Forum Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Forum Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Forum Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Forum Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| (US) 11/06 - I don't get it |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Doug Carson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Yosemitesam514
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 4:48 pm: | 
|
I am convinced that BBV is detrimental to our democracy and needs to be stopped.
However, I was also convinced that Diebold and the like were in the pocket of the neo-conservatives. I was convinced that the manipulation of voting machines was how they remain in power.
Many Americans are sure that the current administration has committed some crimes and if only the Democrats were in power, they could be stopped.
From the point of view of the Neocons, losing this election could be dangerous. All they needed to do was hold the house and senate, even losing a few seats, to stave off investigations that could land them in jail. They have the machines in their pocket. There has been a lot of discussion in the press about how exit polls can't be trusted - I saw that as a sign. There has been discussion of how the Republican get-out-the-vote machine is legendary - I saw that as a sign. The weekend before the election, the polls showed the republicans in a dead heat in several races - I saw that as a sign. On election day, everything was in place to cover up a rigged election.
So here is my question: why didn't the republicans win? They could have kept control while losing a few seats. No one would be surprised if those races that were razor thin went instead to republicans. With investigations at stake, it is inconceivable to think that if the neocons had the ability to alter races, they wouldn't do it.
But so far, even with the inevitable irregularities, it appears that the election was what we hoped to see: it was on the level. That doesn't fit with my convictions, and so I must presume that the republicans do not have a way of throwing elections via BBV.
So I ask, what happened here? I don't get it. |
Craig Bergren
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Babyhuey
Post Number: 8
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 9:07 pm: |
|
I have three possible explanations:
1) Once people like BBV, U. Conn., Princeton Univ, etc. exposed the methods used to hack into the systems and rig the elections, people were on the lookout for those methods.
2) Once pople like BBV, U. Conn., Princeton Univ, etc. exposed themethods used to hack into the systems and rig the elections, both sides are now using the methods and so the cheating on one side nullifies the cheating on the other.
3) Once pople like BBV, U. Conn., Princeton Univ, etc. exposed themethods used to hack into the systems and rig the elections, the voting machine companies were forced to plug the holes, making it more difficult to rig the election. That coupled with increased oversight at the polling place (not in evidence where I voted). A quote from the CBS local affiliate web site:
While saying voting machinery must be improved, Stroger had this reaction while watching Peraica storm the Clerk's office: "This is great TV. I can't go to sleep now."
Peraica says there will be no legal challenge to the vote, at least for now. Stroger's lead is just too big.)
Craig |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 146
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 7:42 am: |
|
One possibility is that whatever monkeying with the vote was conducted just wasn't enough to affect enough races. There is probably a limit to how much you can fudge the vote before it is blindingly obvious to everyone (5%? 10%), and the magnitude of many of the Democratic wins were such that even if 5-10% of their votes went to their opponents or were lost, they still would have won. Without fraud (if it occured), maybe some of the close races wouldn't have been close, and maybe some of the not-quite so close races might have gone the other way. The dynamics of congressional elections are different than presidential due to the distorting effect of the electoral college, and the aggregation of entire states votes. This election was also a bit of an oddity -- most off-year elections are about local politics, and local/state interests, but between them the major political parties managed to "nationalize" the election into being about Bush and the Republican control of the House and Senate. |
Karen Hunter
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Darwin67
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 8:13 am: |
|
Why worry about midterm elections...the real power is in keeping the whitehouse. Personally, I see this as a chess game, and also believe they were willing to sacrafice the house...I think the senate was a fluke, and something they didn't truly anticipate...since the dems won a couple of races that were in the "bag" for some repugs. Personally, I think they allowed their opponent to grab tha rook and a bishop....but check mate will come in 2008 when they again win the WH. If they can't...well, then let's hope that will force republicans to actually get hot about electronic voting and actually push through reform. |
Matt R. Jezorek
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Mattjez
Post Number: 12
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 8:35 am: |
|
I have problems with the WH elections, my problem is the electoral college. Not only do I feel that the voting process needs to be changed the electoral college needs to be removed, I dont really feel that my vote counts when it comes to the WH elections.
To win you only have to win in 11 of these 12 states. But you can lose in every other state.
California
New York
Texas
Florida
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
New Jersey
North Carolina
Georgia
Virginia
11 of 12 show 270 votes so you win 11 states and lose 39 others and win the WH.
Sorry just a rant about the WH elections |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 151
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 10:18 am: |
|
Nobody is going to get 11 of the 12 states above without carrying a lot of other states. We have about 1/3 Blue, 1/3 Red, and 1/3 swing states. It's about as much of a strawman as saying that one could win the popular vote by getting all of the women's votes. Just not going to happen.
And the real power is not just keeping the White House. The real power was in having both the White House and Congress.
Finally, I think that, for most cases, vote fraud (whether machine hacks, vote suppression etc.) is like crooked boxing referees. (Or "hometown refs" for a less venal analogy.) If you knock your opponent down a couple of times and appear untouched, they will still have to award you the decision. |
Matt R. Jezorek
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Mattjez
Post Number: 13
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 12:08 pm: |
|
2 of those other states does not have a winner-takes-all policy either so they can split electoral votes.
I know its off topic I just had to vent my distaste for the whole electoral college process |
|
|
