Challenging the electoral votes = Masturbation Fantasy

[Silverhair]

There is a lot of effort being put forward to get one representative and one senator to challenge the electoral college votes. It is a total waste of time and will not put Kerry in the White House. It will accomplish nothing but make most the the general public collectively groan and roll their eyes, and will make the Republicans happy to be able to paint the Democratic Party as out-of-touch-with-reality radicals.

The NEW congress meets on Jan 6 to count the votes. If a vote is challenged, the two houses meet separately to debate the issue. They are allowed only two hours for the debate and then a vote has to be taken. NO FILIBUSTERING ALLOWED!!!!!!! Guess who controls both houses of the new congress? Guess how they will vote? And then how much cooperation will the objecting senator get from then on?

This tactic would amount to nothing more than bad theater. It would be a play that would not be received well by the general public. It would be spending what little political capital we have and getting nothing for it.

Come back to reality. This election is over and Bush gets four more years. Choose your fights where you have a chance of winning.

[senseandsensibility]

1. Another cheery post

Thanks for your insight and advice. I'll file it in the relevant place.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. It is certainly better than leading people on

People need to begin the grieving process. Prolonging this is only going to make it more painful.

[New Earth]

2. there's about 5 other forums around here that would be more receptive

to what you have to say.

you're asking for it.

[serryjw]

3. Sorry,

masturbation is usually successful....Agreed, nothing is going to come of this. Can you imagine..."Late Breaking News".....John kerry being sworn in January 20th....Only in my dreams

[Kire]

5. masturbation never "succeeds" in producing children

[Kire]

4. I agree, actually.

I am tired of hearing about this stuff. It's your prerogative, but if even I, a loyal Democrat, roll my eyes when I hear people talk about it, then what does that say for the undecideds and moderates out there.

[Clark2008]

13. I'm a moderate

Hell, I'm not even a registerd Democrat. I even voted for a REPUBLICAN (all-be-it John Duncan Jr., who opposed the IWR) this year.

And, I don't roll my eyes.

What is it that makes you roll your eyes? What is so hard about accepting that, yes, there could have been hacking or software built to deliver votes? Seriously, if you'd tell us, it might make it easier to help convince some folks.

I can work on you, because I don't buy into a lot of the wildness - but I DO work in the tech sector and I DO know that it's, "garbage in, garbage out."

[Straight Shooter]

6. "Come back to reality."

IOW, drop off into the abyss.

No thanks. I'm a fighter. As Cliff Arnebeck says, "We aren't crying, we're litigating."

[JohnnyCougar]

7. If there is proven fraud, the Republicans will lose credibility

Especially if they still decide that Bush should be president.

That would be political suicide for them and they know it.

[pocoloco]

8. "getting nothing for it."

Going to bed with a clear conscience and being able to sleep an night is worth a hell of a lot!!

[New Earth]

9. bye bye thread for me

smell ya later :hi:

[gumby]

10. When Bush stole the 2000 election

it was perfectly clear that he would do whatever it takes to remain in office, maybe forever.

However, it would put some "little d" back in democracy is the Dems would be brave enough to stand up and speak the truth about the election fraud.

How can the citizens be expected to back election reforms if they aren't made aware of the problem by our elected officials?

[Mike Niendorff]

11. agree and disagree

If they're going to do it, they'd better have something VERY solid to back it up with. Hard evidence. Smoking gun. Plus, they'll need enough party unity to ensure that this is the first shot in a long and serious battle.

The Dems had a real chance to do this in 2000, back when it really would've meant something.

As to 2004 ... well, we'll see.


MDN

[merh]

22. What do you mean, "in 2000, back when it really would've

meant something"?

It means something now, just as much if not more than in 2000. Maybe if this forum existed in 2000, maybe if there had been a bunch of pollyannas willing to research and petition and write letters to the editors and letters to our congressman and willing to needle those that need needling, willing to drive the press batty with emails, willing to organize theories and statistics, maybe, just maybe we wouldn't be forced to do this today.

What the f was done in 2000 to make a difference? Not much since we find ourselves in just as bad, if not worse position now.

[Mike Niendorff]

27. fair enough, let me rephrase:

"back in 2000, when it really might have changed something".

Back in 2000, the Congressional Black Caucus took the issue up. They challenged Florida's electors, and they clearly had cause to. Al Gore won the popular vote. Al Gore quite certainly won Florida, too. The SCOTUS decision that stopped the count was blatantly partisan and equally as blatantly the product of bad faith. Impeachment of the Five Criminals was a real possibility. All that was needed to start that fight was for ONE DEMOCRATIC SENATOR to stand up and be counted. ONE. Yet not one Democratic Senator would do it (including John Kerry, I might add).

IMHO, 2000 was the brink of real action. Nation-changing action. Shake-up-the-whole-system action.

2004? Sorry, but whether there was fraud or not, it's simply not as nakedly in-your-face as it was with the open theft of the 2000 election.

Thus, my relative comparison of the two situations. Still, I admit that I am somewhat tipping my hand here, because for all the legitimate points that have been raised about Ohio, etc, I'm still not seeing enough to convince most people of large-scale fraud (and, yes, the exit polls are clearly a smoking gun, but the same was true in 2002, as well (see: Georgia)). Maybe it's just a matter of awareness (people are certainly making this an issue in a way they should have -- but didn't -- in 2002), but I'm still cynical because 2000 was just so blatant by comparison.


MDN

[WilliamPitt]

12. Sounds like you're in the wrong forum

Go check out General Discussion: Politics if you want to pick fights and piss on people.

[KaryninMiami]

14. And you think we should simply not expose this? That it's not worth doing?

And then what? There is now clear evidence of election fraud, voter suppression and massive disenfranchisement which could mean that the man who is planning his inauguration DID NOT GET THE MOST VOTES (again). "Bad theater" you say? I don't think so. More like "Bad Democracy".

How will America react, the America that voted for John Kerry-- when the word gets out (and it will- it's already starting to leak- maybe not as quickly as we'd like but it is getting out) that Bush did not win? How will they feel knowing that they waited in line for hours, worked tirelessly to get out the votes, donated thousands of dollars and traveled from blue states to red states to support the Kerry campaign, only to find that it was stolen? How will the millions of disenfranchised (mostly minority) voters feel knowing that in spite of huge obstacles and challenges, they have, once again, got screwed out of having their votes count. How will the students feel when many voted for the first time in their lives because something touched them deeply and they decided to take a stand only to find that their votes may not have counted?

How will the world respond once they learn (and they will), that the President of the United States, that country that "is bringing democracy to a neighborhood near you" (even if it means we destroy the neighborhood first)-- cannot even run a legal election?

Come back to reality? This is reality my friend. This is about being an American and standing up to protect democracy. This is a fight we must win. And we will win. Period.

[whalerider55]

15. Silverhair

it would accomplish something the dems have been ineffective at getting done in the three dubious federal elections in the past four years- and that is force the pugs to steal the election in broad daylight, not behind scalia's office door, not in a locked election board room, not over an internet hackers phone line.

broad daylight. that is a good, symbolic place to start. take a stand for the 15 of 15,ooo or 2,550,000 votes that may have nbeen supressed and miscounted, destroyed or tossed.

yeah it won't change anything in the short term. but you yourself don't want us thinking in the short term.

bad theater?
i don't thinks so. It will be a very important lesson in why we have a constitutional form of government.

more like guerilla theater. more like getting back in the ring with a champ who can only win by cheating. and this time, the cameras are rolling.
only a start, tho.

whalerider55

[crispini]

16. Yawn. You don't like it?

Don't read this forum. Thanks, buh-bye! :hi:

[berni_mccoy]

17. You all need a dose of this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x159783

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

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

[merh]

19. Whatcha scared of?

:scared: Do you think folks might see that dems are willing to fight what is rightfully theirs and are willing to fight for democracy?

Does that bother you? The party is nothing if we don't take a stand and call the bastards out on their vote padding, vote theft, fraud, et cetera.

We will never win another election unless we get this out in the open, let the public see what has occurred and make our legislators take steps to prevent from happening again the types of thing that happened both in 2000 and 2004.

Nothing was done in 2000, we have to see that something is done now. It won't matter what anyone thinks of the party, we will never win unless we take a stand today.

Silverhair does not give wisdom. I know, I am many strands. You are entitled to your opinions, but we are also entitled to ours. Go post in GD and make some other folks happy by doing so. They can join in your bashing and doomsday reasoning.

I would prefer to say I did something than sit back and watch them steal 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, et cetera.

[VTGold]

20. I don't know.........I heard an interesting discussion on the radio...

..the other day of how many in the Republican party don't like the direction the party is taking.

If we prove enough and some of them come on board - they will be heros.

[buddysmellgood]

21. Remember, when they say "Get over it" the "it" is democracy.

There is no "next time." This is next time. Choose your fights where you can't afford losing.

[Griffy]

24. NO.. its about exposing fraud! or we will have no Democracy nt

[Catherine Vincent]

25. Is this you?

{Re: MEMO TO THE LEFT, MOVE ON - Somebody needs to send this over to DU who still refuses to accept reality. And if anybody tries to be a voice of reason and say "Hey, it's over. We lost. Let's move on.", they immediately get flamed and verbally hammered as a freeper troll.}

[GettysbergII]

26. Geez! You're right. What was I thinking.....

From now on I'm going deny the election was less than transparaent. Huh! Let the repugs find fault with that. Hey and I'm going to support another war in Iran and then Syria after that. Surely, that will increase my credibility. With a little luck my children won't even die in the Oil wars. Meanwhile I'll support the dismantling of the publlic schools, the outsourcing of jobs, the destruction of the labor unions, the privatization of social security, more tax cuts for the rich and continued 10%+ per year increases in medical insurance. And all the other programs the ruling class wants to jam down the working man and woman's throat. Makes sense to me since if I allow the rightwing to continue to count the votes I might as well quite struggling and learn to like getting screwed.

Either that or it's don't give an inch time.

[Moderator]

28. Locking.

Flamebait.