Vote Fraud in the news again

pattylou

Or still.... (You probably know I think Diebold "helped" bush's vote tally.)

Every month or so I google news: vote fraud diebold

... and I usually see a few articles, many several weeks old, etc.

Today when I did that search I retrieved a larger than normal number of recent documents. Here is an interesting one, although the source is very biased ("conspiracy planet;" I include the refernece anyway because the content is intriguing. Is it true? I don't know.):

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/chan...contentid=2837

Diebold counts a great percentage of our votes, like tens of percentage points across the nation.

Some columnists in more respectable sources have a report on this as well:

http://www.dailyrepublic.com/article...nloguercio.txt

http://www.dailyrepublic.com/article...nloguerico.txt

Forbes shows Diebolds' stock slumping, the president quitting, etc:

http://www.forbes.com/business/busin...ap2239441.html

pattylou

point of clarification: The president of the country is not quitting; the president of Diebold is.

SOS2008

Don't toy with us like that.

Ivan Seeking

Hopefully the entire network of these anti-constitution, anti-democracy, bible-thumping hypocrites is imploding.

pattylou

http://www.opednews.com/articles/ope...ballots__c.htm
http://invisibleballots.com/

-Patty

(LOL Sorry SOS.)

deckart

I have no doubt there is plenty of vote fraud taking place where it can. But I also have no doubt that it is not a "Republican" or "Democrat" thing, its a political system thing. It's the nature of the beast.

Ivan Seeking

While in the long run that may be true, what matters now is this: Who threatens the constitution today? And keep in mind that Watergate was also about election related fraud and cover-ups, and it also involved, again, a bunch of Republicans, some of which are standing next to Bush right now.

pattylou

I agree. And anyone that is guilty, should be removed from office, period.

deckart

Agreed, a criminal is a criminal.

arildno

Yeah, sure.
And Diebold is both a fervent Republican and fanatical Democrat.

deckart

And I've missed your point entirely.

arildno

Well, you might try to verify your spurious claim of "equal naughtiness" by comparing the number of criminal/fraudulent, yet leading, Republicans vs. Democrats from, say, the time of Richard Nixon.

loseyourname

I'm pretty sure he's right to say that confirmed instances of voting fraud have been about equally distributed between the two parties. I don't know that there has ever been a confirmed instance of fraud in a national election by either party, however.* Overt fraud is usually limited to citywide and countywide elections.

*Well, maybe the old political machine in Chicago back in the day. I don't remember if that was republican or democrat.

arildno

Hmm..I was unaware of that there exists a similar massive "Democratic" vote manipulation as that which Diebold&et al. has gotten away with. Several staunchly Democratical counties in Ohio became mysteriously won by Bush, with a number of registered votes above that of registered voters.

Please provide a reference to that Democratic fraud.

pattylou

Blackbox Voting.org posits that Diebold is happy to fix elections for whomever is willing to cough up the money, and that people from both parties have used this corruption to their advantage.

It would seem to be the case, that Diebold favored Bush to win the National elections (CEO memo "...deliver Ohio's votes to Bush"), and given their ability to manipulate numbers it seems likely to me that electronic tampering took place that favored Bush. But I don't think they'd be above 'helping' democratic candidates, in races that they thought were of lesser consequence.

I'll add a reference in an edit.

Edit: Kerry, for example, may have gotten some help in the New Hampshire Primary. Check the percentages that he got compared to Dean - and see how those percentages depend on the type of vote counting used.

http://media.portland.indymedia.org/.../02/279929.jpg

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/02/279893.shtml

THis is hardly strong evidence, but it raises my eyebrows.

Googling with appropriate key words can find you additional hits.

deckart

Corruption is bipartisan.

russ_watters

loseyourname's post said "confirmed instances of voting fraud". This Diebold speculation about what could happen does not qualify.

pattylou, I thought you were not arguing that the election was directly stolen? Didn't we have a long argument a few months ago, at the end of which you said it wasn't your intent to claim/show that the election was stolen, only that it could be stolen? By that last post, it seems you believe that the Diebold CEO was, in fact, saying that he intended to commit votor fraud. Is that (both parts: that he was saying it and that he did it) what you actually believe? Do you also believe that Bush directly bought the election result from Diebold?