Theory: Bogus reporting enables election stealing.

We all know that the corporation want Brown to win.
Corporate run media has ensured that the public now believe Brown has it all-but won.

Could this be a ploy to make elections easier to steal?
Elections that are not close enough to steal can now be stolen so long as the result corelates to the expected outcome?

It would sure help me understand why all seem to be reporting a Brown win is almost a given. I just can not believe the majority of voting Bay Staters would not elect a dem.

The day is over halfway through... people motivated and unemployed or work odd shifts have likeley already voted.

I think Browns numbers will surge when the 9-5 crowd makes it to the polls.

you mean, those electronic machines can be programmed to rig an election? noooooo....

the new world order would never do that.....

I don't believe it.

~

If Coakley wins, the media was lying. If she loses, the election was stolen.

They've done it before, they will do it again.

They only let Obama win to have someone to blame everything on. They still own the voting systems, they own the media...nothing has changed.

It's certainly easier to blame "corporations" and "media bias" and "voting machines" than to blame a bad candidate and a mediocre campaign. But, have you heard any liberal commentator (presumably not part of the conspiracy) suggest that the race isn't kneck and kneck, and that Coakley hasn't squandered a large lead?

IF so, you should also realize that constant reporting may push heavy voter turn out because people are afraid and will help Coakley.

Personally, I still think Coakley will win and Acorn and Corporate media will be blamed for her win.

Coincidence? Nah....Dan Rather told us that corpmedia NEEDED to protect Bush for a second term for favorable rulings they expected to benefit their OWNERS.

Press Room: Press Releases

June 2, 2003
Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"

Commission Decision May Violate Laws Protecting Small Businesses; Kerry to File Resolution of Disapproval

WASHINGTON - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules. Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete. As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace. In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said: "Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices.

Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests. "Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."