The Supreme Court Rules

[Zool]

Florida

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Or you could blame an electorate that was too feeble to follow the instructions on the ballot. It just wasn't that hard, people (though admittedly it did make a mess).

Personally I like letting the machine count them, period. Its not biased. Can it be rigged...I guess so, but I would think its much less likely than a partisan pollster messing with a paper ballot to change/invalidate a vote.

It ain't an election until the Democrats try some new form of cheating.

Hard to do after all the new ways were discovered by the republicans.

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/04/republican_vote.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/10/republican-voter-fraud-investigation.html

http://www.klas-tv.com/global/story.asp?s=2421595

[mraynrand]

Or you could blame an electorate that was too feeble to follow the instructions on the ballot. It just wasn't that hard, people (though admittedly it did make a mess).

Personally I like letting the machine count them, period. Its not biased. Can it be rigged...I guess so, but I would think its much less likely than a partisan pollster messing with a paper ballot to change/invalidate a vote.

It ain't an election until the Democrats try some new form of cheating.

Hard to do after all the new ways were discovered by the republicans.

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/04/republican_vote.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/10/republican-voter-fraud-investigation.html

http://www.klas-tv.com/global/story.asp?s=2421595

Look at those reputable sources! Do you really believe all that shit you read, TY. Geezus, with respect to FL in 2000, even the NYT eventually determined that there was no cause for believing the election was decided unfairly. Hell, just the early call in favor of Gore probably swung several thousand votes because of the time zone effect. And If Gore really cared about an honest result, why only recount in heavily Dem counties? Why try to block absentee ballots from the military? Why try to have machine read ballots read by hand. The very same machine ballots that can be changed by the reader and can easily be 'misread' by the holder? And why have the FL supreme court involve itself in he first place in a process that's not in their control? The Truth about 2000 was essentially that it was the equivalent of a triple overtime basketball game and Gore blamed the officials. If you scoured the state, you could easily find glitches on both sides, that typically happen in every election (And I'm almost certain that you'll respond to this post with all sorts of these little irregularities. Why bother? I kind find you all sorts from the other side). The margin was within the range of standard error. Gore wasn't cheated - he was extremely unlucky, and if Bush were in his shoes he could have felt just as jobbed. I feel for Dems that lost that election, cuz losing it that way sucked. But that's different from being cheated. The real question Gore had to ask himself (as does a team that loses a triple overtime game) is: Why was the damn election/game so close to begin with - like the Packers playing the at the Bears in 1997 - Gore had to be thinking: "The economy is outstanding, there are no war issues and I still lose!" Maybe he just wasn't that great a candidate.

With respect to 2004, clearly the only major frauds were Dem. 1) In Ohio, ACORN was giving out drugs to pay for fraudulent votes from idiots using cartoon and other common names. 2) In King County, WA, the vote was recounted three times, until enough votes could be 'discovered' in favor of the Dem Governor. Somehow, amazingly, there were thousands more votes cast in highly Dem King county than registered voters, yet the Dem candidate won after three recounts. Same in Milwaukee - where votes exceeded registered voters by thousands. Why didn't all those Lawyers who were stationed in Ohio (where Bush won by about 100K), rush to Milwaukee and Seattle to investigate those obvious cases of fraud?
But the truth of Ohio in 2004 was that NOT one single voting district reported irregularities - and each voting district has one Republican and one Democrat on the oversight.

[MJZiggy]

Why didn't all those Lawyers who were stationed in Ohio (where Bush won by about 100K), rush to Milwaukee and Seattle to investigate those obvious cases of fraud?

Duh!! Because they weren't licensed in Ohio (don't jump all over me I'm being mostly facetious).

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Or you could blame an electorate that was too feeble to follow the instructions on the ballot. It just wasn't that hard, people (though admittedly it did make a mess).

Personally I like letting the machine count them, period. Its not biased. Can it be rigged...I guess so, but I would think its much less likely than a partisan pollster messing with a paper ballot to change/invalidate a vote.

It ain't an election until the Democrats try some new form of cheating.

Hard to do after all the new ways were discovered by the republicans.

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/04/republican_vote.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/10/republican-voter-fraud-investigation.html

http://www.klas-tv.com/global/story.asp?s=2421595

Look at those reputable sources! Do you really believe all that shit you read, TY. Geezus, with respect to FL in 2000, even the NYT eventually determined that there was no cause for believing the election was decided unfairly. Hell, just the early call in favor of Gore probably swung several thousand votes because of the time zone effect. And If Gore really cared about an honest result, why only recount in heavily Dem counties? Why try to block absentee ballots from the military? Why try to have machine read ballots read by hand. The very same machine ballots that can be changed by the reader and can easily be 'misread' by the holder? And why have the FL supreme court involve itself in he first place in a process that's not in their control? The Truth about 2000 was essentially that it was the equivalent of a triple overtime basketball game and Gore blamed the officials. If you scoured the state, you could easily find glitches on both sides, that typically happen in every election (And I'm almost certain that you'll respond to this post with all sorts of these little irregularities. Why bother? I kind find you all sorts from the other side). The margin was within the range of standard error. Gore wasn't cheated - he was extremely unlucky, and if Bush were in his shoes he could have felt just as jobbed. I feel for Dems that lost that election, cuz losing it that way sucked. But that's different from being cheated. The real question Gore had to ask himself (as does a team that loses a triple overtime game) is: Why was the damn election/game so close to begin with - like the Packers playing the at the Bears in 1997 - Gore had to be thinking: "The economy is outstanding, there are no war issues and I still lose!" Maybe he just wasn't that great a candidate.

With respect to 2004, clearly the only major frauds were Dem. 1) In Ohio, ACORN was giving out drugs to pay for fraudulent votes from idiots using cartoon and other common names. 2) In King County, WA, the vote was recounted three times, until enough votes could be 'discovered' in favor of the Dem Governor. Somehow, amazingly, there were thousands more votes cast in highly Dem King county than registered voters, yet the Dem candidate won after three recounts. Same in Milwaukee - where votes exceeded registered voters by thousands. Why didn't all those Lawyers who were stationed in Ohio (where Bush won by about 100K), rush to Milwaukee and Seattle to investigate those obvious cases of fraud?
But the truth of Ohio in 2004 was that NOT one single voting district reported irregularities - and each voting district has one Republican and one Democrat on the oversight.

Rolling Stone is a credible magazine. Care to tell me what is wrong with them?

OR with KLAS..a tv station?

Sorry, but you are wrong.

Let's check out some more "poor" sources:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/100/story/17532.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/14/politics/main649380.shtml

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_republican_war_on_voting

http://www.seminolechronicle.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/12/16/41c2fdb042ea1

http://www.legitgov.org/coup_2004.html

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2004/Oct-16-Sat-2004/news/25015189.html

[bobblehead]

Its pretty commonly accepted that republicans cheat to win elections. That is why every time a democrat loses a close one it ends up in court....they were cheated. But when a republican loses a close one he concedes....he obviously didn't cheat enough (see the case you talked about in washington).

Republicans are evil malicious people who can't be trusted. Repeat it....droooonnne it. Republicans are evil and anything we say or imply about them is acceptable. Democrats are honorable beacons of justice....except that dude with 90k in his freezer who obviously was the victim of some republican janitor planting it there.

[mraynrand]

Sorry, but you are wrong.

I'll take your 'richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com' and raise you the NYT. And every other reputable newspaper that investigated the 2000 election. As I predicted, you barfed up a bunch of articles about voting irregularity. Happens in every election, on both sides. Some examples are more egregious than others - like Seattle and Mlwaukee in 2004.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Sorry, but you are wrong.

I'll take your 'richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com' and raise you the NYT. And every other reputable newspaper that investigated the 2000 election. As I predicted, you barfed up a bunch of articles about voting irregularity. Happens in every election, on both sides. Some examples are more egregious than others - like Seattle and Mlwaukee in 2004.

Try and follow along. I never posted one thing about 2000...except the voter rolls were purged in florida of people that shoulda been able to vote. That is not even debatable.

I posted about 2004. And, there were plenty of irregularities...if you want to talk about both sides..fine. However, my post was in response to Harvey's about Dem's...so, if someone is playing partisan politics...address him.