[Lula-chat] Witness to vote-flipping

[Peter Benjamin]

At 08:20 PM 9/14/2006, Christopher Smith wrote:
>If you check the polls at various points in time, the majority of the
>American public was behind the idea of that war (not so much now ;-).

Bush's war in Iraq is his idea.  He is the "decider" on that war.

The war against the terrorist organization that did 911 is in Afghanistan.
And is still on going and it's head still has not been captured.

These are two different wars.


>>>> We have now had 7 states have irregularities in two
>>>> presidential elections, where the "wrong" person won.
>>>>   
>>>>       
>>> Well, we've had irregularities in pretty much all 50 states in pretty
>>> much every Presidential election as far back as I've checked, and we've
>>> had ethically questionable stuff going on on a much grander scale. In
>>> most cases there is little evidence to suggest that they tipped the
>>>     
>>
>> The 2000 and 2004 elections changed that perception for most everyone.
>>   
>Yes, perceptions changed, particularly because 2000 was challenged.
>Reality is another matter. ;-)

The challenge for 2004 is still on going.  Presidential interference 
has postponed action on until after 2008, per a prior post to this list.

>>> In the
>>> 2000 election, it looks like any fair count of the votes in Florida
>>> wouldn't have changed the ultimate outcome 
>>>     
>> I'll disagree.  Tens of thousands of votes from counties
>> with Democratic leanings were not counted at all.  And
>> the judge did not permit them to be counted, which is
>> real disenfranchising of the voter.
>>   
>They were counted after the fact by several independent groups.

The recount procedure does not permit "several" groups for recounting.
There were many counties and voting locations where fraud was 
suspected.  Each would have just one recount, not several.
Florida law is very specific about how recounts are done.

Only a fraction of the disputed votes were recounted based on Gore's
legal team going after only the low hanging fruit.  The URL you
supply below lists many more incidents.

>Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of the results:
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Presidential_Election#Media_post-electoral_studies.2Frecounts
>
>The bottom line is that while one could contrive to find a way to count
>the votes such that Gore one, the voting favored Bush, and Gore would
>have lost if his legal team would have gotten exactly what they asked for.

That is some extrapolation, a far stretch.  And your limitation on
Gore's legal team appears to exclude the fact I already pointed
that over 100,000 votes appear to not have been counted at all.

That so many instances of suspicion of fraud, under a Republican
supervisor, who was supposed to be bi-partisan...


>> What I read in major newspapers was the opposite.
>> That the current president would not have won if
>> fraud in at least 3 of 5 of these states did not occur.
>>   
>This assumes that allegations of fraud in those states are accurate and
>they are accurate as to the impact on the vote. As we saw in the 2000
>election, this is probably not the case. 

According to major newspapers and most voting experts in the USA
and abroad there is sufficient doubt in all five states that Bush
was the winner in those states.  Bush would have lost those states.

You'd have to supply the names of a few experts or firms
with the opposite thinking before I would accept your
personal view.

>Furthermore, in several of
>those states there are separate allegations of fraud by other parties.
>None of the allegations seem likely to have an impact on the outcome of
>the popular vote, so it's hard to say that the public's will was
>subjugated regardless, and given that the public voted in support of the
>outcome in 2000, 

Huh?  Voted 6 years ahead in 2000 for an outcome in 2006?  Double huh?

>I think the overall direction of the country over the
>past six years was basically where we've gone. 

Circular, for sure.

>Hard to accept, I know,
>but that's what the data seems to point to.

Why do you find it hard to accept?

_______________________________________________
Lula-chat mailing list
Lula-chat at lula.org
http://www.lula.org/mailman/listinfo/lula-chat