If you voted for Kerry, PLEASE look here. It ain't over yet!

lain21us

lain21us

Banned
Those of us who followed the elections and got our news from independent sources, know that this last election was stolen by the dirty cheats in the Bush administration. It is a well-documented fact that numerous verified cases of vote fraud occurred (vastly in favor of Bush, every time) in a number of states, most significantly Ohio. In one example, a voting machine tallied several thousand extra votes for Bush, and this has been confirmed by poll officials. Another Ohio county was found to have a 123% turnout. There is obvious fraud occurring, but the law says that corrections will not be made unless a recount occurs. There are dozens of other cases of vote fraud, reported and verified. Those who are not aware of this fact can read about it, and be disgusted, here:

http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2004/983

The Green and Libertarian parties, though having run independently, are united against Bush and his administration's theft of our votes. They have requested a recount in Ohio, to prove that Kerry was the clear winner in that state. This will not be like the Florida recount, where the rules for the recount were unclear, and the Republicans prevented most of the controversial votes from being recounted. Ohio has very clear rules for recounts, and there will be independent oversight that will ensure that Bush and his supporters cannot cheat this time around. The only problem is that recounts cost money, and the two parties need to raise $110,000 in order for the recount to go through. They have set up a website to raise money:

http://helpamericarecount.org/

I am donating 2 dollars. It's only a drop in the bucket, but every little bit counts. I refuse to let history believe that Bush won fair and square. Even if Kerry does not choose to contest the results, it is the responsibility of that section of the American public which believes in real democracy to ensure that the truth is determined. As I write this, Republicans are attempting to shut this site down. Please contribute even a dollar while you still can.
 
Scorch, he conceded, but that doesn't mean it's over. The recount is a second opportunity for any presidential candidate who wants to file.

zionoverfire, those results are questionable, but he didn't "win" by 3,000,000 votes. You win by electoral votes, not popular votes, and a confirmed win for Kerry in Ohio would win him the presidency.
 
[quote name='dnt_h8me2']As much as I hate to say this, Bush won and there's nothing anyone can do about it.[/quote]

Actually, if the recount occurs, then Bush hasn't won yet. And as I already said, there is something that can be done about it: an orderly recount.

BTW, people, please don't just sit there and jump on the bandwagon saying shit like "it's over," when I'm telling you it's not. If you haven't even checked out the links and verified that the information in them has been confirmed by all relevant sources, official and otherwise, then you really don't have a right to say "it's over". There are plenty of people far better-educated than you who think it's not and and are willing to put money on it. Further, even if Kerry does not file for the recount, I believe it is important that the truth be known about the American vote, since it is clear that somebody cheated.
 
[quote name='lain21us']
zionoverfire, those results are questionable, but he didn't "win" by 3,000,000 votes. You win by electoral votes, not popular votes, and a confirmed win for Kerry in Ohio would win him the presidency. Also, I think your information is incorrect. I think you should study up a bit more.[/quote]

I'm quite aware that only electoral votes matter however the last election was a huge debacle because Bush didn't win the popular vote, had he won that even with the scandal in Florida his 1st term would have seemed much more legitimate. Secondly from CNN the popular vote tally is: 59.5 Bush, 56 Kerry both in the millions of course. Which I rounded earlier to about a difference of 3 million.

linky:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/
 
[quote name='zionoverfire'][quote name='lain21us']
zionoverfire, those results are questionable, but he didn't "win" by 3,000,000 votes. You win by electoral votes, not popular votes, and a confirmed win for Kerry in Ohio would win him the presidency. Also, I think your information is incorrect. I think you should study up a bit more.[/quote]

I'm quite aware that only electoral votes matter however the last election was a huge debacle because Bush didn't win the popular vote, had he won that even with the scandal in Florida his 1st term would have seemed much more legitimate. Secondly from CNN the popular vote tally is: 59.5 Bush, 56 Kerry both in the millions of course. Which I rounded earlier to about a difference of 3 million.

linky:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/[/quote]

So, what the hell's your point? If you're trying to say that the person who wins the popular vote should be president, I won't try to argue, but that's not the way it is. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a democratic republic, which is considered a reasonable alternative. My point is that Bush should not have one the majority of electoral votes. Those 3,000,000 popular votes have nothing at all to do with this.
 
i think if kerry really wants to have a recount, he can foot the bill, his wife is an heiress to a billion dollar ketchup company so why does he need $2 from me?

There is a certain amount of ballot stuffing that goes on in EVERY election since the beginning of time(not just in the USA but everywhere). The past couple of elections we had even more cheating than ususal.

There is a pretty good reason to believe that the only reason JFK won the election in 1960 was because his father really stuffed the ballots and now in 2000 and 2004 as well, of course Bush won the old fashioned way: he cheated. I highly doubt my giving of money over a dodgy looking site will make any difference, i bet it is another fraud to steal honest peoples money, ITS A TRAP.
 
Don't forget that Pennsylvannia opened their polls already several thousand votes in favor of Kerry before anyone even voted. The Democrats delayed in allowing absentee ballots from the military to be counted likely losing many thousands of votes for Bush as well. There is voter fraud on both sides so it evens out in the end anyways. Just get over it and move on.
 
ahh the political left, ever so graceful in defeat...

I also see that your "independent source" is so amazingly liberal that it is virtually worthless for any sort of unbiased information. More smoke and mirrors from conspiracy theorists.
 
[quote name='lain21us']BTW, people, please don't just sit there and jump on the bandwagon saying shit like "it's over," when I'm telling you it's not.[/quote] No thanks, I don't really need you telling me anything.


[quote name='lain21us']If you haven't even checked out the links and verified that the information in them has been confirmed by all relevant sources, official and otherwise, then you really don't have a right to say "it's over".[/quote] I have checked the links, they are trying to turn a couple anomalies into a "stolen election" scenario. They are clinging to a glimmer of hope.

[quote name='lain21us'] There are plenty of people far better-educated than you who think it's not and and are willing to put money on it. [/quote]
Please don't make condescending assumptions, there are also "better educated" people who think it is over.

[quote name='lain21us'] Further, even if Kerry does not file for the recount, I believe it is important that the truth be known about the American vote, since it is clear that somebody cheated. [/quote]

You know what, that's fine, I hope they do recount so I can stop hearing the stolen election conspiracy theories of the internet blogs.
 
I voted for Kerry. I do not thik there needs to be a recout at all. Yes there probabbly is fraud but on both sides of the coin.In all reality either one is going to to better than the other for America. instead spending $2 on a recount how about putting it to a better cause in Cheappy's toy drive? at least will be spent for a good cause there
 
Bush just stole 3 million votes then, not very hard when you are the most power man on earth.

Bush won, move on people.

Kerry conseading means nothing through, its just being nice because Gore did last time and then took it back.
 
There were Democratic voter drives all accross the country run by Republicans.

They tore up all of the applications, and as a result hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people were denied the right to vote.
 
Their goal is to raise $150,000 for a recount in Ohio. According to their website, as of 9 pm Sunday night they had raised $144,640. The recount will be occuring. From what I have read, 70% of Ohio uses the punch card ballots. It will be interesting to see how many votes Bush and Kerry gain from the recount. I still expect that Kerry will fall far short of surpassing Bush. One thing I don't understand about the voting in Ohio is that Republican leaning precincts had lines no longer than 60-90 minutes. Democratic leaning precincts, however, had reports of anywhere from 5-8 hours of waiting to vote. How many people simply left because they could not afford to miss that much work? Why weren't there enough machines in Democratic precincts? There needs to be a nationwide law regarding the number of machines that must be available per 1,000 people.
 
if you lived in ohio, it'd be different. but you don't just let it go and wait for hilary to run for you. now thats going to be one hell of an election year.
 
Once again america drags its face in the mud bickering about an election that Kerry could not have one period, it wasn't in his hand from the begining. And no amount of recounts or redescions is going to change that. What would make this whole process alot easier is if they would just make the winner decided but popular vote, but then again we are a complicated lot of people....
 
[quote name='ZeroSupporT']Once again america drags its face in the mud bickering about an election that Kerry could not have one period...[/quote]

Once again the value of "No Child Left Behind" is shown...
 
[quote name='ZeroSupporT']Once again america drags its face in the mud bickering about an election that Kerry could not have one period, it wasn't in his hand from the begining. And no amount of recounts or redescions is going to change that. What would make this whole process alot easier is if they would just make the winner decided but popular vote, but then again we are a complicated lot of people....[/quote]

It would also help if there were only one set of rules for all states to follow nationwide. Also, only one type of voting machine should be in use.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Does this mean we recount the states that Kerry won too? Who knows what fraud happened there?[/quote]

I doubt that two or three poor parties can afford recounts in all of the states, just a select few where major fraud was reported.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Does this mean we recount the states that Kerry won too? Who knows what fraud happened there?[/quote]

If you want to fund a recount in those states, knock yourself out.
 
[quote name='dopa345']Don't forget that Pennsylvannia opened their polls already several thousand votes in favor of Kerry before anyone even voted. The Democrats delayed in allowing absentee ballots from the military to be counted likely losing many thousands of votes for Bush as well. There is voter fraud on both sides so it evens out in the end anyways. Just get over it and move on.[/quote]

Nope, not true. This was repubs crying about nothing. What was on the machine was how many times it was used, not votes for Kerry.

Also, if they look at Ohio and find that Kerry did win it, he IS president. Conceding is not legally binding, the final count is and when the electoral college casts its votes. Remember, they are still counting votes in New Mexico, so they haven't said who gets theirs. I really doubt anything will change unless they find real evidence of fraud.
 
My own guess as to the reason they want the recount:

Its not that they want Kerry to win (I mean, if they really wanted Kerry to win, why did they run as a third party?), and I doubt they expect to find significant votes for themselves. The reason they want the recount is because they expect to find significant amounts of fraud. The more fraud they find (from either party), the more people who are going to become disillusioned by the system, and they're going to turn to third-parties to get away from the corrupt Republicans and/or Democrats.

The reason they picked Ohio is pretty clear: there's a whole lot of clear-cut cases of fraud in Ohio (unless you can explain having more votes than voters...) Florida is number 2, but it would likely be harder to prove fraud there because of all the electronic machines with no paper-trail at all, plus third-parties don't have a whole lot of political power or money, so they have to focus it to do what they can.

If anyone actually WOULD want to push for/help fund a recount in ANY state, please, feel free. Again, the more corruption that's found, the better, regardless of what side it comes from.

Also, just for the record, I do think Bush won Ohio. I don't think he expected to, though, which is the reason that so much fraud happened. The plan was for Bush to win Ohio by a narrow margin, but because Bush actually DID win Ohio by a narrow margin, the extra votes pushed him into completely unrealistic 'major victory' status that's set off sirens and flashing red lights in the mind of anyone who's paid attention. The recount will be fun :)
 
dubya-grand-theft-vote.png
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']There were Democratic voter drives all accross the country run by Republicans.

They tore up all of the applications, and as a result hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people were denied the right to vote.[/quote]

Yeah I remember hearing about some suspicious shit in Nevada with people tearing up these votes or applications saying "Democrat". This guy grabbed em' out of the trash and they chased after them. Real bullshit.
If you believe in your candidate don't cheat. Seriously it just makes you look pathetic and uncertain.
 
I wish we had just used the popular vote, then Gore would have won and bush would never have happened. Though I hoped kerry won, I also sort of wanted him to win without the popular vote, as sort of evening things out. Though, I believe if things had gone smoothly in florida in 2000, and the votes made were all counted accurately (and definately if so many people weren't turned away for reasons such as having similar names as felons) Gore would have won. Not that I think kerry has a shot at winning, but I figure we should get to steal one election too, it's only fair. Here's to keeping alive the .000000000000000000001% hope I have left.

Though I also think there's fraud commited by both sides, most of it not being commited by the party itself, but by their members. That being said, I do believe the republican party is more likely to commit fraud (though I have no real proof, it's just observation and opinion), but also realize that when the losing side claims fraud they will be taken more seriously, and rightly so. No one really pays attention if the losing side commited fraud (unless it was massive), since they lost anyway.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']There were Democratic voter drives all accross the country run by Republicans.

They tore up all of the applications, and as a result hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people were denied the right to vote.[/quote]

If you're going to quack one off like this you'd better give a link or something. And not some commie whacko website either, please.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Does this mean we recount the states that Kerry won too? Who knows what fraud happened there?[/quote]

Nader is getting a recount in New Hampshire. Of course, he's also trying to get a recount in North Carolina, Florida, and a few other states.
 
[quote name='Drocket']My own guess as to the reason they want the recount:

Its not that they want Kerry to win (I mean, if they really wanted Kerry to win, why did they run as a third party?), and I doubt they expect to find significant votes for themselves. The reason they want the recount is because they expect to find significant amounts of fraud. The more fraud they find (from either party), the more people who are going to become disillusioned by the system, and they're going to turn to third-parties to get away from the corrupt Republicans and/or Democrats.

The reason they picked Ohio is pretty clear: there's a whole lot of clear-cut cases of fraud in Ohio (unless you can explain having more votes than voters...) Florida is number 2, but it would likely be harder to prove fraud there because of all the electronic machines with no paper-trail at all, plus third-parties don't have a whole lot of political power or money, so they have to focus it to do what they can.

If anyone actually WOULD want to push for/help fund a recount in ANY state, please, feel free. Again, the more corruption that's found, the better, regardless of what side it comes from.

Also, just for the record, I do think Bush won Ohio. I don't think he expected to, though, which is the reason that so much fraud happened. The plan was for Bush to win Ohio by a narrow margin, but because Bush actually DID win Ohio by a narrow margin, the extra votes pushed him into completely unrealistic 'major victory' status that's set off sirens and flashing red lights in the mind of anyone who's paid attention. The recount will be fun :)[/quote]

The thing that bothers me is the exit poll data. For decades, exit poll data was extremely reliable. In 2000 it all of a sudden failed, but only in certain states. Again in this election, exit poll data failed. The interesting thing is the failures seem to be only in states that had electronic voting. According to experts, based on exit poll data some of Bush's victories were statistically impossible. Why were the descrepancies only in states with electronic voting? This is why we need a paper trail.
 
[quote name='Drocket'][quote name='RedvsBlue']Does this mean we recount the states that Kerry won too? Who knows what fraud happened there?[/quote]

If you want to fund a recount in those states, knock yourself out.[/quote]

Yeah let me just pull out a few hundred thousand. Hmm perhaps you don't want to know if Kerry won a state fraudulantly?
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Yeah let me just pull out a few hundred thousand. Hmm perhaps you don't want to know if Kerry won a state fraudulantly?[/quote]

If I had a few extra million laying around, I might. As I said, though, Florida is the number 2 state that needs to be investigated. I'm not really sure what number 3 is - Ohio and Florida were head-and-shoulders above every other state in terms of 'unusual' election results. It makes the most sense to investigate things in order of suspiciousness, Kerry states would just have to wait until however far down the list we'd get. *shrug*
 
[quote name='Scorch']He conceded. Even if they found out every damn vote in Ohio was frauded, he conceded, and Bush won.[/quote]
concention is more of a polite response not legally binding..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top