Vote Recount USA?

[Timber Loftis]

I'll spare you the text of the email moveon.org sent me, but here are the links:

1. Broward Machines Count Backward, Palm Beach Post, November 5, 2004
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politic...VOTE_1105.html

2. Glitch Gave Bush Extra Votes in Ohio, AP carried on CNN, November 5, 2004
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...g.problems.ap/

3. Letters from members of Congress to David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, demanding an investigation of the election: November 5th, 2004 & November 8th, 2004
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democ...04ltr11804.pdf
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democ...04ltr11804.pdf

[krunchyfrogg]

GET OVER IT

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

I find it disturbing that I'm hearing so many reports of fraud and potential fraud and if people show concern they're told to "get over it." If indeed there was even the possibility of fraud it should be looked into, no?

[Yorick]

I agree Illumina. People should just get over the fact that there is a possible election fraud?

I don't understand why paper ballots with a pen aren't used. That's all Australia used. Add machines and you have faulty punch card locations, and the hacking of computers.

Just go back to good old paper, pen and human counters with cross checker witnesses from all sides watching.

Even if there is no fraud or conspiracy, it doesn't put much faith in the American government to have potential for fraud floating around.

[Grojlach]

Originally posted by krunchyfrogg: GET OVER IT

I reckon you'd be calling for a recount too if the situation was reversed, though...

[Davros]

Well of course he would Grojlach. One's perspective chnages with the side of the political divide one is on - you know that . Bush had his lawyers all on standby to repeat the Florida thing if it came down to one key state.

[krunchyfrogg]

No, Groc, I wouldn't. And the republican party traditionally hasn't either.

Nixon lost the first time he ran for president, and there were registered dead people in Ohio who voted. He stepped down, didn't whine about it, and ended up winning the next time he ran.


Many left wing people earn the name "screaming liberals" because they'll yell and scream at you if you don't agree with their ideas.

If a Republican wins again in 2008, will we again hear talk about recounts and other conspiracy theories?

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

Originally posted by krunchyfrogg: Many left wing people earn the name "screaming liberals" because they'll yell and scream at you if you don't agree with their ideas.

Funny. Ann Coulter and Fred Phelps scream more than Michael Moore ever did. At rallies, it's always the Republicans screaming. Abortion rallies, too.

[Cerek]

Originally posted by Davros: Well of course he would Grojlach. One's perspective chnages with the side of the political divide one is on - you know that . Bush had his lawyers all on standby to repeat the Florida thing if it came down to one key state.

The Democrats also had a platoon of lawyers retained and on standby, Davros. Kerry prevented them from challenging the results by conceding the victory to Bush.

[Cerek]

Originally posted by Yorick: I agree Illumina. People should just get over the fact that there is a possible election fraud? I don't understand why paper ballots with a pen aren't used. That's all Australia used. Add machines and you have faulty punch card locations, and the hacking of computers. Just go back to good old paper, pen and human counters with cross checker witnesses from all sides watching. Even if there is no fraud or conspiracy, it doesn't put much faith in the American government to have potential for fraud floating around.

Heya Yorick, it's great to see ya back here, brother. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

Pen and paper ballots may sound like the way to go, but that would allow even MORE accusations of fraud...because then the public is dependent SOLELY upon the integrity of the people doing the counts...and there is just too much opportunity for paper ballots to be "lost" or miscounted - even with all the cross-checks in the system.

In my little NC county, we had a sheriff that OPENLY bought votes for years and years. He eventually got caught and sent to prison by the Feds, but not until he had been sheriff for close to two decades. One of the methods he used was to give out liqour to those that came to vote. He eventually got SOOOO complacent and lazy that he actually bought the booze with a check written out of the Sheriff's Dept. checkbook. Talk about ignorant.

Mechanical and electrical voting machines may not be foolproof, but at least the machine itself IS completely objective about which votes are registered in it's system. It may not be perfect, but it is a FAR sight better than simply trusting in human integrity to bring us "unbiased" election results.