Do you trust the US government to run an honest election

[Ivan Seeking]

Very late edit: Please make that second option "significant election fraud"; meaning enough to affect the outcome of the election. Any votes already made in error should be clarified and I will post the correction here. I sure don't want to start any polling fraud conspiracy theories! :rofl:



From another post, but it applies well here.

We recently had a very uncharacteristic show of outrage on the floor of congress by a black congresswoman from Florida. She accused Bush of a coup d'état. Not so well known but widely reported at the time, blacks in Florida claimed that they were prevented from voting by “Republican thugs”. This fact was lost in the counting frenzy. Of course, Florida, Governend by Bush's brother, was also the swing state that got Bush elected.

The congresswoman was demanding that the UN monitor our election. Rightfully so I think.

Maybe I'm mostly alone on this one but I'm afraid the problem may be just that bad. IMO, honestly people, I'm not inflating things here just to start a fight, I feel there is so much smoke around the Bush dynasty that a fire is nearly certain - I wonder if this congresswoman might not have been well within the bounds of reason. If what the blacks claimed in Florida did happen then this may have thrown a Presidential election. Stop and consider what that would really mean.

So as a follow up question, who here would support a resolution to have the UN monitor the US presidential election this year?

 

[Hurkyl]

Frankly, I get the impression that none of the outcomes of such a resolution would sway many opinions. First off, there's the problem that many would find the very idea an insult. Of course, if USA refuses many would claim something's up. If the UN inspectors don't find any tampering, they were either comprimised, or the US interfered with the investigation. If the UN inspectors find tampering, they're just exacting revenge.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Did Republicans ask for UN or National Guard help when the dead voted for LBJ in his run for governor?

 

[russ_watters]

Frankly, I get the impression that any of the outcomes of such a resolution would sway many opinions. First off, there's the problem that many would find the very idea an insult. Of course, if USA refuses many would claim something's up. If the UN inspectors don't find any tampering, they were either comprimised, or the US interfered with the investigation. If the UN inspectors find tampering, they're just exacting revenge.

Agreed. I am very much opposed to the idea.

 

[Prometheus]

First off, there's the problem that many would find the very idea an insult.

Of course, many would consider it an insult. Unfortunately, many people also feel that fraud was committed in the last election, and that this fraud swayed the course of the election. People who believe this consider the last election an insult.

Of course, if USA refuses many would claim something's up. If the UN inspectors don't find any tampering, they were either comprimised, or the US interfered with the investigation. If the UN inspectors find tampering, they're just exacting revenge.

I find this a poor justification. If the UN did find tampering, what would that mean?

If the UN did not find tampering, perhaps people who feel that the Republicans committed a major act of fraud would be less sure of this feeling.

I wonder why you put such a negative spin on the possible outcomes.

 

[ray b]

first problem is the US government never has run a election
the states are in charge but they all sub out the job to local
county political hacks
perhaps the idea of the feds running a election would be a better idea then the current system as would direct election of our presidents under a one man one vote system

we have had dead voters and many other frauds including a result thrown out by the courts, in a local mayor election in the last few years here in miami fla
:surprise:

 

[Janitor]

Democrats in New Mexico have a sordid history of vote fraud, by the way.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

An interesting aside: Some may remember that just before Ross Perot dropped out of the the '92 election, he claimed that Republcan thugs ruined his daughters wedding and threatened he and his familiy. I think he actually used the word "thugs". A bit of a coincidence eh?

A quick check produced this as a basic reference to this event.

Discouraged by a reinvigorated Democratic party ticket...as well as Perot's claim that Republican operatives were attempting to disrupt his daughter's wedding, Perot announced his withdrawal from the campaign.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot

 

[JohnDubYa]

An interesting aside: Some may remember that just before Ross Perot dropped out of the the '92 election, he claimed that Republcan thugs ruined his daughters wedding and threatened he and his familiy.

Heh. I forgot all about those claims. Perot was certainly a loon. My favorite was the supposed kidnapping attempt the North Vietnamese made on his family. Good stuff, H.!

 

[Shahil]

I actually think that UN monitors should be dispatched during voting. After what Ivan Seeking said and the fact that a whole lot of the world weren't very impressed after the Florida debacle, wouldn't UN monitors be a definite for the elections.

As for the corruption of these monitors, well if we can't trust the UN, who can we trust!

Anyway, on the election procedure - In SA we have a centrally-based IEC (Independent Electoral Commission). Also, even though they're independent, they are audited. They've run 5 elections so far and the biggest problem they had was alleged cheating in rural area of the province I live in (KwaZulu Natal). The case was dropped though meaning that the IEC is doing/did a brilliant job. I'm kinda against the sub-contracting coz it'll mean differences in the voting technique at different locations which I'm against.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Sour grapes are driving this UN voting oversight demand. Those that lost the election desire oversight because such action would be considered an acknowledgment that the 2000 elections were somehow rigged.

In other words, this isn't about the 2004 elections at all. Some are still fighting to place an asterisk besides Bush' 2000 victory and this is their latest scheme. They want history books to say "The 2000 election was so badly rigged that in 2004 the US even had to call the United Nations to oversee the elections."

After seeing what happened with the Oil for Food program, I am not sure I trust the UN anyway.

 

[member 5645]

yeah there will be some independent fraud, but nothing on a large scale.
You can't expect anything else in ANY election process of this size, anywhere in the world.

 

[member 5645]

So as a follow up question, who here would support a resolution to have the UN monitor the US presidential election this year?

I would not.

 

[Robert Zaleski]

I believe Kofi Annan said last week that no UN monitors will be provided for our presidential election. Thank you Eddie Bernice Johnson D-Texas and ten democrat accomplices.

 

[Shahil]

I believe Kofi Annan said last week that no UN monitors will be provided...

What about EU or AU observers?? I'm not trying to argue that rigging will take place nor am I arguing that I think the 2000 elections were rigged - I'm just saying that IF there is a reason to believe vote rigging will occur, won't bringing in independant observers be the only logical thing to do. It doesn''t matter who wins the elections - the main thing is that it will be fair. That's is, after all, all that matters.

 

[Entropy]

I don't vote, but I believe the American voting system is pretty good.

 

[member 5645]

What about EU or AU observers?? I'm not trying to argue that rigging will take place nor am I arguing that I think the 2000 elections were rigged - I'm just saying that IF there is a reason to believe vote rigging will occur, won't bringing in independant observers be the only logical thing to do. It doesn''t matter who wins the elections - the main thing is that it will be fair. That's is, after all, all that matters.

Why should there be? Fraud will happen in the EU election, the AU election. It happened in the last Indian election. It's impossible to stop it.

Are monitors going to personally handle the entire election, and then be audited in some miraculous manner to stop any fraud? No, of couse not.

 

[member 5645]

I don't vote, but I believe the American voting system is pretty good.

why don't you vote?

 

[kat]

I think he may be too young. (?)

 

[russ_watters]

Why should there be? Fraud will happen in the EU election, the AU election. It happened in the last Indian election. It's impossible to stop it.

Maybe I need to clarify my vote (I voted for the first option). Fraud certainly will occur in small, isolated cases. There are something like half a million election officials and a few will choose to break the law. It can't be stopped.

I answered with the first option as a response to the level of fraud accused in the last election.

 

[JohnDubYa]

First of all, no fraud has been proven. Second, it appears that if any did occur, it was very isolated. What percentage of voters were potentially defrauded, in anyone's estimate?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Heh. I forgot all about those claims. Perot was certainly a loon. My favorite was the supposed kidnapping attempt the North Vietnamese made on his family. Good stuff, H.!

So you just assume that it never happened? How blindly patriotic of you.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Maybe, but wasn't there also an issue in Wisconsin where voters were voting multiple times? If I recall correctly, Gore benefitted in that situation.

Every election we have situations where someone screws up. The only difference in 2000 was that Florida was one of the last swing-vote states and the voting was incredibly tight.

 

[kcballer21]

I think the notion of a nonpartisan organization monitoring any government activity would be a good idea in theory. The problem would be finding individuals that could really be deemed unbiased. The UN has been shown to have its own agenda on more than one occasion, which is unfortunate.

JohnDubYa First of all, no fraud has been proven. Second, it appears that if any did occur, it was very isolated. What percentage of voters were potentially defrauded, in anyone's estimate?

What percentage is acceptable?

 

[member 5645]

So you just assume that it never happened? How blindly patriotic of you.

ummmm, this is an odd response.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

ummmm, this is an odd response.

Not when you consider that blind trust drives many Bush loyalists.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Maybe, but wasn't there also an issue in Wisconsin where voters were voting multiple times? If I recall correctly, Gore benefitted in that situation.

Every election we have situations where someone screws up. The only difference in 2000 was that Florida was one of the last swing-vote states and the voting was incredibly tight.

Clearly the Congresswoman from Florida did not feel that this was just a screw up. If there was a concerted effort to prevent blacks from voting I can definitely see her point. There is a difference between cheating and the forceful overthrow of an election. Not to say that I condone cheating, but small town diehards have probably been stuffing ballot boxes from day one. Intimidation - the loss of the right to vote - would be another thing altogether. No doubt this has gone on in the South in decades passed.

 

[Njorl]

Sour grapes are driving this UN voting oversight demand. Those that lost the election desire oversight because such action would be considered an acknowledgment that the 2000 elections were somehow rigged.

In other words, this isn't about the 2004 elections at all. Some are still fighting to place an asterisk besides Bush' 2000 victory and this is their latest scheme. They want history books to say "The 2000 election was so badly rigged that in 2004 the US even had to call the United Nations to oversee the elections."

After seeing what happened with the Oil for Food program, I am not sure I trust the UN anyway.

You claim to know the motives of other people in this matter? I would think you would be working in Las Vegas at the poker tables with these marvelous mind-reading skills you claim to have.

There has already been one Republican attempt to illegally sway the 2004 Florida election. Republicans attempted to carry out a secret purge of felons from the voter rolls. All felons who served a year or more are supposed to be stricken. That's just fine. However, Governer Jeb Bush fought the disclosure of this list tooth-and-nail. It turns out, many who did not qualify for striking were stricken, also, virtually no Hispanics were on the list. Most Hispanics in Florida are Cuban, and vote Republican.



Just what exactly happened with the "Oil for Food" program? Are you talking about those interesting accusations of bribery that were floated by Ahmed Chalabi, and bought into completely by the right-wing media? Most people have backed off those charges after finding out Chalabi was an Iranian agent. Paul Volcker was put in charge of an investigation, and, miraculously, all of Chalabi's documentary evidence of the corruption vanished.

Njorl

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Maybe I need to clarify my vote (I voted for the first option). Fraud certainly will occur in small, isolated cases. There are something like half a million election officials and a few will choose to break the law. It can't be stopped.

I answered with the first option as a response to the level of fraud accused in the last election.

This is certainly in the spirit of the poll: Do you trust the process. Obviously some isolated cases of fraud will happen. The question is really more one of scale and significance. I could have worded this better, as usual.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

There has already been one Republican attempt to illegally sway the 2004 Florida election. Republicans attempted to carry out a secret purge of felons from the voter rolls. All felons who served a year or more are supposed to be stricken. That's just fine. However, Governer Jeb Bush fought the disclosure of this list tooth-and-nail. It turns out, many who did not qualify for striking were stricken, also, virtually no Hispanics were on the list. Most Hispanics in Florida are Cuban, and vote Republican.

Wow! When did this happen? Do you have a link?

 

[JohnDubYa]

There is a difference between cheating and the forceful overthrow of an election. Not to say that I condone cheating, but small town diehards have probably been stuffing ballot boxes from day one.

Sounds like you are saying that cheating is no big deal.

What's the difference if I intimidate you into not voting, or simply stuffing a ballot that negates your vote? Both are illegal and the effect is the same.

 

[JohnDubYa]

So you just assume that it never happened? How blindly patriotic of you.

If anything, you have blindly accepted the word of a loon. What's worse?

The FBI investigated the wedding photo controversy and found nothing. And given H. Ross Perot's frequent delusions of grandeur, we can safely say that no such plot ever occurred.

 

[Njorl]

This has much of the story.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040712/NEWS/407110366

Njorl

 

[russ_watters]

This is certainly in the spirit of the poll: Do you trust the process. Obviously some isolated cases of fraud will happen. The question is really more one of scale and significance. I could have worded this better, as usual.

Whether isolated fraud, votor incompetence, or counting errors, the problem in Florida was that all of those issues add up to a statistical tie. In other words, all the sources of error added together were larger than the margin of victory. Our electoral system is not equipped to handle that. A lot was made of the hanging chads - fixing that with electronic machines will eliminate recounts and vote ambiguity, but that's not even half of the problem.

 

[russ_watters]

This has much of the story.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040712/NEWS/407110366

Njorl

How much of the article did you read? It seems to refute your implication of impropriety.

Regarding the oil-for-food program, the only question is the depth of the problem. Do you remember the photos/videos of the warehouses of hoarded food captured in Iraq?