# Documented Voter Fraud in a Blue State



## modarnis (Jul 27, 2005)

For those who think only Republicans play dirty....


Originally published in The Hartford Courant 7/27/05

www.courant.com 


Prenzina Holloway, a veteran Hartford campaigner whose support is often critical in vaulting candidates to office, committed absentee ballot fraud in last summer's primary election, the state Elections Enforcement Commission has found.

The commission fined Holloway $10,000, a rarely imposed penalty.


After a nearly yearlong investigation, the commission found that Holloway, a Democratic party activist and a paid employee for two campaigns in 2004, voted on behalf of, and forged the signature of, at least one voter. That voter told investigators he had never asked for an absentee ballot, let alone completed and signed one.

The voter, James Osborne, was a former tenant of Holloway's at 345 Sigourney St. Investigators concluded that he had not lived at that address for several years.

Forensic analysis of Holloway's own signature indicated that she signed Osborne's name, according to the commission's written findings.

"The commission has evidence to suggest that she did cast his ballot for him," said Jeffrey B. Garfield, the commission's executive director.

The commission also found evidence that Holloway, 68, was in the same room with at least two other voters as they filled out absentee ballots, a violation of state election law. Though Holloway contended she was there as a neutral poll worker, investigators say she showed those voters campaign materials for the candidates she was supporting.

Holloway, the mother of Hartford city Councilwoman Jo Winch, also handled absentee ballots after they had been completed, the commission found.

Holloway signed an agreement with the state acknowledging that it has enough evidence to find she committed absentee ballot fraud. She declined comment Tuesday. Her lawyer, Michael Harrington, is on vacation this week.

Absentee ballot abuse has been a persistent problem in Hartford politics for years and has resulted in the arrest of at least eight city politicians, including two state representatives, in the past decade.

The accusations against Holloway arose in part from a Courant investigation in which elderly and disabled residents in a nursing home and two apartment complexes described being assisted with their ballots in ways that appeared to violate election laws.

The charges against Holloway come one year after former state legislator Barnaby Horton paid a similar $10,000 civil penalty for findings of absentee ballot improprieties during his 2002 re-election campaign. Though Holloway's ballot transgressions are as serious, if not more serious, than Horton's, Holloway's case was not referred to the state's attorney's office for criminal prosecution, as Horton's was.

The difference between the two, Garfield said, is that Holloway may not have been as well-versed in elections law as Horton, whom she helped elect in 1998.

Horton, Garfield said, "was a legislator and lawyer, and an individual who had been a member of the legislative commission that wrote the election laws.

"Ms. Holloway is a campaign worker. The level of knowledge that she has is less than Barnaby had," he said.

Horton, charged with being in the room with an absentee voter who was considering a ballot with Horton's name on it, lied to the Elections Enforcement Commission at first, Garfield said. Holloway, with legal representation, cooperated with the probe by providing samples of her handwriting, he added.

Horton did not return calls for comment Tuesday.

Though she was a paid employee on the winning campaigns of state Sen. Eric Coleman and state Rep. Douglas McCrory, the findings of wrongdoing by Holloway do not raise questions about their victories. Nor do they raise questions about the primary victory of Hartford Democratic Registrar of Voters Shirley Surgeon, whom Holloway also supported in 2004.

"The pluralities were pretty significant in those campaigns," Garfield said.

"What it does say," he added, "is that absentee voting abuse continues to be a significant problem in Hartford."

The $10,000 fines to Holloway and Horton are the largest penalties the Elections Enforcement Commission has ever imposed for absentee ballot fraud.

Because she demonstrated financial hardship, Holloway will have to pay only $2,000 of the fine, the commission decided. The first $1,000 is due by August 1.

In its report, the commission warned Holloway that future transgressions would be referred for criminal prosecution.

The commission also banned Holloway from distributing absentee ballot applications and assisting with absentee ballots for two years. Horton is banned from those tasks for life.

Holloway's ban from absentee ballot work has practical effects for the Democratic party in Hartford. She is celebrated as an indefatigable workhorse when it comes to harvesting absentee ballot votes - a time-honored and legal strategy for winning elections.

"She's a very hard and diligent worker, and she gets out the vote," said Noel F. McGregor Jr. chairman of Hartford's Democratic party. Without her, "we have to pick up the slack," he said.

McGregor, who had not seen the commission's report on Holloway, said he was still dismayed to learn of its conclusions.

"We don't want to keep having these things happen," he said. "The voters lose confidence in us."

In part because of the prominence of Hartford's absentee ballot transgressions, the state legislature this year passed a law to reform the absentee balloting process.

The new law requires anyone assisting with an absentee ballot application to file a list with the town clerk detailing the names of all the people whom they assisted. Ballot applications that are sent to voters who did not ask for them must include a disclaimer that anyone who votes absentee despite being able to go to the polls in person will be subject to civil and criminal penalties.


----------



## michaeledward (Jul 27, 2005)

Thank you.

It's nice to know investigations can produce results. Let's see if this investigation produces an indictment of criminal activity. From the article, it seems this is only an accusation, so far. 

Anyhow, do you think this revelation will overturn the 163,662 Kerry win?


----------



## Sapper6 (Jul 27, 2005)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Thank you.
> 
> Anyhow, do you think this revelation will overturn the 163,662 Kerry win?



geez man, still a little bent huh...?  

it's ok micheal, hillary will lead you to victory in '08. artyon:


----------



## michaeledward (Jul 27, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> geez man, still a little bent huh...?
> 
> it's ok micheal, hillary will lead you to victory in '08.


Not at all ... Bush won, fair and ... 

well Bush won. 

And Hillary will not do anything of the sort if I have my way. (Remember, I voted Kucinich). Hillary makes a *wonderful Senator* for the Empire State.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jul 27, 2005)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> And Hillary will not do anything of the sort if I have my way. (Remember, I voted Kucinich). Hillary makes a *wonderful Senator* for the Empire State.



why is that?  in all seriousness, i'm very interested to know the reasoning behind your stance.  to me, you represent the "liberal left" in it's finest; that's just what i gather from here at the study.  why is hillary a bad choice for the dems in 2008?  is she too conservative?  this might warrant a completely new thread, but a good discussion all together.


----------



## Tgace (Jul 27, 2005)

Ya see it only matters if you WIN. And then only when your opponent wins.


----------



## ginshun (Jul 28, 2005)

There were a lot of stories about voter fraud here in Wisconsin around election time.  Its just that national news seemed not to care much about it. Hhmmmm... There were stories about Move-On.org people surrounding and harrassing people in Madison, and there were two or three counties around Millwaukee (all of which Kerry won) that had 98%-100% voter turnout.  Which seems good at a glance, but 100%?  Come on, that is just impossible.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 29, 2005)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Not at all ... Bush won, fair and ...
> 
> well Bush won.
> 
> And Hillary will not do anything of the sort if I have my way. (Remember, I voted Kucinich). Hillary makes a *wonderful Senator* for the Empire State.


 I guess next time the Democrats will have to give away more crack cocaine than they did this time, if they want to properly "win" the election. Since when did Marion Barry become head of the NAACP?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/18/mary.poppins.registers.to.vote/

As for Kucinich, why don't you just clone Lenin and skip the middle man.


----------



## michaeledward (Jul 29, 2005)

modarnis said:
			
		

> obviously more than an accusation, she was fined. The article does indicate she was not referred for prosecution


Thank you. 

I did read the article. 
I saw that a fine was imposed by the Elections Commission. 

And, shall we discuss your motives for posting this?  Certainly, it is to demonstrate the cleanlieness of politics in Connecticut, right? How they can clean up their own. 

Gee... didn't your Governor (R) Rowland demonstrate how clean political figures are in Connecticut. I mean, aside from taking tens of thousands of dollars from contractors with state contracts to upgrade the summer home. He was as clean as they can get. 

Remove the moat in your own eye.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 29, 2005)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Thank you.
> 
> I did read the article.
> I saw that a fine was imposed by the Elections Commission.
> ...


I'd say his motive was probably pretty similar to yours where, in another thread, you applauded an article insinuating Republican voter irregularities. You had this to say about anyone who questions the motives of someone who points out voter irregularities: 



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> Thank you, Bob. As the article says, those who disagree with the premise, seem to immediately brand anyone asking the question a 'conspiracy theorist' (aka kook).


And that was just an article insinuating voter irregularities, with lots of supposition and insinuation and very little evidence. Now that we have hard evidence of several Democratic operatives out and out engaging in voter fraud, and being convicted of crimes for it, it's all irrelavent? I wouldn't call forging an absentee voter card (the one she got caught doing, no one knows how many weren't caught), or trading crack cocaine for voter registration (what was the plan once they got the fake voter registrations? Surely it didn't end there). I think those things being perpetrated, in addition to voter turnout in some places greater than the number of registered voters, and other frauds democrats were implicated in (and in some cases indicted for), I think these things need to be discussed.

Especially in light of the repeated asinine claims that Republicans "stole" the election (this, despite Democrats apparent, though failed, widespread attempts to REALLY steal the election), this kind of information needs to come to light.

You might want to take a look at that mote in your own, it's roughly the size of a log.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 29, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> Especially in light of the repeated asinine claims that Republicans "stole" the election (this, despite Democrats apparent, though failed, widespread attempts to REALLY steal the election), this kind of information needs to come to light.


And just how many of these blue state voter irregularities were taken before congress? How about when Clinton won? I'm sure this stuff "must" have occured then!

Or maybe the fact that some people are crying foul just might have to do with gigantic lists like this...

*2004 Election fraud links*



*General sources*



http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

http://www.votergate.tv/

http://www.truthout.org/

http://freepress.org/



*Ohio Election Congressional Report*



http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/010605Y.shtml

http://rawstory.com/images/pdfs/finalreport.pdf



*Statistical Studies on the Exit Poll/Actual Results discrepancy*



http://www.assassinationscience.com/The_Exit_Poll_Discrepancy.pdf

http://truthout.org/unexplainedexitpoll.pdf
http://www.freepress.org/images/departments/997.pdf
http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/new_web/...wappendices.pdf
http://www.trivalleyherald.com/Stor...2545298,00.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0412/S00167.htm
http://mediastudy.com/exitpoll.html
http://ustogether.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm



*Estimated Vote Count in Ohio*



http://www.freepress.org/images/departments/Vote_Count_Ohio.pdf



*Computer Hacking of Electronic Voting*



http://www.jefffisherforcongress.com/Campaign2006/Election%20Fraud/electionfraudlink.htm



Texas to Florida: White House-linked clandestine operation paid for "vote switching" software



http://onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/120604Madsen/120604madsen.html



*80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S.*

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html

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



*There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry. *

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0916-04.htm

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html



The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/private_company.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html



*The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." *

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1647886



*Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S. He became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.*

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_200.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/031004Fitrakis/031004fitrakis.html



*Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee. *

http://www.blackboxvoting.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=26

http://www.hillnews.com/news/012903/hagel.aspx

http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/000896.php



*Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates. *

http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_28/b3689130.htm

http://theindependent.com/stories/052700/new_hagel27.html



*ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.*

http://www.essvote.com/HTML/about/about.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html



*Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters. *

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2987/041020evotestates/pfindex.html



*Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail. *

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.diebold.com/solutions/default.htm



*Diebold is based in Ohio. *

http://www.diebold.com/aboutus/ataglance/default.htm



*Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as consultants and developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.*

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/301469.shtml



*Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of General Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold. Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.*

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0312/S00191.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf



*Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years. *

http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf



*None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio. *

http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/2638.html

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/10/26/loc_elexoh.html



*California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie here: http://blackboxvoting.org/baxter/baxterVPR.mov.) *

http://wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,63298,00.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4874190



*30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail. *

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml



*All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates. *

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65757,00.html

http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOut.htm

http://www.rise4news.net/extravotes.html

http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=950

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm



*The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's brother.*

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/local/7628725.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10544-2004Oct29.html



*Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending further investigation.*

http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOut.htm

http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,10801,97614,00.html

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/tens_of_thousands.html

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html

http://uscountvotes.org/



*Ohio Secretary of State James Blackwells illegal activities*



http://www.berkeleydaily.org/text/article.cfm?issue=01-03-05&storyID=20433

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1046

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121404Z.shtml

http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=552



*Articles Written on Voting Irregularities*



Ten preliminary reasons why the Bush vote does not compute, and why Congress must investigate rather than certify the Electoral College



http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1065



The "Crime of November 2": The human side of how Bush stole Ohio, and why Congress must investigate rather than ratify the Electoral College



http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1067



Seven key reasons why the vote must be challenged at the electoral college



http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1066



Pollsters, Media Implicated in Vote Fraud



http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4934



TV Networks Officially Refuse to Release Exit Poll Raw Data Mainstream media finally displays true colors



http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1355&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0





*Raw data for the distribution of voting machines*



http://www.freepress.org/images/departments/machine_distribution.pdf



*Ohio Supreme Court Cases*



Moss v. Bush



http://freepress.org/images/departments/Election_Contest_2.pdf



Expert witness deposition



http://freepress.org/images/departments/Dep_Baiman.pdf

http://freepress.org/images/departments/Dep_Lange.pdf

http://freepress.org/images/departments/Dep_Phillips.pdf



Moss v Moyer



http://freepress.org/images/departments/Election_Contest_3_(Moyer).pdf



*Ohios Recount Discrepancy*



http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4939



*Articles on the Congressional Challenge*



*Conyers to Object to Ohio Electors, Requests Senate Allies*



http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/123104W.shtml



*Ohio Voter Claims*



http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%..._TO_NATION2.PDF
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_demo...testmt12804.pdf
http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp



*Voter Fraud in Florida*



http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1118-22.htm






So, excuse me if I am not jumping up and down and waving my fists when a couple of cases of "blue state" voter fraud jump up. From what I've seen in my research, the "right" hand is heavily weighted. Oh well, a vote is a vote, I guess, unless its for the other "guy".


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 30, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> So, excuse me if I am not jumping up and down and waving my fists when a couple of cases of "blue state" voter fraud jump up. From what I've seen in my research, the "right" hand is heavily weighted. Oh well, a vote is a vote, I guess, unless its for the other "guy".


Well, the difference is that the majority of your listed sites (such as commondreams and truthout) are merely political hack sites run by conspiracy theorists who are credible as the UFO crowd, and who distort reality and are HUGE on inference, and small on facts, and the issues brought up at the beginning of this thread are validated in a court of law. 

It's the "illusion" of evidence, without much substance. It's created on inference and conspiracy theories. Much like your thread on the US arming Iraq, it's designed to "look like" a ton of evidence, by virtue of the shear amount of BS. You don't have a mountain of evidence, you have a mountain of innuendo with little credibility and far less validity.  

Their best argument consists of "Well, it just seems fishy....the numbers don't add up" no coherent explaination of how the numbers add up, though i'm sure that if pressed, someone will throw out the most wild, convoluted and ultimately dense numerical "support" of absolutely nothing in hopes that it will appear to be a mountain of evidence. Much like the rest of the "evidence". The strategy is to assemble as much "evidence", which either a distortion of the truth or an outright lie, and throw it all together so that it appears to be an overwhelming unassailable amount of evidence. Funny thing is, none of it is what it is represented as when closely examined. In the light of detail the entire house of cards comes tumbling down. 

Not so charges like the ones where NAACP representatives traded crack cocaine for voter registration.  That's just the ones that got caught doing it, and I know that if three people are getting caught doing it, a whole lot more are getting away with it.

Yet we continue to hear absurd innuendo about vague right wing conspiracies.

Take the case about Diebold machines. You yourself like to reference Occam's razor from time to time. It applies here as no where else. There is no evidence that Diebold machines were biased toward either party. Defective, maybe, vast right wing conspiracy? Don't make me laugh.

Then we get the other asinine allegations of "widespread fraud"

Take this little nugget:

MIAMI, FL  With the knowledge that the minority vote will be crucial in the upcoming presidential election, Republican Party officials are urging blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities to make their presence felt at the polls on Wednesday, Nov. 3.

"Minority voters should make their unique voices heard, especially the African-American voting bloc, which is always a major factor in every election," said Florida Republican Party voter-drive organizer Mark Monreal, as he handed out flyers at a community center in the mostly black Miami neighborhood of South Farms. "That's why we put up hundreds of brightly colored banners featuring Martin Luther King Jr. and the 'Vote November 3' reminder. We needed to make sure they know when we want them at polling places."

"You can't walk through a black neighborhood here in Miami without seeing our 'Don't Forget Big Wednesday!' message up on a billboard, tacked to a phone booth, or taped to a bus shelter," Monreal added. "The Republican Party has spared no expense in this endeavor."

Interesting, no, and thrown around as proof positive of voter disenfanchisement. The ironic part is...it was originally a spoof piece by those masters of fake news, the Onion. It has since circulated the internet as "Real news". 

Evidence of fraud does exist...take this for example:





After nine months of intense voter-registration efforts focused on Franklin County, the number of people signed up to cast ballots in the Nov. 2 election has surpassed U.S. Census estimates of those eligible. 






There are about 815,000 Franklin County residents older than 18, according to the most recent census estimates, for 2003. As of yesterday, Franklin County Board of Elections officials counted more than 817,000 registered voters, and forms are still coming in at the rate of 8,000 per day as Mondays registration deadline approaches. 

Although voter-registration numbers in some Ohio counties have reached 90 percent or more of population estimates, surpassing the number is highly unusual. 

One county official in Ohio called the Franklin County figures "bizarre." 

One state official called them troubling.





​_Columbus Dispatch_






_Or this describing trading votes for crack cocaine: _

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbc...EWS09/410190343

or this

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/me...4/21voting.html

or this

http://www.10tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2458796

or this

http://www.cincinnati.com/text/loca...oc_fraud20.html

or this

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/s.../062903725.html


The list goes on and on. Note that all those cites listed are legitimate news sources, not crack wacko political hack websites, and that they discuss verified acts, many of them criminal, where suspects are named and charged with specific criminal offenses involving widespread voter fraud. 

I have chosen not to include blogs as a source, as I feel that many of them are unreliable sources of information. I did find this one interesting 

http://wrenncom.com/CommentaryArchi...05m03d05-01.asp

Not that Democratic voter fraud is anything new. It is widely believed and supported that it was responsible for the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960.

In all seriousness, however, voter fraud seems to have occurred on both sides by unscrupulous supporters of both parties. Perhaps, just perhaps, it isn't an indication of vast right and left wing conspiracies, but the work of a minority of criminals on both sides who will do anything to get their side elected.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 30, 2005)

In both arguments, arming Iraq and voter fraud, the evidence was strong enough to present before congress and in both cases, the White House killed the measure. It most certainly is NOT innuendo and kook theories or it never would have made it that far.  In fact, an election challenge occured only once before in the history of our country.  This is nothing to blow off...

There is plenty of hard evidence in the form of legal cases, criminal investigations, and independent reports if you look.

The bottom line is that this amoung of voter irregularity may or may not be unique, but either way it is appalling. What this means is that when the electorate is split so evenly, as it is now, the skullduggery is what decides the election. 

Nobody wants to see cheaters win, but unfortunately, playing nasty is probably just part of the ballgame.


----------



## TonyM. (Jul 30, 2005)

I wondered who the other guy that voted for Kucinick was.


----------



## Cryozombie (Jul 30, 2005)

Voter Fraud isnt a "Side" thing.

 It exists in all parties, becuase we are dealing with people, people want to win, and there will be plenty of cheating to win... Steroids in baseball, lies in politics, etc etc.  Someone is always gonna be willing to cheat to win.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 30, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> In both arguments, arming Iraq and voter fraud, the evidence was strong enough to present before congress and in both cases, the White House killed the measure. It most certainly is NOT innuendo and kook theories or it never would have made it that far. In fact, an election challenge occured only once before in the history of our country. This is nothing to blow off...
> 
> There is plenty of hard evidence in the form of legal cases, criminal investigations, and independent reports if you look.
> 
> ...


Well, here's the problem North. Voter fraud is a crime, which means that IF evidence existed that it occurred, there's no need to bring it congress. Simply file charges against people responsible and send them to prison. It's that simple. Especially considering many of the prosecutors in jurisdictions where people were allegedly "disenfranchised" are Democrats themselves, and really don't have any reason to NOT prosecute other than a lack of a case.

It doesn't take any evidence to get something before congress, it takes political opportunism and a couple of congressman willing to try and cash in on political opportunities.  

The only purpose for having a congressional hearing, is to create a circus and cash in on political hay by bringing a large amount of anecdotal evidence and vague, unsubstantiated allegations and innuendo so it gets played over and over again on the nightly news until everyone believes that it occurred, whether it did or not. They'd parade a bunch of conspiracy theorists, wackos and all around loons, in front of the nation. They will testify about their "knowledge" that this was occurring, which consists of bizarre unsubstantiated theories. Just what we need. 

Now, why didn't anyone bring charges on this so called vast conspiracy to defraud the American voter? Because there isn't any evidence it existed outside the minds of a few internet nuts who are upset their guy didn't win. Several charges were brought against individuals, however, many of them Democrats who were engaging in clearly illegal activity. I won't even suggest this was a wide-spread phenomenon in the sense that it was planned in a centralized way. 

I will suggest that it was fueled by the "Anyone but Bush, win at all costs" mentality of the left during the election, which led many on the left to believe that they needed to win at all costs, even if that meant voter fraud before the election, or accusations of voter fraud AFTER the election.


----------



## Tgace (Jul 30, 2005)

artyon:


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 30, 2005)

Has it occured to you that you are being entirely too dismissive of all of this?  There is an ongoing investigation by the way.  I'm going to sit back and see what happens...then we'll see who is right.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 30, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Has it occured to you that you are being entirely too dismissive of all of this? There is an ongoing investigation by the way. I'm going to sit back and see what happens...then we'll see who is right.


 It occurred to me....until I looked at the evidence you gave me. Then it occurred to me that I was right the first time.

By the way, who's conducting the investigation this time? George Soros, Michael Moore, Ted Kennedy or a few nutcases from truthout.com? The problem is a lack of understanding of cause and effect and what evidence actually proves.

truthout.com actually thinks that the fact that Diebold's electronic polling stations have screen freezes and computer problems mean that the Republicans rigged the election. That must be the cause, because they spend an inordinate amount of time and webspace trying to prove Diebold's machines are defective. So much time and webspace, I guess they didn't have time or room to "prove" that Bush stole the election.

They can't tell the difference between a defective machine and vast right wing conspiracy. I think it's a problem with their understanding of logical reasoning.  1 + 1 does not equal 4,345.  Keep thinking Occam's razor, North. Especially as a defective printer can't tell the difference between a vote for Bush and a vote for Kerry.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 31, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> 1 + 1 does not equal 4,345.


That is just it.  The numbers just don't add up.  You can choose to blow it all off, but until you put the time into actually researching the raw data and crunching the numbers yourself, you really won't see it.  Until you read the court cases, the congressional report, and the testimonials, you just won't see how important it really is.

Here is just one example...

The odds of just the Diebold voting machine errors in one state ALL coming out in favor of Bush are 93,000,000 to 1 for instance.  That is just one state.  Nationwide, across the country, every state had errors and they ALL favored Bush.  

It is statistically impossible for that to be random chance and it deserved to be investigated.  This is one of the things that was challenged about the election before Congress.  There are 83 more equally impossible things in that report.  

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that something is rotten in Denmark.

You are too dismissive of the left.  Truthout and Commondreams are leftwing biased, but they aren't kooky conspiracy theorists.  Most of it is well researched.  They've taken the numbers and they've shown the results.  You just have to take the time to read it and understand the implications.  There is a string of cases that stretches from the US supreme court to various state supreme courts, to the United States justice department and everyone is citing the same data.  The bottom line is that if this is just a bunch of nutbar A.B.B people trying to stick it to Republicans, then thousands of people have purjured themselves.

It really doesn't matter that Bush won.  It matters how he won.  And a democrat could do the same thing next time.  That door is now open and all of these "impossible" things are "fair game".  If, in the end, nothing is done about any of this, we are really looking at some dirty future elections and possibly a compromised electoral system.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 31, 2005)

Try to be unbiased about this report...does its conclusions make you feel comfortable about e-voting machines?

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf

Don't you think that an investigation should take place where statistically impossible "problems" occured with the voting machines?


----------



## Tgace (Jul 31, 2005)

And yet no evidence or probable cause for an arrest..........


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 31, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> That is just it. The numbers just don't add up. You can choose to blow it all off, but until you put the time into actually researching the raw data and crunching the numbers yourself, you really won't see it. Until you read the court cases, the congressional report, and the testimonials, you just won't see how important it really is.


 Where are the indictments?



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Here is just one example...
> 
> The odds of just the Diebold voting machine errors in one state ALL coming out in favor of Bush are 93,000,000 to 1 for instance. That is just one state. Nationwide, across the country, every state had errors and they ALL favored Bush.


 You don't even believe that number. It's a statistic with absolutely no basis for calculation. Some nut case with a claim of authority came up with that statistic using a "Extremely complex, and unexplainable algorithim after examining all the evidence" (See also: Made it up).

It strikes me as being very similar to the "irrefutable evidence of Gods" existence argument, whereby some expert gives a complicated explaination about how the possibility that god doesn't exist, based on the evidence, is 1 Trillion: 1, when this number has no basis in any kind of reality. It's pure fabrication. It's designed to give the appearance of absolute authority, without having a single ounce of validity. 



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> It is statistically impossible for that to be random chance and it deserved to be investigated. This is one of the things that was challenged about the election before Congress. There are 83 more equally impossible things in that report.


 I think you put WAAAAY to much faith in self-proclaimed experts and their internet posts. What's an easier explaination....A) A vast, nation wide conspiracy involving not thousands, but tens of thousands of people, all working in unison to defraud the electorate or B) A couple of nut jobs using explainable events, and distorting them to support a wacked out theory.....Notice the question wasn't what you want to be true, but what more likely is. Apply Hanlon's razor. You're a smart person, north, don't lower yourself to this kind of poor reasoning. 



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that something is rotten in Denmark.


 Something stinks alright....but it's most likely the fishy, cooked up "evidence".



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> You are too dismissive of the left. Truthout and Commondreams are leftwing biased, but they aren't kooky conspiracy theorists. Most of it is well researched. They've taken the numbers and they've shown the results. You just have to take the time to read it and understand the implications. There is a string of cases that stretches from the US supreme court to various state supreme courts, to the United States justice department and everyone is citing the same data. The bottom line is that if this is just a bunch of nutbar A.B.B people trying to stick it to Republicans, then thousands of people have purjured themselves.


 What I am is a committed skeptic. I don't believe in vast conspiracies, Left or Right wing. Truthout and Commondreams are left wing biased, kooky conspiracy theorists, period. The "research" as a have pointed out time and time again, is nothing but distortion, supposition and innuendo. The evidence doesn't even point anywhere in the direction they claim, but that doesn't stop them from claiming it. They get by on the mountian of "non-evidence" they have that doesn't support anything. But they believe if they present the appearance of a HUGE amount of evidence, no one will take the time to look at it closely and see it's nothing but an illusion. It's the forest through the trees argument. 

I have no doubt that a large number of people have perjured themselves in this case. I don't think it's a vast leftwing conspiracy as much as it is a mentality that encourages people to do anything to support their party. In addition, I think there are a large number of people who believe that this occurred because they have misinterpreted the evidence, and applied malicious motives to everything they see. 

Again, Hanlon's Razor "Never attribute to conspiracy, that which can more easily be explained by stupidity."




			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> It really doesn't matter that Bush won. It matters how he won. And a democrat could do the same thing next time. That door is now open and all of these "impossible" things are "fair game". If, in the end, nothing is done about any of this, we are really looking at some dirty future elections and possibly a compromised electoral system.


 Oh come on, you don't really believe that either. No matter how Bush won, it would be called in to question. The leftists desire to defeat Bush at all costs created an environment where no matter who won, Bush was to be considered illegitimate. When you dealing with that kind of vitriole, it doesn't matter if he won fairly or not, as he is presumed to be illegitimate no matter what. 

In this political environment, the truth is irrelavent. It's the perception that's important. That's why this evidence is presented. It doesn't prove anything, but the evidence isn't what's important, it's the editorial comment that's attached to it that you are intended to see. They will show you the evidence, and then TELL you what to think about it. Sorry, i'm not that stupid. I call BS.

The evidence does not support a charge of a vast attempt to steal the election, but that fact does not stop the effort to paint it so. So the theory goes, if you can't win the election, do everything you can do to make sure the winner doesn't benefit from the victory. 

The left seems to be mastering the art of the Pyrrhic victory.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 31, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Try to be unbiased about this report...does its conclusions make you feel comfortable about e-voting machines?
> 
> http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf
> 
> Don't you think that an investigation should take place where statistically impossible "problems" occured with the voting machines?


All your evidence seeks to make the leap of logic that because it is technically possible to alter these machines, then it MUST have happened. Your entire article is based on showing how it is "technically possible" that it could have happened (though, even in this, you have to take their word for it). 

Again, applying some logical reasoning lets look at the facts. Here's what we have

"Could have technically happened"

Here's what they conclude through that

"Could have technically happened" = "DID happen"

One does not equal the other, especially in light of the fact that there is no further evidence that this occurred.

Basically, the situation breaks down like this. Any electronic equipment is subject to failure. Infallible electronic equipment is not POSSIBLE. Therefore, faulty electronic voting machines are evidence of nothing more than the fact that it is possible electronic voting is fallible. 

Now, as to your question: "does its conclusions make you feel comfortable about e-voting machines?", let me remind you that it is an entirely seperate issue than the asinine accusation that Bush plotted to win the election.  It bears studying this type of technology to see if we should even trust ANY kind of electronic voting system.

However, it then begs the question: How much more fallible (if it all) is electronic voting than hand ballots? I haven't heard that answered. These so called unbiased websites do nothing but give the illusion of research, without the substance and logical insight.  When we have that answered, I can more intelligently answer your question.


----------



## Tgace (Jul 31, 2005)

The Libs couldnt win this one so they switched to Rove.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 31, 2005)

A liberal billionaire stops spending money on 547 groups and starts buying voting machine companies. Suddenly, all "errors" point in favor of democrats. It's all "fair game" now. Will you be singing the same tune?  We'll see in 2008 when Hillary wins!


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 31, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> And yet no evidence or probable cause for an arrest..........


There are lots of steps before the investigation gets to that point.  Memory cards need to be seized and analyzed.  Same with records.  The Justice Dept seems to be "sluggish".

Part of the reason why the congressional challenge took place was to "force" their hand.  

Sometimes, statistics are all that indicates a "problem" occured.  It would be nice to at least investigate this and put it to rest, don't you think?


----------



## still learning (Jul 31, 2005)

Hello,  Will voter's fraud every end?  Nope?   As long as the bad guys can figure a way to cheat, people will.

 Life is about being honest or crossing that line and become dishonest.  It is easy to cross that line, and once you do it once the second time becomes easier, and so on.

 In today's world it is begining to get harder to stay honest, truthful,trustworthy and loyal.  To stay straight as an arrow can be done if one wants too.  There are alot of peope who are straight as an arrows and we need to keep sharing and encouraging others to do the same......its hard work but rewarding to one's self............staying as straight as an arrow....Aloha


----------



## Sapper6 (Jul 31, 2005)

still learning said:
			
		

> Hello,  Will voter's fraud every end?  Nope?   As long as the bad guys can figure a way to cheat, people will.



it's not about good guys-bad guys.  as long as there are elections, there will be voter fraud.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 31, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> There are lots of steps before the investigation gets to that point. Memory cards need to be seized and analyzed. Same with records. The Justice Dept seems to be "sluggish".
> 
> Part of the reason why the congressional challenge took place was to "force" their hand.
> 
> Sometimes, statistics are all that indicates a "problem" occured. It would be nice to at least investigate this and put it to rest, don't you think?


 Courts and law enforcement bodies are better investigators than a bunch of half-wit congressman with an ax to grind. A grand jury is arraigned when evidence REALLY exists and they want to force someone's hand. If congress is holding hearings, it's for political gain.

Further, the "statistics" are nothing but a three-card monty game. Those statistics are meaningless props, pulled out of thin air.

As for putting this to rest, could enough evidence exist to convince you and others, who are sure this occurred, that it did NOT occur? I doubt it. 

The only reason you want an investigation is so you can saw "SEE?! They're investigating this, so that PROVES it must be true!". The point of convincing the government to even conduct an investigation is to MANUFACTURE proof in the form of the investigation itself, that the accusations are valid.

You don't investigate something that's so obviously BS that only a few nut case conspiracy theorists believe it.


----------

