Seems pretty clear that most DUers totally agree with each other...

...about the need for serious vote/election reform in America. Those who allege/suspect/believe there was fraud involved in the results of NH's primary stand for that reform. Those who followed Ohio fraud reports in '04 agree. Those who remember Max Cleland's shocking '02 defeat in GA agree. Those who heard and read Andy Stevenson's warnings agree. And most who are skeptical of the fraud claims regarding this last NH primary also agree.

The details, method and means of instituting this reform are up for debate, but the necessity for such reform is well-nigh accepted universally on DU.

Yes?

I can't believe we're in nearly the same grim situation as we were in 2004. Where was the honorable John Conyers in this fight? He nearly stood alone in being openly suspicious in 2004. We've had four years to reform the system and it seems little has been done. It mayupset some people here but I feel we need to scrutinize our own candidates just as much as the neocons when it comes to our elections.

i worked the polls several election cycles and easily the most problematic and questionable were the touch screen voting machines. i'm really digging the paper ballots that are optically scanned though. the ballots are so easy to read and mark that they can be easily read by hand as well. ideally we should go back to hand counting, but the optical scans were pleasant. if i were to do it i'd use the paper ballot w/ opti-scan and a hand count on the side to double check. it would add some labor costs, but considering how miserable the touch screens were, and how time consuming reading a punch card to its key is by hand, i can comfortably say these new paper ballots in Alameda county are wonderful. everyone in the nation really should try these things out, they're wonderful!

oh, and if anyone has the time to sacrifice a 16+ hour day, volunteer at your local precinct! i'd do it again, but i'm SOL w/ school this time. everywhere needs more volunteers to pick up the slack!
:7

that completely discredits the movement imvho.

We seem to keep forgetting that we are all on the same side in the end...

Sort of, anyway.

report yourself or stop benefitting.

I'm no tinfoiler, but if you can find me ONE instance where the RRRepublicans have been losers due to election fraud, you will have my undying admiration.

If you are talking only about NH--look, I don't care for either HRC or Obama, but I know that it's easy to distort the results and that's why there will forever be a taint on ANY election where electronic voting was used.

Do I think there was fraud in NH? No, not really--but the fact that I know there EASILY could have been is problematic enough.

Am I concerned that election fraud, writ large, exists? I sure as hell am.

getting public support for real improvements. As for actual cases of fraud, these must be handled by the campaign/candidate/party affected in an offical protest or legal action.

They've never been victimized by it.

Sadly, THEY need to be hurt by it before they will give a damn--and if it happens, it will be all OUR (the Democrats) fault somehow--but it will get action.

Granted that the most recent losers care more. lol.

Any movements that points to a particular loss in an election as evidence of fraud, and yet no real protests or legal action is taken, are blowing little more than hot air.

On the other hand a credible call for national standards in voting equipment and procedures is one that that does not align with unconfirmed unproven and uncontested charges.

I have said all I have to say.

edit to add uncontested

Regardless of the willingness of the campaign/candidate/party affected, each and every citizen has a stake, our only stake in the legitimacy of the election process.

Of the State of Washington was stolen by the Democrats.
And then there is the whole nasty history of the Daley machinery in Ilinois.

However, one of the outshoots of the Daley machinery (and its corruptness) is that Illinois voting activists (Both Dems and Repugs) finally got it right a few year ago - only then HAVA required the sytem they put into place to be dismantled.

As Vonneugt would say, Oh well. And so it goes...

yet I even saw debate about this overall issue on several threads last night.

I was going to post a new thread:

2 + 2 = 4

I was certain SOMEONE would jump in to disagree, as that seems to be their purpose in life.

Kinda like my ex-husband.

Oy. :eyes:

All Americans should be secure in the knowledge that regardless of how they voted and whether their candidate won or lost, that the vote was counted accurately. We don't have that. We STILL don't have that, despite numerous events over the past eight years. This is pathetic and disgusting. What ACTUAL progress has been made in restoring the integrity of the vote since the last election?

This is why I will be permanently bitter towards Kerry, who did not "have my back" and who could have challenged the vote in Ohio and blown this wide open the way it deserved to be.

I guess I will just have to donate and support my heart out for whoever our next candidate is(who will lead in poll after poll, exit and otherwise over whichever Republican ghoul is running), and wait for the UNEXPECTED and SURPRISING and POLL DEFYING, LAST MINUTE TURNOUT of the "Security Dads" or the "Nuclear Nieces" or some other completely imaginary voter population that pops up at the last possible second and delivers us once again into Republican hands.

Since NO ONE ANYWHERE, population and candidates alike, doesn't give a rats ass about this overriding, overwhelming usurpation of democracy, we will get the militaristic, wealth-transferring, blood-sucking, corporatist government that we deserve.

I am asking because of threads like this one
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2644442

Plus, this kind of thing is right up his alley - corporate malfeasance and all. If you are going to say that I shouldn't have him as my first choice because he didn't fight the count in 04 - just give up now. That decision was John Kerry's to make. I think we would have a very different outcome in 08 with Edwards at the top.

Plus, I don't see the "negotiators" "reconcilers" "work the middle Democrats" like Obama and Hillary taking up this cudgle, so I am left with Edwards regardless. Just my opinion.

minds that, unlike the 2000 one the 2004 theft is largely unknown - and what contributed to that. It was you after all bringing the resentment against Kerry on that - which I share. But at least Kerry didn't have the chutzpa to ask for my vote again.

Seems to be your meme of the day. I don't really think you'll dissuade any Edwards voters, since as I mentioned neither of the alternatives seems like a better choice in this regard. You think Edwards didn't fight hard enough and he has chutzpa asking for your vote? Fine. Don't vote for him.

I have to think your plan of action is to undermine Edwards by saying "He's a fighter? Oh, yeah, well why didn't he fight this?"
I think most of us will be able to see through this. Good luck to you and whoever your actual candidate is.

Could it be I just care about the issue and am still angry about the thefts? Could it be I appreciate that Gore at least brought attention to the issue while the two bozos of 2004 buried it? Maybe I am not as good as you at compartmentalizing - Kerry bad, Edwqrds good....
Why would anyone need to undermine Edwards? :shrug:

So we have something in common. But again, here we have your words "the two bozos of 2004 buried it"

I don't know why you need to undermine Edwards - only you can answer that question - all I know is that you ARE undermining Edwards.

Hey, that's your choice. And it's my choice to see through it.

about compartmentalization. Actually, I have always compartmentalized them since it became generally known that Edwards did not want to throw in the towel as quickly as Kerry. Kerry was the top of the ticket and the decision maker. It hasn't any struggle at all and I am not at all conflicted over it.

If the issue raises it's head again in this election, which now looks like that will happen- somehow, somewhere, some way- I am completely confident that Edwards will not be restrained by circumstances as he was in the past.

actually doing NOTHING for 4 years. Had he championed the cause, I would have supported him and bought the "wanted to". In light of the subsequent silence, this "rumor" strikes me as political calculation and kinda absurd...Who cares what he "wanted"? I wanted to be the greatest person on earth too...

and said so repeatedly at the time and later. That's not backstabbing, it's just making it clear that he wanted to continue the fight and Kerry didn't feel it was politically advantageous to do so.

:shrug:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADwjvAs9J-0
Don't you wish he was more firm on the other "disagreement"?

Issues that matter to me most. Voting rights. Peace. Avatar. Signature. Me.

I don't have another thing to say on this topic, so I won't make anymore replies.

Lieberman was on the ticket with Gore when big Al made his stand. Right? So, would he get the thubs up?

She had the courage to tell Cuyahoga County to replace the direct recording Diebold electronic voting machines with scanned paper ballots.
!

The weird New Hampshire vote also involved scanned paper ballots. What matters is not how the vote is cast, but how the vote is TABULATED and that's where the opportunity for fraud arises.

The good thing about the scanned paper ballot is that least there is a paper ballot that can be looked at later if a recount is demanded.

I would expect a whole bunch of races that are closely contested to magically fall just outside the parameters of automactic recount and the losing candidates won't ask for recount, because they won't want to be smeared as a "poor loserman".

Brunner looked at all the voting methods and determined that optical scan had the least opportunity for fraud. Compared to direct recording machines whose security can be breached by opening it with a hotel minibar key(!).

Now, what frosts me is that the Ohio newspapers are trying to blur this by comparing it to "voter fraud", which is someone voting "illegally" by claiming a false identity. F-ing Plain Dealer.

They are masters at blurring the issue and reframing the argument. A**hole drunk Brent Larkin.

Or I should say "the Cleveland loathing editorial board of Cleveland's newspaper". Are they so stupid to not remember how SOS Blackwell stole the 2004 election?

that Edwards will stay in for the long haul, no?

I suspect that we'd get a lot of agreement on the other side of the aisle.

The trick is to get some Congresscritters to champion it while they're on the "winning" side!

This will not be an easy sell.

Watch his video where he testifies in front of Conyers about rigging the software.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8112825559202389150

Its all a scam

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2644942&mesg_id=2644942

The voting process is obscured and patented to ensure secrecy. Who can have any faith in it? Why would they?

We know "they" can manipulate the votes themselves and the counting of them afterwards. After all we have seen in the last 7 years who amongst us thinks they would pass up the opportunity? Faith Based voting will not do, the entire process needs to be open, secure, and absolutely incorruptible.

NoFederales

We would KNOW.

will bring this suspicion up again. That is why we need verifiable results.

I am not claiming fraud.

I am not supporting Obama.

I am not crazy.

I am not paranoid.

I KNOW there was voter fraud in 2000, 2004 and 2006.

I KNOW that the Diebold machines are easily hackable.

I KNOW the results from the areas with Diebold scanners were different than other areas.

I KNOW the polls were all wrong, but only on the DEM side.

I KNOW these things and I KNOW I want verified elections in this country.

Thank you for throwing your weight behind this. I know your opinion is highly regarded by many here.

who are alleging that HRC won her NH primary thru Diebold. Not every election that is lost is thru fraud, sometimes voters surprise the pollsters and pundits especially in a volatile primary where 40% of voters said they either had not totally committed and can change their minds. It actually made me pretty happy to see that voters can still have the ultimate say. And I'm not even a HRC supporter.

And it is equally irrelevant.

...water down the argument and in many cases harms the cause of real voter fraud as it appears as sour grapes.

While there's been plenty of smoke about machine fraud, I still haven't seen anyone who has been prosecuted for such tampering. Maybe I'm missing something here. Yes, there have been suits and hearings, but no direct criminal prosecution of someone caught tampering with a machine. Yes, Repugnicans are sneaky, but they're stupid as well...look at the New Hampshire phone jamming scam and many others that fill TPM Muckraker...yet not one of anyone being indicted for tampering with a Diebold scanner. Again, it's not that I don't doubt the reports or that there wasn't some type of manipulation, but the claims that this is why Obama lost in New Hampshire sounds like major crutch people run to these days when elections don't turn out the way they want them to.

This waters down a lot of the real voter suppression efforts. I was scanning here yesterday for discussions about the Supreme Court hearings on the Indiana voter fraud case. I only found one thread here...while there were dozens of "election in New Hampshire stolen" ones. Now whose not keeping an eye on the ball here. Obviously people weren't paying too much attention as I'm seeing little outrage as the Supreme Court is about to codify the Rovian tricks.

Plus you get a pony.

a particular candidate. Those DUers who have bothered to spend some time over at the ER forum (formerly ER&D) know we are committed to fair, transparent and verifiable elections. Do we have cause to question the integrity of the vote outcome w Diebold? ABSOLUTELY!

...I guess I'd prefer that they were not talking about the war, rather than not talking about election reform or the economy.

just ask skinner. all is hunky dory because cnn exit polls match official election results.

count how many times we are told to "get over it".

the questioning of vote results should be a reflex until we have thoroughgoing reform. we are far from that and far from universal agreement on its importance.

And of all other electronically counted results, but why not start now - you know, to dispel the confusion caused by the discrepancy between paper and optiscan counties in NH, which no doubt has an innocent cause. But isn't it best to know rather than to speculate? Even if the speculation is intelligent, isn't it better to know?

Maybe they have so many to move, they haven't gotten to this one just yet.

Might be effective to hit alert on it, just so they know it's still here.

But you are definitely correct; this belongs with the others.

ER is the new GD!

Sorry 'bout that.

Though where they belong is less clear. (Personally, I'd say this issue is roughly 10000 times more important than some of the stuff that's posted daily to GD, but as some DU Hall Monitors have so helpfully pointed out, Love It Or Leave It.)

I agree with you, Will, that this should be one of our top priority issues--no matter who benefits or is harmed by the results.

It requires a special kind of harsh justice to save GD from itself. Mayhem on that forum could easily detonate the whole community.

But I agree that a community square is a volatile and fragile thing. :)

Thanks.

... unless they like unverifiable election results, that is ...

:dem:

-Laelth

;)

There are so many places for improvement, it's not funny!

I am glad there are diligent people here who are dedicated to this cause - I support their work wholeheartedly.