He was re-(s)elected by Diebold/ES&S--Bushite corporations whom Tom Delay and Bob Ney paid off with $3.9 billion of our tax money (the "Help America Vote For War Act" of 2002), to keep Bush in office, and keep the war going and the boodle coming in.
Bush's polls fell to FORTY-NINE PERCENT on the very day of his 2nd term inauguration (unprecedented!), thence on a downward trend that has barely seen him over 40% for TWO YEARS now--falling, falling, falling to their current 30%.
Why do you think they needed TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code in the new electronic voting systems, with no paper trail in a third of the country, and wholly inadequate audit/recount controls in the rest--with 80% of the country using new, untested, insecure, unreliable and extremely insider hackable voting machines and central tabulators? Are we going to write this off as "incompetence," too? It was frigging DELIBERATE. That WAS the fascist coup.
I remember the polls in Feb. 2003, before Bush invaded Iraq. FIFTY-SIX PERCENT of the American people opposed the war. That would be a landslide in a presidential election. And pretty much the only time the war has not been disapproved of, by a majority, was during the few months of the invasion and its immediate aftermath with US troops at max risk. (You can understand people keeping their lips zipped for fear of harming our troops.) Fast-forward to spring 2004. SIXTY-THREE PERCENT of the American people oppose torture "under any circumstances." 63%! Now, granted that Kerry did not represent majority opinion very well; still, he was a decent candidate, compared to Bush, and inspired (with a lot of grass roots work on his behalf) a 60/40 blowout success in new voter registration for the Democrats in '04. In 2000, about a 100 million Americans voted, in a 50/50 Gore/Bush split (with a slight edge to Gore, as it turned out). In 2004, 120 million Americans voted, and of that 20 million additional voters, 4 out of 6 had registered Democratic. People were flocking to the Democratic Party, to vote for....Bush?! Right. Uh-huh. The numbers just do not add up, folks--no matter what numbers you look at, and no matter which way you look at them. And there is no reason whatever to trust the official results, with zero transparency in the vote counting. After the election, Karl Rove (or was it Cheney? --can't recall), when asked how they won, said it was their "invisible get-out-the-vote campaign in the churches." Invisible. Right, but not "in the churches"--invisible in the voting machines, quite literally. Unrecountable, unauditable voting machines.
Here's an interesting discussion in Business Week of each side's strategy just prior to the '04 election. The question: With intense grass roots GOTV for the Democrats yielding a 60/40 edge in new registration for the Democrats, how much MORE could Bush/Cheney squeeze out of their base of nutball Christians, to counter that enthusiastic surge to the Democrats, vote for vote?
"Swing-State Stakes
"In battleground states where one candidate has pulled ahead, get-out-the-vote programs are do-or-die. Take Pennsylvania, a swing state that Al Gore won by four percentage points in 2000 but that Bush hopes to recapture this year. An Aug. 2-15 Keystone Poll, a nonpartisan statewide poll conducted by Franklin & Marshall College, showed that 11% of Bush's 2000 voters say they are defecting to Kerry, while just 5% of Gore's voters plan to switch to Bush. The only way Bush can do better this time is by turning out more of his base -- especially anti-abortion Catholics."
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_37/b3899036_mz011.htmHere's a discussion of the Bushites' "invisible GOTV" and other myths of the 2004 (s)election:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x367638And here's an article at Freepress.org, describing the absurd state of our election system, as of 2004, and warning voters of the potential for fraud in 2006. Although the Dems won 30 seats in the House, of the 40-50 they should have won, and squeaked to a one-vote majority in the Senate (with Joe Lieberman in a pivotal position), the POTENTIAL for fraud by invisible code in the machines remains huge, and there is no way to know for sure if it was used to LIMIT the Democratic win, and to shape a Congress that is not really very representative of the American people, and cannot stop the war, impeach Bush-Cheney or achieve any real reform. The other kinds of Republican election fraud also remain endemic--items such as purging poor, black and other Dem voters from the voting rolls.
In fact, evidence developed by TIA (see the second links, below) points to an inexplicable 5% loss in the overall recorded Dem vote in '06 (as compared to averages of 100+ generic pre-election polls). The questions for all of us: How can we be sure that the new Congress was not crafted and shaped, as described above?* Should such uncertainty be permitted in our system? What is to prevent another outright theft of our presidential election in '08, beginning with the theft of votes from the real representatives of the people in the Democratic presidential primaries? (With something like 90% of Democrats opposed to the Iraq War, how come everybody thinks we're going to end up with Hillary as the candidate? Shouldn't we make conscious this subliminal feeling that our elections are "fixed" pro-war, and pinpoint WHY we have this feeling?)
A loaves & fishes/Holy Ghost victory for the GOP in November?
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
October 17, 2006
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2006/2181(TIA-Strange 5% Dem loss of votes in '06:)
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=3346(TIA-Update on 5% Dem loss:)
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=3394(TIA-How the doctored exit polls reveal the electronic fraud:)
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=3404(All recent TIA posts:)
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=120-------------------------------------
*(With all polls predicting a Dem win in '06, the election thieves had to be careful--in order to preserve their election theft capability for '08. Also, there is evidence that the fraudulent code has to be pre-programmed--and that Rove miscalculated. Finally, the peoples' determination to "send a message to Washington" on the war was very great. The people overwhelmed the machines in some cases. But it's quite interesting that a number of Iraq War vets, and strong anti-Bush candidates like Coleen Rowley, lost--people whom the war establishment would least like to see in Congress--and that, with 70% of the American people wanting the Iraq War ended, we achieved a Congress with some Dem strength but still very likely with inadequate numbers to restore the "balance of power," to curtail this out-of-control president and bring him and his v-p to account, and to stop their heinous war. With Bush's approval at 30%, and the outgoing Congress at 18%, how can this be so? The "poison pill" is a group of Dems, like those who voted for torture and suspension of habeas corpus a month ago, who can act as a block to prevent the will of the people from being done. With a 40 to 50 seat Dem win--what we should have won--that group of Bushite Dems would have less ability to block real reform. With a 30-seat win, they are pivotal. THAT'S what Diebold/ES&S did, in my opinion--and what their election theft capability is all about. It's a flexible capability that can hide itself from view, and permit limited wins for the people, as in '06--when their election theft system is in danger of being exposed--and can outright steal elections, in defiance of the will of the people, when critically needed, as in '04.)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
