Bush's lead grows in Ohio

[leftyandproud]

If there was any doubt that this was over...this should seal the deal.
Provisional/Absentee ballots break for Bush..

http://election.sos.state.oh.us/Results/RaceSummary.aspx

#$%%*&*(&^$%#@#$!@#!#%@~@@^!@$#&

[stray cat]

1. outch!

nt

[GRLMGC]

2. I don't get it

I don't get how anyone can vote against their his/her best interests.

[tridim]

3. I think that's the point

They didn't vote against their best interests, the fraud did.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CatWoman]

5. *groan*

"we" as in "small"?

or "we" as in "yes"?

[Vickers]

10. Garsh, it must have been torture reading all about this on DU

for the last five days...

:eyes:

[jackster]

11. it's not nutso

to see what's happening everywhere - stay underground and read everything you can from indy media - look at the reports - small ones coming from everywhere complaining of problems

this wasn't one big scam, it was a bunch of very very small ones

same conclusion

and why is it a surprise that the bush lead grows - of course it grows, that's why they WON - they stole the votes!

nothing will change, but as Zogby said.... THIS IS THE FREE WORLD

what the F**K IS GOING ON!

[Cat Atomic]

12. I dunno. Can "we" stop supporting criminals and thieves like Bush?

[koopie57]

13. are you the eagle

that asscroft always sings about?

[For PaisAn]

17. LOL

thanks for the laugh!

[GRLMGC]

16. Even if it wasn't stolen

Any form of irregularity is unnacceptable in a democracy. In this case, I'm not completely sure it was stolen, but isn't it more than a little suspicious that all the irregularities are in Bush's favor? It's not "nutso", its a real concern.

[RetroLounge]

31. Excuse me mr 11 posts if I don't count you as "We"

just yet...

RL

[Sydnie]

15. A caller to C-SPAN just a few hours ago summed it up for me

The woman stated that she voted for Bush but did not agree with the addition of the "abortion gag" added to the budget. She was very angry that they were taking this action and stated that this was not what she thought they would do.

Don't know what planet she was getting her info from before the election! A second caller after that gave her hell and told her to stop complaining since this is EXACTLY what she voted for. I loved that second caller as she said exactly what I had been saying to my TV screen since the first callers statements.

I guess some of the Bush voters will now see what they have forced onto the rest of the country and maybe, just maybe, they will find the shame in their actions.

[Lone Pawn]

36. Read "Don't Think of an Elephant."

eom

[greekspeak]

6. They probably threw out a huge number of Dem ballots

That would not suprise me in the least. I thought I was nervous about voting in Florida, but I am SURE glad I am not in Ohio.

[shance]

7. Didn't we see this coming? Cui bono? (Who benefits?)

The recount for all practical purposes could be used as a two way vehicle, depending on the ethics of those counting the votes.

If those counting the votes have a vested interest in promoting that elections are fair when in fact they are not, we will continue to see results like those we saw in the original elections and results promoted to invalidate potential and vital election reform solutions.

While an effort to recount is good and promotes citizen involvement, and could help promote the necessary doubt to show Americans that election reform is so important, I have been concerned it can potentially be used against those of us truly trying to implement reform.

On another note, we must look towards eliminating the privatization of our vote and in order to do this, we must seek through legislation and lawsuits the elimination of these electronic voter machines as the core issue, and as the most obvious step to prevent nationwide fraud that is undetectable, or at least cannot be proven due to the usage of the machines.

[Zhade]

26. I've had the same concerns.

For instance, the recount in New Hampshire. If someone (say, Karl Rove) had the backdoor number to dial into the master tabulator and change the results on 11/2, why wouldn't he be able to do likewise right before the hand recount?

They could make the machine results jive with the hand recount (+- some slight deviations, of course, given statistical error) and detonate any possible investigation into vote fraud.

And therein lies the true problem - not that b*sh cheated, or Kerry cheated, or anyone actually cheated, but that WE CAN'T KNOW IF THEY DID OR NOT.

Without justified trust in the voting process, democracy is dead.

[shance]

28. Exactly Zhade. Recounts are showing to be an ineffective approach.

That can be a good thing if we LEARN from this situation and do what many other Americans are doing by looking at the fraud element and more importantly, to hit at the core issue:

Eliminating the privatization of our vote by these companies that now essentially OWN our votes. THese companies who have total control over access to the data have all the power to manipulate the outcome before AND after an election, which makes recounts obsolete. Also, if we have unethical election officials and leaders blocking provisional and absentee ballots from being counted, then, why are we in effect going to further waste our time now? Time to move on, learn from this and realize recounts are simply more smoke and mirrors.

We have to take the electronic voting machines out of the voting process all together.

We shouldn't have to HAVE any recounts! Thats part of the problem.

Thats what they want. It apparently is playing into the hands of those who do not value fair elections. They can essentially say, "see, we had a recount", when it wasnt a recount at all. It was a dog and pony show.

We have to make elections more transparent and that is where we should be placing our energy. Again, this can be a lesson learned with these recounts. THey are not proving to be an effective approach.

Going to the ROOT of the problem is the effective approach.

[nebula]

8. Hard to believe

If the provisional ballots come from mostly minority/democratic areas, (because those voters were often targeted for harrassment at the ballot box), how could they be breaking for Bush??

It makes no sense! x(

[geomon666]

18. It makes perfect sense.

They can throw out any number of ballots for any reason they chose. And do you really think we'll ever see those ballots and why were they rejected? Think it'll ever be fully investigated and brought to the surface? If you do, I've got some wood for you to buy.

And you're right Eagle1, we should just get over it already. In fact, I'll be talking with my plastic surgeon ASAP so I can have wrists surgically attached to my ankles. You know, so I can 'receive the agenda' with ease.

[nebula]

27. Well, that would explain a lot then

the ballots were simply trashed.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ohio_liberal]

20. My county....

disallowed 42% of the provisional ballots. :(

[NVMojo]

9. I don't believe anything this Blackwell jerk comes out with ...

[troubleinwinter]

14. ???? Nowhere does it say that those are the provisionals....

It says "Precincts Reporting: 2.71%".

[Jawja]

19. Yes, that's what I noticed.

That's only the results from one county.

[leftyandproud]

24. Correct...HERE is what we should be looking at.

http://www.ohvotesuppression.blogspot.com/

The SOS website is just confusing...This guy is keeping track of things more accurately. Only a few thousand have been counted, but those are still going for Bush.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RetroLounge]

32. Go away freeper scum

enjoy your tombstone, asshat.

RL

[troubleinwinter]

33. No, YOU look!

http://election.sos.state.oh.us/results/SingleRaceSummary.aspx?race=PP

Precincts Reporting: 2.71%
Office Candidate Party Votes % Of Votes
President/Vice President
Bush, George W. Republican 76,631 55.92%
Kerry, John F. Democratic 59,710 43.57%
Badnarik, Michael 367 0.27%
Peroutka, Michael Anthony 324 0.24%
Cobb, David Keith-WI 4 0.00%
Duncan, Richard A.-WI 0 0.00%
Zych, Thomas F.-WI 0 0.00%
Parker, John T.-WI 0 0.00%
Harris, James -WI 0 0.00%
Schriner, Joe -WI 0 0.00%
Total Votes 137,036

[adadem]

21. noticed

on the website "Change our World - Vote" on the left side...yeah, right..the world that PNAC wants...domination by force.


http://election.sos.state.oh.us/Results/RaceSummary.aspx

[For PaisAn]

22. It's titled Election Night and

shows:Precincts Reporting: 2.71%.
I don't think this would have anything to do with provisional ballots?!

[Carl Brennan]

35. Well, that should end this thread.

but it probably won't.

[journalist3072]

23. Ohio

I really have a hard time believing this. I don't think this is accurate, especially considering that Bush got extra votes from e-machines.

Secondly, how could this be from provisional ballots? It was my understanding that they really haven't started counting them yet. The counties have been reviewing them to see if they are valid first, and then they'll count the valid ones. I'm really confused.

Lastly, Al Gore received over 90% of the provisional ballots back in 2000.

I smell a rat.

[GetTheRightVote]

34. I am with you journalist3072

A very very big RAT !!!!!!!

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. I thought the first reports were from the rural areas?

Do these include the Democratic counties?

[leeroysphitz]

37. twelve points?

FUCK YOU twelve points.