Skip to comments.Evidence That 2004 Election Was Stolen
Posted on 01/30/2006 8:17:56 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot
As coincidence would have it, Mark Crispin Miller's new book, "Fooled Again" (Basic Books), documenting the Republican theft of the 2004 presidential election, arrived in the same mail delivery with the Jan. 12 edition of the Defuniak Springs Herald, the locally owned weekly newspaper in a Florida panhandle county seat.
The Florida panhandle is thoroughgoing Republican. Even Democrats run as Republicans. Nevertheless, the newspaper's editor, Ron Kelley, believes that American political life is measured by something larger than party affiliation. In his editorial, "The Shepherds and the Sheep," Kelley reports that two Florida counties have banned any further use of Diebold voting machines after witnessing a professional demonstration that the machines, contrary to Diebold's claim, are easily hacked to record votes differently from the way in which they are cast by voters.
The pre-election statement by Diebold's CEO that he would work to deliver the election to Bush was apparently no idle boast. In five states where the new "foolproof" electronic voting machines were used, the vote tallies differed substantially from the exit polls. Such a disparity is unusual. The chances of exit polls in five states being wrong are no more than one in a million. (OMG, what a stupid thing to say!!)
Miller describes considerably more election fraud than voting machines programmed to count a proportion of Kerry votes as Bush votes. Voters were disenfranchised in a number of ways. Miller reports incidences of intimidation of, and reduced voting opportunities for, poorer voters who tend to vote Democrat.
Some of Miller's evidence is circumstantial. However, he documents widespread Republican dirty tricks and foul play. The media's indifference to a stolen election burns Miller as much as the stolen election itself.
Miller is not alone in his concerns. The nonpartisan U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), in response to a congressional request, investigated a number of complaints regarding the electronic voting machines.
Here are some of the problems noted in the GAO's September 2005 report:
Some voting machines did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected.
It was possible to alter the machines so that a ballot cast for one candidate would be recorded for another.
Vendors installed uncertified versions of voting system software at the local level.
Access was easily compromised and did not require a widespread conspiracy. A small handful of people is sufficient to steal an election. Curiously, the media have shown no interest in the GAO report. In my opinion, a free press has proven to be inconsistent with the recently permitted highly concentrated corporate ownership of the U.S. media.
The electronic voting machines leave virtually no paper trail, and their use involves private, potentially partisan corporations tabulating the votes with proprietary software that is not transparent.
A number of counties in various states have decided to return to paper ballots that can be verified and recounted. But now that Republicans have learned that they can use the electronic machines to control election outcomes, the disenfranchisement of Democrats is likely to be a permanent feature of American "democracy."
Other reports claim that the undersampling by pollsters of Democratic voters creates a percentage bias that exaggerates the number of Republican voters by as much as 5 percent, thus providing cover for vote fraud. If hard-to-reach Democratic voters, such as the working poor, are less likely to answer telephones, polls can create the illusion that there are more Republican voters than in fact exist.
If the electronic voting machines are then rigged to shift 5 percent or 6 percent of the vote to the Republican candidate, the result is not at odds with the expected result and can be used as "evidence" to counter the divergence between exit polls and vote tally.
The outcome of the 2004 presidential election has always struck me as strange. Although Kerry was a poor candidate and evaded the issue most on the public's mind, by November 2004 a majority of Americans were aware that Bush had led the country into a gratuitous war on the basis either of incompetence or deception.
By November 2004, it was completely clear that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction and that Bush had rushed to war. People were concerned by the changing rationales that Bush was offering for going to war. Moreover, the needless war was going badly, and the results bore no relationship to the rosy scenario painted at the time of the invasion. It seems contrary to American common sense for voters to have re-elected a president who had failed in such a dramatic way.
Miller directs our attention to Bush's high-handed treatment of dissenters. If electronic voting machines programmed by private Republican firms remain in our future, dissent will become pointless unless it boils over into revolution. Power-mad Republicans need to consider the result when democracy loses its legitimacy and only the rich have anything to lose.
COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Wow, if this article is correct, that's means that ol' Bush has snookered the Democrats two elections in a row.
And they call him dumb!
Music rises to crescendo. Viva la revolution!
OMG!!!!Someone needs to ping Bev Harris.
I believe the 2004 election was stolen--in Washington State (governor's race). Also some of the states where Kerry won narrowly probably should have gone to Bush, except for ballot-stuffing by the Democratic political machines.
DUmmies: "We haven't even gotten over 2000 yet and now this! Where are our MEDS?!?!?"
good post. That is one of the conundrums of conservatives.
I'm not sure I understand your point.It was,in fact,my teenage nephew who received the leaflet,he showed it to me a little while later.And under our our Constitution,a person is allowed to claim pretty much whatever he/she wants.
This,I believe,often isn't the case in other parts of the world....being one who "denies" the Holocaust in certain parts of Europe comes to mind.
Some of these nutjobs are so wrapped up in an Anti-Semitism/Jew conspiracy influenza they can't even pretend to sound rational. He and Buchanan ought to go on a cruise together.
Paul Craig Roberts...Hmmmm, like we give a damn what you say.
The chances of exit polls in five states being wrong are no more than one in a million.
This is as crazy as Bill Clinton winning with 43% of the vote and shortly after the election polls appeared proclaiming 58% approval rating.
I have never been asked to participate in an exit poll. Even if I would have been asked, I doubt I would have answered, or I might not even answer truthfully ("Mickey Mouse!"). So how can exit polls even be considered remotely accurate?
Confusion w/ the govt. accounting office (GAO) ???
They will do anything to keep from examining the possibility that their positions on issues are what is losing elections.
Those fun-loving imps on du say the silliest things.
I thought I read somewhere that the rats are getting tired of her act and think she played her contributers for money.
wonder if he mentions anything about the voting machines in Philadelphia that had over 2000 Dem votes in them before the polls opened?
--Or the cigs for votes in Milwaukee.
Evidence? There is not one shred of proof in this whole article. It is all speculation and innuendo.
Democrats were only allowed to vote once per election and dead Democrats were not allowed to vote at all!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.