C-span 1..Democrats are arranging the deck chairs.. Anyone else watching?

[SoCalDem]

I have been watching this for a while, and the sheer NONSENSE about the whole "meeting" is overwhelming.. To a person, they are "worried" abotu front-loadiing the primaries and "preserving Iowa & New hampshire's status as first"...and yet complaining about how much money it costs to run.. Also griping about rules changes..

NO ONE HAS EVEN MENTIONED that is really doesn't matter when our primaries are or who goes first... The rigging of the e-voting machines will determine who wins..no matter how much money democrats spend or when they hold primaraies.. They are only going to decide which candidate will "lose" to the republican selectee..

Total waste of time...

[w13rd0]

1. I am not interested...

...in preserving Iowa and New Hampshire's status as first. Why are they first? So politicians can pander to the corn growing lobby? Besides, Iowa and New Hampshire do NOT represent a cross-section of the diversity and cross-cultural geography of our nation. They are overwhelmingly white and rural. I'm from Missouri, which is a contested state, with a wide variety of big tent democrats. It also is home to a good deal of diversity demographically. Why aren't we first?

[SoCalDem]

3. The ONLY way to gauge a candidate's strength is REGIONAL

I came up with a good map that would test the candidate and yet allow easy travel to all states within the region..

and my map encompasses urban and rural.. it's well balanced..

The whole primary season could be over a 2 month period and would allow plenty of tv coverage in all markets..

[WritingIsMyReligion]

20. I dunno why New Hampshire's first...

...sheer tradition, I suppose.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

2. If the vote is not close

I don't think they can pull off a successful cheat.

My opinion..I know next to nothing about this, but it makes sense to me.

And I don't think the vote is going to be close.

[SoCalDem]

4. The vote will be as "close" as they need it to be..(to pass the smell test

Races last time that were not all that close, became "closer" as the election neared..yet exit polls (such as they were) did NOT reflect the "polling changes" reported prior).. The national polliing groups are heavily weighted towards republicans (and are probably owned by them too).. The polls can say anything the person taking the poll wants them to say)..

We` are being conned..big time

[napi21]

9. Well, I agree with Grannie in the post above. If the votes not

close, the cheating won't matter.

I don't know about the exit polls. I've never been convinced that they were very accurate. Surely you aren't saying that the country wasn't split, almost 50/50 in 2004?

I really believe Shrub won because the Pubs were smart enough to get 2 very explosive issues into the forefront (abortion and Gay Marriage) and got the cooperation of the churches to motivate their base to get out and vote!

Long lines played a part too! I know I waited in line for almost 2 hours, and lots of people can't or aren't motivated enough to do that!

[SoCalDem]

12. I am convinced that our country is really 65-35.. Unfortunately

the 35% controls the media..and they have the most money..They also seem to be very 'well-placed" in the voting machine department..

The issues they trot out every cycle are the same ones they always use..

God-Guns-Abortion-Immigration

Those issues are the bloody shirt issues for their folks, and all the have to do is supress democratic turnout...blast on their media outlets how CONSERVATIVE the country is.. throw enough monkey wrenches into the actual voting (long lines, broken machines, missing machines, terrah alerts etc) and then they just keep telliing everyone how "close" it is..

They add a few here, subtract a few there...easy as American Pie..and the public just accepts it..

2000 was the test run.. It's gangbusters from there on.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

10. Again, you must understand that I have no expertise here...

but the preliminary polls and the exit polls were just two or three points apart, were they not? I understand they were outside the MOE, but just barely. Enough for plausible denial.

If we are talking landslide type figures, how could they pull it off? Particularly given the election reforms that are in the works in some states?

[glitch]

17. If you are going to rig the vote you are definitely going to rig the polls

they are corrupt, not stupid. Well, maybe they are not stupid.

In 2004 I believe they rigged the polls based on the 2000 election, they expected the race to be narrow enough to cheat, but when the polls and the count differed so much they had to make their midnight correction, and that correction is what caused so much suspicion this time.

They did not expect Kerry to win by as big a margin as he did.

So for the people who say compare the polls to the count because the polls are correct and the count is wrong I say they are both rigged(but you can still glimpse the fraud by comparing them because they misjudged how much they would need to rig the polls).

It is not necessary for the race to be close for them to cheat.

All that is necessary is that the corporate media not report on them.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

22. What would be involved in rigging the polls?

That is something I never considered. I completely trusted poll results because there are so many disparate polls, run by varying agencies.

Would this have to be a concerted conspiracy? Or just ... well, I don't know.

How could it be pulled off? I'm not arguing here, just asking your opinion on the methodology, if you will.

[SoCalDem]

23. Most polling companies skew heavily in favor of republicans

and all pollsters have access to maps..

Let's say you are a pollster..making calls in California.. If 2/3 of your calls are to Orange County & Riverside county, you will get a disproportionate number of republicans who will answer the phone..
The time of day also affects who answers.. A demographic area of older folks will get a lot of "well-off retired people" while the working classes in those areas will most likely NOT be at home having a "luncheon party".. They will be slaving away at Walmart or Sears or JiffyLube...

We all know that the WAY a question is crafted, and the order they are asked, can affect the 'answers".

A question with a yes-no possible answer can also be worded and broken into 4 questions, so that the negatives are split 3 ways, while the positives are a single entity..

example

The president's handling of hus job is .........

excellent 20
good 20
fair 20
poor 10
horrible 10
worst 10
don't know 10

That poll would be spun to say that the president, by a SIX TO ONE margin is doing a Fair to Excellent job

[TallahasseeGrannie]

24. So you are saying

that the pubs have a basic monopoly on the poll companies? (albeit overt)

[SoCalDem]

25. Pretty much.. Google any poll-taking organization

and once you make it past the gobbledygook name and get to the organizers/owners, you'll find it laden with republicans..

For a few years Frank Luntz was introduced as "Pollster-FrankLuntz", and once people started to see through him, they had to start calling him "Former-Republican-Pollster FrankLuntz".. Leopards don;t change their spots :(

[TallahasseeGrannie]

26. This is totally news to me

and it really explains a lot. Why are there no dem pollsters?

[SoCalDem]

27. There are a few, but in order to have a poll make a difference it must be

reported..Can you really see Limbaugh/Hannity/Savage/Boortz/Elder/O'Reilly/Parsifal/Ingraham/Blanquita/Scarborough/and all the others reporting polls fairly?..

If there are 5-1 republicans polling, the ONE democratic poll will just be ridiculed on the blowhards' shows..

[napi21]

5. Yep, I watched it. I DO think it matters when you schedule the

primaries, and yes, Iowa and NH matter too!

I think Shrub had a big advantage last time because of the front-loading of the Dem schedule. It also makes the campaign season sooo damn long, many people just stop listening to any messages, and maybe don't even bother to vote because they just tune out in disgust.

I know there was a lot of BS being throuwn around in that meeting, but I'm glad to hear they at least recognized that the timing does matter!

[liveoaktx]

6. I started to-but the only issue I"m interested in is why the winner is

announced before the Texas primary. Why bother to vote for any but local candidates and why is my opinion via vote as a Democrat on who the winner should be totally discounted?

[SoCalDem]

7. California used to go in June.. WAY after the "winner" was announced

Regional is the ONLY way to go..

[Tamyrlin79]

15. personally, I don't like regional.

I like the regional map posted above, BUT I'd prefer that each "set" of primaries take one or two states from EACH region and hold them all on the same day. That way, each "cycle" selects a diverse choice of candidates, and no one region or state has "first pick".

[msongs]

8. why do you think the Democratic Party Inc is concerned with vote fraud?

not much evidence out there that I have seen showing the national democrats are really interested in getting rid of e-voting fraud via unverifiable computer technology.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[political_invader]

11. Yes, I watched the entire meeting

Not one person brought up the E-voting. If this isn't fixed we never stand a chance of winning. I would have a better chance of hitting the lottery.:banghead:

I will say that what Sen Blanco said about the candidate must not avoid the freeper cities and not avoid the issues of church based groups. IMO she is right this will be one key area for us to win back the WH. We may not like it, but it is was it is.

[MaineDem]

13. This Commission isn't charged with dealing with E-voting

So you probably won't hear it mentioned at all. That's not to say it's being ignored. There are other DNC groups looking into it.

And faith-based groups will play a big part in any Democratic strategy in the future. That's being worked on now, as well.

[SoCalDem]

14. I am tired of everyone "looking into" it.. It was OBVIOUS in 2000

and it's now too late to do much before 2006 elections..and probably nothing will happen before 2008 elections..

Time is of the essence here, and NO one seems to realize how important this issue is..

Nothing matters if the WRONG person ends up in office:(

We have had ample proof over the last 5 years of what happens when a few senators are "lost" and the power shifts or when a LUNATIC takes the white house and uses it as his platform to launch "extreme craziness" across the world..

We may not recover from the mess he has us in NOW..and I hate top think about another loony republican taking over after him..

[MaineDem]

16. It can't be fixed overnight

And issues have to be "looked at" before they can be identified and fixed.

But this commission isn't going to do it. I hope you don't get upset watching this meeting expecting them to address voter fraud. What they are discussing is important to the states.

[Tamyrlin79]

18. I think that any real change on this issue will come from the bottom

For example, a friend of mine is talking about suing the state for its diebold voting machines (basically, I think she would be asking the court for an injunction that prevents the machines from being used...) and concurrently starting a ballot initiative should that court effort fail. We'll see.

[MaineDem]

21. Dean has been talking about citizen initiatives

He's urging states that have that process use them to legislate verifiable voting. You'll be hearing more about this, I think.

[mandyky]

19. Nor did they address the media in depth

The media covers the horse race not issues.