The DNC 2004 Election Report: An indictment of incompetence - Bob Fitrakis

[tommcintyre]

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1335
The DNC 2004 Election Report: An indictment of incompetence
by Steven Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis
June 25, 2005

The Democratic National Committee's investigation into Ohio's 2004 presidential election irregularities is the perfect postscript to the party's 'election protection' efforts last fall: it is a shocking indictment of a party caught completely off-guard in its most heated presidential campaign in years, and a party still doesn't fully understand what happened and how to avoid a repeat in the future.

The report primarily documents Jim Crow voter suppression tactics targeting Democratic African-Americans voters were rampant in Ohio’s cities during the 2004 presidential election. It cites and spends most of its time analyzing the most visible problems: from shortages of voting machines in minority precincts, to unreasonable obstacles to voter registration, to disproportionate use of provisional ballots on Election Day among new voters and Democratic constituencies, to inadequate poll worker training and election administration, to poor post-Election Day record keeping.

But the DNC reports says those factors do not mean John Kerry won the election, nor does it mean that the new electronic voting machines are unreliable – even though some of the precincts with the highest percentages of reported problems were outfitted with the new electronic voting machines, known as DREs. The DNC asked for access to the new electronic voting machines and their software, but was denied by local election officials and the private manufacturers. The report leaves the matter there.

It is statements like this one, on page 189, and a failure to follow-through that make the report more than a disappointment to election protection workers, voter rights advocates and those grassroots activists who worked for John Kerry’s campaign. Speaking of the new electronic voting machines, the DNC report states, that “many of the county boards (of elections) do not actually control the electronic records created during the tallying process.” When the Fairfield County Board of Elections was asked for election results, they merely forwarded data from a private vendor. <bolding and underlining mine>
<more>

[fasttense]

1. The repukes rigged the election but that doesn't mean the

dems won. How in the hell do they know that when the people who would have voted for Kerry weren't allowed to vote? How in the hell do they know that when the true votes were never counted?

[tommcintyre]

51. It makes you wonder, doesn't it? n/t

[EFerrari]

2. If they were denied access to the machines and the softward

they have no business drawing conclusions.

Although they should be drawing conclusion ABOUT BEING DENIED ACCESS.

[tommcintyre]

53. The "widespread" illogic of the DNC report makes you wonder WHY...

IN THE HELL ARE THEY DOING THIS!

:mad:

[EFerrari]

67. Right. Because we know they know.. n/t

[newswolf56]

3. Has anyone ever considered the possibility...

...that the Democratic Party's vapid inactivity -- like George Bush's victory, the Christofascist majority in Congress, and mass media's suppression of the story of the Ohio election irregularities -- are all merely expressions of the will of our monopolist overlords? That what we are witnessing both domestically and globally is the deliberate expression of collective boardroom policy, not accident or coincidence? That with all its foreign and domestic foes crushed, Big Business is now merely imposing the same fascist New Order it has sought since the 1920s?

I wonder what others think about this...

[Oversea Visitor]

6. Well

are there any other explanation for they incompetencies

[tommcintyre]

7. Shades of Walter Lippman, and "Manufacturing Consent"

Watch Noam Chomsky's movie "Manufacturing Consent". The title is based on lippman using the phrase in the 1920's I believe.

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Walter-Lippmann
"Lippmann came to be seen as Noam Chomsky's moral and intellectual antithesis: He agreed with the Platonic view that the population is a great beast, a herd, that has to be controlled by an intellectual specialist class. In this sense Lippmann might be viewed as a forerunner of US neoconservatism. Chomsky used one of Lippmann's catch phrases for the title of his book about the media: Manufacturing Consent."

[mod mom]

19. Sadly, I believe you are correct

Here is something I posted yesterday:

Blackwell uses Franklin Co. Dem Chairman's words to back no racial problem
in vote. WE NEED NEW DEM LEADERSHIP IN OHIO, YET THE DNC LET THOSE IN CHARGE IN OHIO, BE ON THE COMMITTEE THAT INVESTIGATED THE ELECTION. THIS IS WHY WE HAVE A REPORT THAT SAYS NO FRAUD!

from Friday's Toledo Blade:

Republican Rep. Bob Ney, who represents Ohio's 18th District, held hearings about the election in Ohio as chairman of the House Administration Committee.
He disputes the report's contention that there was racial discrimination in the vote, especially in Franklin Country, where Columbus is located.
His office issued a statement yesterday saying, "The inherent problem with theories such as this though is that they are in contradiction to extensive testimony under oath to the House Administration Committee earlier this year by a number of Ohio election officials including Bill Anthony who is not only chairman of the Board of Elections in Franklin County, but is also a leader in the black community and chairman of the local Democratic Party."
Mr. Anthony testified in March that he drove around Franklin County in the rain and found long lines in urban and suburban neighborhoods, black and white communities, and Democrat and Republican precincts.

www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050623...

This is the same Bill Anthony who stated those who said otherwise were conspiracy theorists! (same House Administration Hearing) I don't care if Blackwell and Anthony are African American, there was widespread inequalities in the African American vote in Ohio! WE NEED NEW LEADERSHIP IN OHIO!!!!

[petgoat]

92. Dem Inactivity

Here's a theory to explain it:

1. Mike Rupper is right, we've reached "Peak Oil" and chaos and death are coming.

2. The Big Thinkers have decided we need to watch out for ourselves and
take control of the oil.

3. The Dems are not willing to do the dirty work, but they consider it
their patriotic duty to leave it to BushCo to do the job for them.

[Oversea Visitor]

4. Get rid of the machine

And have paper verified voting
What so difficult for them to get x(

[tommcintyre]

55. I'm afraid we will have to dismantle our "political machines" before...

we will have a chance to get rid of our electronic voting machines, and have transparent paper ballot elections like so many other countries around the world.

:(

[Botany]

5. In 19 out of 88 counties ......

...... a liberal black women running for Supreme court in Ohio got more votes
than Kerry. But in the same counties * got many many more votes than the republican
running for the same position .......

No fraud BULLSHIT

[tommcintyre]

59. Rev. Jesse Jackson talked about this a lot

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00380.htm
"New findings indicate that Kerry's margins in 37 (of 88) Ohio counties are suspiciously low when compared to those garnered by Judge Ellen Connally, an unsuccessful Democratic Supreme Court candidate. The calculations focus on standardized county-wide ratios between bottom-of-the-ticket tallies won by Judge Connally versus those won by Kerry in heavily Republican, rural counties. According to a wide range of experts, there appears to be a systematic removals of Kerry votes by hackers who overlooked the Connally votes, which now clearly infers something went wrong. "It's simply not credible that a vastly underfunded African-American female candidate at the bottom of the ticket could outpoll John Kerry in Butler County," said Cliff Arneback, a lead attorney for the challenging legal team. Jackson said the situation "does not pass the smell test.""

[LightningFlash]

8. At least it was only a halfway buggy report....

Instead of a total whitewash which it would have been. This deserves a fully compiled supplement by Arnebeck, Fitrakis and everyone else and then it will be taken seriously.

[Apollo11]

9. a very important issue ...

Nobody knows more about what went on in Ohio last year than these guys (Steven Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis). If they are saying that the DNC report fails to adequately address certain issues, then I am concerned, and I hope Howard Dean is paying attention.

I am willing to accept that it is "impossible" for Democrats to prove that Kerry should have won the vote in Ohio - because the Diebold DRE machines make it impossible to have a fair recount, and thousands of voters were already disenfranchised by various well-documented means. But these machines don't just make fraud possible - they make it extremely easy to carry out and cover up.

To believe that the Ohio result was fair and accurate, you have to put your trust in the honesty and integrity of people like Kenneth Blackwell and Diebold's Walden O'Dell. You have to believe that these people would NOT be prepared to ensure that Bush carried Ohio's electoral votes "by any means necessary".

I am looking forward to the publication of "Did George W. Bush Steal America's 2004 Election? Ohio's Essential Documents" by Bob Fitrakis, Harvey Wasserman and Steve Rosenfeld. Foreword by Rev. Jesse Jackson. This book will be a collection of news analysis, legal documents and sworn statements from suppressed and disenfranchised voters.

You can pre-order this book from THE FREE PRESS website:
http://www.freepress.org/index2.php

[LightningFlash]

11. So everyone must continue to flood his box...

Make them get on the ball, Howard Dean needs to talk to Arnebeck and everyone immediately and demand a full supplement be added to DNC's wash of a report.

http://www.democrats.org [e-mail]

[Boredtodeath]

14. please, please, please STOP THIS!

I am willing to accept that it is "impossible" for Democrats to prove that Kerry should have won the vote in Ohio - because the Diebold DRE machines make it impossible to have a fair recount, and thousands of voters were already disenfranchised by various well-documented means. But these machines don't just make fraud possible - they make it extremely easy to carry out and cover up.

THERE WERE NO DIEBOLD DREs IN USE IN OHIO FOR THE 2004 ELECTION. NOT ONE.
Please stop repeating inaccurate talking points. Please.

[snot]

16. The point is, there were plenty of opportunities for electronic fraud.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=379309 :

"Reports by Bob Fritakis that he now has a contractor on record that he installed computers in Ken Blackwell's office that had were interactive with central vote tabulators @ county sites around the state. This would have allowed remote access and manipulation of the vote totals. Blackwell himself is on record in March of '04 saying that he was now interactive with all BOEs. Something stinks about this ...... the vote data should have a one way flow to it ...... votes totals from machines into central tabulators and then on to the Sec. of State's office for final tabulation. Except for telling the tabulators that the office computers were on line and ready to receive the data why would they need interactive access with the tabulators? It now appears "back doors" might have been put into the tabulators hardware and or software that would allow remote access and manipulation of the data without leaving any "finger prints.""

(Go to link for full posting & thread.)

[Boredtodeath]

17. No one is denying there were plenty of opportunities

But getting our facts wrong diminshes the impact of the point we are trying to make.

Example: Ed Klein and the "Hillary" book. Completely discredited because his words are fantasy and not fact.

It's just a bit hypocritical to berate Ed Klein when we are doing the same thing - over and over and over.

We shortchange our own arguments when we do it or condone it.

[snot]

25. I wish you and/or others more knowledgeable about the tech-

nologies and -nicalities would develop a set of "talking points" that are short, sweet, and accurate--some of us could use help in that regard!

[Boredtodeath]

27. I wish I could write it in an understandable document

If I wrote it down, it would be too technical. I've tried.

If someone would spend the time to WRITE it, I'd spend the time to share the knowledge.

[snot]

28. B.t.w., I do agree with you re- imptc of ACCURACY. nt

[Boredtodeath]

30. Thank you n/t

.

[SophieZ]

102. I think most of us need "thinking points" not "talking points".

Unfortunately, understanding the technology and procedures of voting does not fit on a bumper sticker, or in a two-sentence ride in an elevator.

Why do you think electronic voting machines have a quarter of a million lines of computer code or more? That are "proprietary secrets." So it will be simple and clear and transparent to all citizens? The answer is .... NO!

I suggest you read this article. It includes some technical points in non-technical language.

EVEN A REMOTE CHANCE?
by Pokey Anderson
January 10, 2005

http://www.votersunite.org/info/evenaremotechance.htm

[mod mom]

20. Diebold Optiscan were used and check out this report from the recount:

December 22, 2004
 
Report from Recount Observer, Lucas County, Ohio
Emailed report from Lucas County, Ohio, Recount Observer:

i was a witness for the testing of the optiscan machines on tuesday the 14th.

what is puzzling to me, after the tests of the scanners were finished, the witnesses were not allowed to compare the hand count results to the printed results from the scanners. the ballots, the hand count sheets and the printed tapes were all taken away, to another room, out of sight of any witnesses and about 40 minutes later, the director comes out and tells us everything checks out.

we go to lunch and when we come back, we find ourselves waiting in the lobby. why? we were waiting for diebold to reprogram the scanners. what? didn't they just verify that everything was on the up and up? what is the need to reprogram the scanners?

also, during the testing process, one precinct, sylvania 3, continuously had the test ballots spit back out at least 3 times for approximatley 50% of them. during the election, how many times did this occur and what poll worker is going to stand there and continuosly feed the scanner to get it to scan 1 ballot? therefore, how many of the ballots were put in the spoiled pile that were really not spoiled?

another thing that was very interesting was the two people that i was witnessing actually did not know how to run the scanner. are they the type of people that were the normal who were overseeing the election? am i crazy? what is wrong with this picture?

after witnessing the fiasco of a test recount being conducted at the lucas county government center, i am definitely for scrapping this election and having a re- vote. there isn't any other way we are going to get a legitimate election.

Please also visit "Ohio Election 2004" athttp://ohioelection2004.com.

NOTE: THIS WAS LUCAS COUNTY (TOLEDO) WHICH IS A COUNTY RICH IN DEM VOTES. CHECK OUT THE DIFFERENCES IN VOTER TURNOUT BETWEEN SUBURB AND CITY. Richard Hayes Phillips did an excellent analysis of this county at:

http://web.northnet.org/minstrel/toledo.htm

[Boredtodeath]

22. Optical Scanners are NOT DREs

and the statement is factually incorrect.

But, I guess that doesn't matter as long as you can still scream "fraud" does it?

Not to mention that only 2 counties used Diebold ANYTHING.

[mod mom]

37. Optical Scanners CAN have problems as well. What statement

is factually incorrect? No one said the entire election was stolen on Diebold. Ohio was stolen by a multitude of ways, which by the way amounted to 11 votes per precinct. I have never heard anyone say it was only the machines.

[Boredtodeath]

38. NO, Optical scanners DO HAVE PROBLEMS too

Big problems. But that's not the issue I was talking about.

Please RE-READ my post #14 in this thread for a better understanding.

[Stevepol]

66. You mean optical scanners are not programmed?

It's my impression that the optical scanners are programmed to count the votes just as the touchscreens are. They're not direct recording devices and they leave a paper trail, but it's my opinion that the optical scanners, ES&S primarily, but Diebold too, are a much more serious problem than the touchscreens. I believe, in fact, that the optical scanners around the country cheated on the vote to a much greater degree than any Diebold touchscreen. It's well known that there's never going to be an audit so what do they have to be afraid of?

The results in FL indicated I believe that the discrepancies between voter registration / other indicators of party strength and the alleged actual result were much greater in counties and precincts where the scanners were used than where the touchscreens were used.

I personally believe that there was a deliberate effort by those who rigged the vote (a small handful of programmers and activists and dirty tricksters) to concentrate on the scanners and let the touchscreens record a pretty accurate vote.

And really the primary method of rigging was undoubtedly the central tabulators. And who made the central tabulators in OH? Was it Triad? ES&S? Sequoia?

[mod mom]

68. Some info on Optical Scanners:

The Diebold optical scan system uses a dangerous programming
> methodology, with an executable program living inside the electronic
> ballot box. This method is the equivalent of having a little man
> living in the ballot box, holding an eraser and a pencil. With an
> executable program in the memory card, no Diebold opti-scan ballot box
> can be considered "empty" at the start of the election.
>
> The Black Box Voting team proved that the Diebold optical scan
> program, housed on a chip inside the voting machine, places a call to
> a program living in the removable memory card during the election. The
> demonstration also showed that the executable program on the memory
> card (ballot box) can easily be changed, and that checks and balances,
> required by FEC standards to catch unauthorized changes, were not
> implemented by Diebold -- yet the system was certified anyway.
>
www.ballotintegrity.org/DCForumID1/354.html
OPTICAL SCAN MACHINES HACKED IN FLORIDA:
> http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/5921.html

[Boredtodeath]

71. I never said any such thing

In fact, I said the exact opposite. I said Optical Scanners had big problems, always have, always will.

And yes, they're programmed, like the DREs, by central tabulators.

I said THERE WERE DIEBOLD DREs USED IN OHIO IN THE 2004 ELECTION.

Said it over and over.

Said it over many days and weeks.

Will say it over and over until people stop saying DREs were used.

Will say it until everyone gets the idea that it's not true.

The majority of central tabulators in Ohio in 2004 was the Triad Central Tabulator.

So go try to start a fight with someone disagreeing with you, mkay?

[Apollo11]

85. Before everyone gets bored to death ...

Boredtodeath - you are contradicting your earlier statement: "I said THERE WERE DIEBOLD DREs USED IN OHIO IN THE 2004 ELECTION."

Don't you mean that "No Diebold DREs were used in Ohio in the 2004 election"? Which would be comforting - except I would be even happier if you could assure me that Diebold had no involvement whatsoever in registering or counting any of the votes in Ohio.

I am willing to admit that I am not an expert on this, and I am ready to apologise for any factual mistakes in my posts. But the main thrust of my argument still stands.

The main point I was trying to make is that Steve Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis HAVE done the research. These guys definitely know what they are talking about (even if I don't). And so when they say that the DNC report is not giving us the full picture, then I am inclined to believe them, and I hope Howard Dean is paying attention also.

[liam_laddie]

24. definitions

Although BtD is technically correct regarding DRE touch-screen
voting machines, there WERE/ARE plenty of tabulators by Diebold, ES&S and Triad used in Ohio. These convert the voter's
ballot choices (punch card, optiscan, whatever) to digital signals, which thereafter are subject to, and have been, grossly manipulated to "give" wins to actual losers. Can you also say FL2000? Not sure what BtD tries to accomplish with the overall
content of his/her posts, and I don't begrudge the attempts at accurate language and terms, but there seems to me to be another agenda at work. Hmmm...

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

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

[tommcintyre]

63. FYI: Fitrakis book is actually shipping

They just haven't updated their web site yet. People here have reported receiving their copy; and Bob went on tour to promote it right after the following BradBlog interview with him on 6/11/05:

http://bradblog.com/BradShow/Archives/BradShow_061105_Hour2.mp3

[farmbo]

10. DNC "Let us see the machines!"...BOE: "Nope"...DNC: "Sorry for asking...

...please forgive us for our audacity...we'll tell the world there was no fraud in the DREs and tabulators....(and we CERTAINLY won't bring up that phony "Terror Alert" in Warren County)

Can we pick up your dry cleaning for you to make amends?

[kster]

32. I needed that

:rofl: :rofl:

[tommcintyre]

65. So you think the DNC has resigned itself to be the GOP "neutered pet"? ;)

Thanks for the laugh - these days - with reports like this, etc. - I need all I can get.

[autorank]

12. tommcintyre, Thanks for the great post...this IS the other 1/2 -- WE WON

damnit. We'll never be a real party until we are ready to fight. That's why the American people don't come on over. They think we don't care about our party.

[kster]

13. Knew there was something missing

on the DNC report, now we know what we are up against, at very least they should have let the INTERNET community know that Ohio and the voting companies didn't let them look at the machines during the investigation. We could have made some hay about it.

[tommcintyre]

79. Yep, and we need to remember that the people are the party...

not those who are currently running it. They can be replaced if they won't do their job.

[Helga Scow Stern]

15. Now I know exactly what to say to the DNC when they call me

for the 25th time today asking for money.

I am not going to give a cent to a party that allows elections to be stolen out from underneath them. What a sham.

[tommcintyre]

69. I think that's the best way to get their attention

Unless they are pressured, under threat of losing significant support, I don't think they will ever acknowledge even the POSSIBILITY that Kerry was the victor; and Bush only sits in the oval office today - due to fraud.

And the best way to apply that pressure is to spread the word on how the DNC has "sold us out"; and, though the pocketbook - i. e. withhold contributions.

[kster]

70. I hate to admit it but I think you

are correct. We have to support Conyers,Fritakus, landshark people who are taking this seriously.

[tommcintyre]

77. Yep, gota hit 'em where it hurts! In the pocketbook n/t

[SophieZ]

104. Well, I know what I tell 'em.

I ask 'em what they've done to ensure honest, transparent, recountable elections.

If they're a Senator and their name is not Barbara Boxer, I ask them WHERE THEY WERE on January 6, 2005, for the contest of the Ohio electors. Only Boxer signed the contest.

And, I tell them that until they get serious about REAL election reform, with paper ballots counted by human beings in public at the precinct, I am giving my money to election reform groups. And I have. (A large portion of your donations to political campaigns ends up in the pockets of large media corporations anyway.)

One example is of a great activist group is Voters Unite. They work work work, quietly, fairly, brilliantly, with groups and election officials all over the country, trying to break through the myths. After a year of raiding their own finances and working full-time for election reform, they finally asked citizens around the country for a small amount of money to assist their operation. They're over the $9800 mark -- need $15,000. If you're interested, check 'em out. Their news archives on elections is priceless, as is their documented LONG list of mess-ups, by manufacturer.

www.votersunite.org

[tommcintyre]

105. Good insights and suggestions

I hadn't thought of this one:

"(A large portion of your donations to political campaigns ends up in the pockets of large media corporations anyway.)"

That's an extra reason not to support them if they are unwilling to support election fraud investigation.

[snot]

18. Is Dean the best, only Dem. we should complain to? nt

[mod mom]

21. Conyers is the highest ranking Dem interested in addressing it. I hope

Conyers and other members of the CBC will be vocal in setting straight the story.

[snot]

23. True -- but he already seems to be doing all he can.

[mod mom]

40. You are correct re Conyers. If ever a case for cloning then Conyers is it

[snot]

82. I'd love to have the karma HE's built up.

[snot]

83. I recall a few Conyers for Prez postings during the last 8 mos. . .

If that's not pure fantasy, I'm about there.

[kster]

84. Any honest Dem or Repug

that reports for duty on fixing the faulty voting machines NOW, I'm there.

[tommcintyre]

91. Yep, supporting the investigation of possible fraud is my litmus test n/t

[tommcintyre]

89. I would vote for him in a heartbeat!

And, it would no doubt, be the best vote for President I have ever cast - since I would know I voted for an honest person.

[LightningFlash]

97. Conyers set a record trend.

He delivered a bombshell report at his blog and stands up for each and every single vote. :yourock:

[kster]

29. Not in my

opinion,I watched Dean rig an election on TV, so he definitely knows better than this. The fact that he heads the DNC and let this report stand is unacceptable. I personally am offended by the DNC report. Dean and the DNC need to get together with "LANDSHARK" and start fighting the real problem of electronic voting.

For 500,000 , Landshark could have had real court cases started across the country, that would have exposed this sh*t once and for all.

[Boredtodeath]

31. Then DO IT.

Stop waiting for a hero to come along and become one.

Start a legal fund. Set up a website. Work to raise the funds Landshark needs to do this work across the country.

Hire attorneys and private investigators - PROFESSIONALS who can get the job done and find the proof.

Stop waiting for a hero and become one.

[kster]

34. Can you be my adviser

but one thing we have to get everything right, first we can't say Ohio did not use Diebold, and then come back and say, only 2 counties in Ohio used Diebold anything. It will look like we are lying.

[Boredtodeath]

35. Nice try

I said Diebold DREs.

But keep it up.....your work here is so much more important than doing anything effective </sarcasm>.

As for an "advisor" role, I'm not qualified to advise about any such thing, but I'd bet Landshark is.

Why don't you ask?

[kster]

39. read post #14 and #22......nt

[Boredtodeath]

41. Yes, please do.

And concentrate on reading for comprehension.

[kster]

42. Define "diebold anything"

is this a new machine ?

[Boredtodeath]

43. A little research might help you

Unless, of course, your only mission is to talk about election fraud and do nothing to assist in the investigation.

You might want to start at http://www.dieboldes.com

Then be sure to migrate to the essvote.com web site.

A little knowledge goes a lonnnnnnnng way.

[kster]

45. Can't you just tell me

it would be a lot easier, you said

"Not to mention that only 2 counties used Diebold ANYTHING".

What is "Diebold ANYTHING" ?

[Boredtodeath]

46. 2 counties used Diebold OpScan

Hardin Paper Ballot Voting Machines Scan Optical Scanner DIEBOLD

Lucas Paper Ballot Voting Machines Optical Scan Optical Scanner DIEBOLD

I know it's hard for you to get over the lack of DREs, but wooot there it is.

[kster]

47. Thank you...nt

[kster]

48. Take a look at this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x379633#380309

[Boredtodeath]

49. And?

If you were paying attention, jsamuel and I determined that had nothing to do with Diebold.

Look, all I want you to attempt to do is remain FACTUAL. Broad brush statements which are proven to be inaccurate, as the one made that I responded to in Post #14, do great damage to our issue.

Keep the facts straight and don't pop off with inaccurate data.

There was plenty of vote manipulation in Ohio in 2004. But Diebold machines weren't used (THIS TIME, IN THIS STATE) to conduct it.

Go after the culprit.

[mod mom]

52. What did you determine caused Cobb to get Kerry's votes? How do you know

it was not a problem with Diebold?

[Boredtodeath]

54. How did you determine it WAS?

I never made any such determination. Never tried to.

So, please, make your case. Factually.

Answer the basic investigative questions:

Who?

What?

When?

Where?

Why?

[mod mom]

56. You state you never made a determination yet you said:

"If you were paying attention, jsamuel and I determined that had nothing to do with Diebold."

How could you determine it had nothing to do with Diebold if you didn't determine what was the cause?

[Boredtodeath]

57. Because I don't speculate

I'm waiting for the EVIDENCE so I can speak factually to the issue.

[mod mom]

61. If you don't speculate, why did you state:

""If you were paying attention, jsamuel and I determined that had nothing to do with Diebold."

If you didn't determine it had nothing to do with diebold, the you were speculating that it didn't.

[Boredtodeath]

62. Circular logic

We determined, factually, that those pages are NOT from the Diebold central tabulator by finding pages that ARE and comparing them. There was NO SPECULATION involved.

Then, Time for Change stepped up to the plate to agree to get the documents so we could find out what did.

[kster]

64. Please, let me know

where the investigation takes you. "BTD"

[kster]

58. When they said we

can't look inside the machines, that would be my first clue.

[Boredtodeath]

60. So, it's time for you to get busy on that legal team

Because you've got a good precedence here that they can't say "no."
------------------------------------------
Greenwich citizen Stephen Whitaker requested electronic access to the city's GIS maps in December 2001 under the state open records law.

The town refused to give Whitaker electronic access to its GIS system, arguing that the records qualified for public safety and trade secret exemptions to the state's public records law. Whitaker sued and obtained rulings in favor of release from the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission in 2002 and the Connecticut Superior Court in 2004. Greenwich appealed to the Connecticut Appellate Court, but the Supreme Court stepped in and transferred the case onto its own docket before the intermediate appellate court could rule.

Justice Christine S. Vertefeuille, writing for the court, rejected the argument that the trade secret exemption could apply to the electronic GIS maps. All of the information contained in the maps is available piecemeal from other town departments, so there is nothing secret about them, she wrote.
http://www.rcfp.org/news/2005/0616-foi-citymu.html

[tommcintyre]

80. I would tell all that may be "hurt" by your future lack of support...

that if they don't "do the right thing" now, they will not be able to count on your vote AND financial contributions when THEY need it. And, you are going to tell everyone you know to do the same.

If they start getting enough communications like this... we just may get their "attention.

[sunnystarr]

33. My thanks to Rosenfel and Fitrakis ...

They completely detailed what the problems were the DNC report and the outrage I felt when I read it.

While it's true that you can't accuse fraud or stolen election without proof, it was imperative to point out the extreme vulnerability to fraud that currently exists and what has to be done to protect the vote of the American people. I didn't see the exit polls addressed for example and the reason they are important.

If the corporations have sullied top DNC officials then we should know about it and do something about it.

We can't afford any more time screaming in the wind and exhausting ourselves to no avail. The only one I trust right now is Dean. Donna Brazile has been playing the corporate game for too long and even if her intentions are good I don't believe she's ready to look at the truth. You lay down with dogs and you get up with fleas and until she's had a good flea bath she's not gonna see the light.

[Boredtodeath]

36. Sadly, I don't know how we expected anything else

Cathy Cox, rising DEM star in Georgia bet her career on Diebold voting machines.

Saying she made a mistake means sacrificing her run for the Georgia governor's mansion.

Did you really expect the DNC to make that sacrifice? I didn't.

[autorank]

50. The only people here sacrificing are the citizens of this country.

They sacrifice every day because the * machine stole 2000, outright, and because the Democratic Party failed to fight the theft on the obvious grounds of disenfranchisement...black voters were purged in large numbers, 50K, by a program that the vendor told the state would incorrectly purge many more people than should be purged. The NAACP went to court and capitulated with a consent decree rather than taking it to the logical conclusion. This was a sacrifice the whole nation had to bear and one that the 50K Florida blacks enxerienced first hand (if I'm correct, black FL turnout in 2000 was upwards of 90%). DNC didn't even sue. That was pathetic.

We lost 2004 because we didn't bang heads with the bullies who have a varietiy of different strategies: voter suppression anywhere they can; default to Bush voting machines; optiscan proglems here but none there (a fact the DNC report failed to notice); manipulation of the final exit poll to make it look like there was no inconsistency (but we know that there was thanks to the brave souls who released the data "by mistake"); the Mitofsky tour where he trashes his entire methodology to further hide the truth of his polls; the failure of anyone to seriously look into this OHTER THAN activists (why was DNC reporting so late?).

We're it, that is the citizens of this country. I happen to think that we're enough if we all hang together and don't bash our brains out. Patience and tolerance is a virtue unless you're dealing with an obvious disruptor. We all have to stick together. It's impossible to be correct on every single aspect of this problem. Help one another is the motto for those who want to convert words to action, and do it graciously when possible and appropriate.

The DNC was 1/2 there. The other 1/2 missing is flawed because they would not say the "F" word--FRAUD! We will make them do that and that's it, period, end of story on the report.

[kster]

44. kick.nt

[Nothing Without Hope]

72. Yes, it's a disaster that the DNC is STILL saying the "problems" with the

2004 election would not have made a difference in the outcome of the election. See, it's too bad that there were those long lines in African-American communities, but if we fix those, we're just fine, right?

Wrong. I imagine the GOP would be willing enough to go along with providing more voting machines for heavily Dem neighborhoods. Makes the GOP look "honest," prevents more embarrassing video coverage of voter suppression...

and leaves intact the central engine of election fraud - the machines and hackable tabulators.

Why doesn't the DNC give a damn about this? There is no possible answer that makes them look good...and some that make them look corrupt. Section VII of the DNC report talks about some of the issues, but neither Dean's remarks nor the overview, nor Kerry's remarks, nor any of the other "insiders" are fighting against electronic election fraud as is desperately needed. Why the silence? Why indeed?

[kster]

73. I am with you

optiscan and DRE voting machines are equal, they are designed to steal votes period. And voter suppression and the surface shenanigans from what I'm seeing from the DNC is designed to cover it all up.

[Kansas Wyatt]

74. Is it possible that our government and elections are....

Even more corrupt and fraudulent than everyone suspects?

Could some powerful Democrats have some involvement as well, and that is how the Republicans get away with it without any serious objection that would be heard?

Could one of the reasons for them keeping this secret be, that it would blow the lid off how corrupt and fraudulent our elected representatives in the United States really are, and what other corruption and cover-ups could that expose?

Would 'We The People' have an uprising and would the United States experience a Great Collapse after the rest of the world dumped U.S. investment, due it's insolvency and third world Banana Republic integrity?

Maybe it's a matter of, 'go ahead and say something, and watch how it all turns to shit around you and everyone you know too.'

[LightningFlash]

75. An excellent point....

But I fear its more then that......Democrats in name only like to not touch the ribbons of the republican theft.....Because they engage in it too, just like all the corrupt BOE democrats in Ohio.

[kster]

76. The one thing I don't

get if what you say is true, why don't they fix the problem now for future elections being as they know we are gaining on them, as far as informing the public. That would take some of the pressure off of them, as far as being exposed for past elections.

[Kansas Wyatt]

86. Perhaps it's just easier for those who call the shots...

To keep it buried and going nowhere, and reap in the benefits of not having to actually earn their re-election votes and risk losing. And, if some new honest people actually got in place to actually investigate what really goes on within our government, some explosive and disturbing facts may see the light of day regarding what our past elected representatives did and kept hidden.

If the most sacred trust in our election process is broken and ignored, then what else has been perverted, manipulated, broken, and destroyed by the elected representatives of 'We The People?' Election fraud could very well be just the tip of the iceberg, which would explain why they just do not "fix the problem" and risk having some new elected representatives see the past 'business as usual.'

[autorank]

78. Nothing Wrong with Kansas Wyatt! You go places others fear to go.

How about the 3.0 million "spoiled" ballots every year. Since these are predominantly in black districts, who do you think benefits?(The Republicans) Who do you think doesn't give a flying fuck? (The Democrats)

Election fraud is the stuff of a new Velvet Revolution, one that will turn this country upside down.

That's why I like to say...

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Contact the DNC and Tell Them that THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN & That They’re not Doing Enough to PREVENT Election Fraud

[Nothing Without Hope]

88. YES!!! We cannot allow the DNC to bury the central issue of election fraud

It is terrible that they are trying - clearly, we cannot trust them to move forward in what must be done to regain democracy in this country.

Let them know! They are smug and self-satisfied in their belief that they lead and we meekly follow. They need internet activism, and they take it for granted that we will support their false statements in the DNC report on the Ohio 2004 election.

Let's show them that we insist on the TRUTH.

[tommcintyre]

100. Maybe the DLC (DINOs) are running the DNC?

Check this out:
http://www.prospect.org/print-friendly/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html

[LightningFlash]

103. Then we need to fight them back out of here...

And make the DNC run the DLC until they stop their corrupt bullshit!!!! :mad: :mad: :banghead:

[tommcintyre]

107. Good news! Progressive groups have already started

"DINOs Outshining RINOs"
http://www.davidswanson.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=263
<Note: This is written by "a board member of Progressive Democrats of America". It explains how even moveon.org and a coalition of progressive groups are going up against the Dem leadership on a number of issues. Also, note the reference to the "new democrats" - are they not the same new dems cited in the DLC article. I now believe that the DLC is to the DNC, as the neocons are to GOP - DINOs and RINOs that have taken over the respective parties - sort of like the film, "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers"*.>

http://www.filmsite.org/inva.html
Invasion Of The Body Snatchers (1956)
snip
"The theme of the cautionary, politicized film was open to varying interpretations, including paranoia toward the spread of a harmful ideology such as socialistic Communism, or the sweeping mass hysteria of McCarthyism in the 1950s and blacklisting of Hollywood, the spread of an unknown malignancy or virulent germ (read fear of annihilation by 'nuclear war'), or the numbing of our individuality and emotional psyches through conformity and group-think. Yet its main theme was the alien (read 'Communist') dehumanization and take-over of an entire community by large seed pods (found in basements, automobile trunks, a greenhouse, and on a pool table) that replicated and replaced human beings. And it told of the heroic struggle of one helpless but determined man of conscience, a small-town doctor (McCarthy), to vainly combat and quell the deadly, indestructible threat." <:SIGH: The more things change, the more they stay the same.>

[kster]

81. kick.nt

[emcguffie]

87. Donna what's her name was furious with me

I called and called the DNC back some months ago, wanting to talk to someone about how the electino was stolen. Donna, what's her name? it's Freudian that I cannot remember ... the woman from Clinton's campaign who was heading up the "investigation" or the Voting Rights Committee, or whatever. After much effort I was given her e-mail address and told she was off "investigating". So I e-mailedl her.

When I tried to find out whether they were looking at just voter suppression or fraud also, she became furious with me, wrote "please don't insult me", and that was that.

wouldn't even answer the real question: voter suppression only, or are you also looking at fraud?

I'm still up for just going to visit them, but I have given up on anybody from DU ever saying, yeah, let's do it.

I guess you have to be known to be recognized, but how the *** do you get known here?

So of all the folks here in DU not one has ever taken me up. It's a little much for me to do by myself, but if one other person would say yes, let's do it, that would be it. It seems to me that might be the best way, just go show up in the office and refuse to take no for an answer.

I live in Essex County, NJ, and work in NYC.

Any takers? Probably not, as usual...

[LightningFlash]

96. Someone will take you up on the offer!

Not to worry, there's plenty of patriots out here ready to work!

Keep fighting the good fight. :yourock:

[tommcintyre]

98. Don't get discouraged, more and more people are waking up to the...

reality that "We are the ones we have been waiting for". No calvary is coming to the rescue, so, it will ultimately be up to us to save our democracy.

[Nothing Without Hope]

101. "We are the ones we have been waiting for" - exactly.

We must build into our plans the likelihood that some top Dem people are complicit in the deliberate coverup of the election fraud that stole the 2004 election. We cannot expect the best of these people and then be devastated by their betrayal. It's not black and white, it's shades of grey.

We MUST take the evidence to the people - they will not tolerate what is being pulled now. If ONLY the long voter lines are addressed - and that's what they keep harping on in their speeches - then the electronic voting network, with its hackable central tabulators and all the rest of built-in fraud capability at every level will keep working. No democracy ever again.

We cannot allow the Dems to continue to deny that there was significant election fraud, enough to tip the election. Without this as a public-driven incentive, the system will NOT be overhauled.

Voter-verified paper ballots!

(Andy is recuperating, so we have to shout extra loud.)

[EFerrari]

90. Instead of reinventing the wheel, we should just ship a copy

of Bob's book to each of our reps.

If we hit them all, it will send a message. :evilgrin:

If we get no response in a limited time period, we do it again.

Whaddya think? Maybe we could get a group rate from the publisher.

[glitch]

93. Damn fine idea.

Kind of feel sorry for their mailroom, I hear these books are heavy!

[tommcintyre]

94. Better yet, tell 'em if they don't pay for their own copy, AND support...

election fraud investigation, we will NOT support them anymore. (My reasoning: people are much more likely to read what they paid for themselves. I would hate to see Bob's fine book be turned into a Congressional doorstop. ;) )

[EFerrari]

95. Okay., got it.! What about if we buy them a copy and SIGN it

for them, with as many constituents' signatures as we can gather?

That would be one incriminating doorstop. :)

[tommcintyre]

99. I like that. It would be one hell of a unique petition! Hard to ignore. nt

[Nothing Without Hope]

106. ANOTHER Fitrakis article on the DNC report posted 6/28:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x381320
Thread title: "Limp election theft report, Dems prove why they're unworthy" - Fitrakis

Thanks for posting the new one at DU too, Tom! :hi:

[Time for change]

108. Some responses to my questions about the DNC report

I recently received a response from Professor Walter Mebane to my questions about his group’s portions of the DNC 2004 Ohio Election Report. Professor Mebane’s group is responsible for Sections VI and VII of the DNC report. I consider Section VI to be the most critical section of the report, because that is the section that concludes that the analysis strongly suggests that there was no widespread fraud in the Ohio 2004 Presidential election.

My intention is to go over the response to my questions with some statisticians prior to posting a summary of the response on the DU. That is because I am unable to fully understand some key parts of the response. However, in the meantime, I think that it is worth while to post some key points of the response because I know that a lot of you are writing letters to our representatives or to the DNC, and I think that some parts of Professor Mebane’s response may be helpful to that effort.

Before listing those points I just want to say a general word about Professor Mebane’s response. He responded to my e-mail to him within four hours, and the response is extremely detailed and thorough – though quite difficult to read for non-statisticians. In that regard, and because some of his points I believe could be useful our effort, I think that many of you would feel some gratitude towards him for his prompt and thorough response. On the other hand, he still sticks by his conclusion that “The precinct data
provide strong evidence against the claim that there was widespread misallocation of votes from Kerry to Bush.” In that respect I’m sure that many of you would be profoundly disappointed in him, to say the least.

I myself am still unable to understand the rationale for coming to that conclusion, and that is one reason why I want to go over the response with some statisticians. Anyhow, here are the points that you might find useful:


1. Relationship of Issue 1 (ban on gay marriage) to turnout

One very perplexing (to me) part of his report was that there was a positive correlation between turnout and voting “yes” on Issue 1, which is responsible for an increase in turnout of one half percent to 2%. That was perplexing to me because we have always been told that a large turnout favors Democrats, but if voting “yes” on Issue 1 led to increased turnout, then that would appear to mean that increased turnout favored Bush.

So I asked if the reason for the apparent correlation between turnout and voting “yes” on Issue1 could be due to voter suppression or electronic manipulation to reduce the vote in Democratic precincts, since this would make it appear as if there was low turnout in Democratic precincts.

The response I received to this question was basically that it was impossible to tell because there was no data available on party affiliation, and with regard to the possibility that electronic fraud played a role in this, there was no evidence found for this “but the kind of data we have are not really suitable to digging into that. A forensic examination of administrative records would be needed to make the case for or against.”


2. Voter suppression due to insufficient voting machine allocation in Franklin County

Item # 3 in my thread where I post my letter to Howard Dean discusses in depth the problem of voter suppression due to insufficient voting machine allocation in Franklin County: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=380878&mesg_id=380878.

I asked Professor Mebane about that, and whether that could be part of the reason for the apparent “low voter turnout” in Democratic precincts. He did confirm the problem in Franklin County by saying that: "There were also proportionally fewer voting machines in Franklin County's minority neighborhoods than in predominantly white neighborhoods." I don’t believe he specifically addressed the issue of whether that could have contributed to the apparent low voter turnout in Democratic precincts. But I don’t see any way that it could NOT have contributed to that. I mean, it seems to me that that’s just common sense.


3. Strange findings in Cuyahoga County

I asked about some of the strange findings in Cuyahoga County, which I describe in detail in item # 2 of my letter to Howard Dean (see link above). Briefly, this includes implausibly low voter turnout in numerous precincts, coupled with the strange finding noted in the DNC report that in Cuyahoga County the normal expected positive correlation between voter turnout and machines per voter was ABSENT.

Here’s what Professor Mebane had to say about that: “I don't know what went on in Cuyahoga County. As I wrote in several places in the DNC report, there were many anomalies in the data from Cuyahoga County that warrant further investigation.”


4. Late vote surge in Miami County

I also detailed in my Dean letter thread, item # 5, the late vote surge of 19,000 votes in Miami County, after 100 % of precincts had reported, giving Bush an additional cushion of about 6,000 votes.

In response to my pointing that out, Professor Mebane noted that there were four precincts in Ohio that were outliers with respect to turnout, as predicted by support for Issue 1. Three of those precincts were in Miami County, two high outliers and one low outlier.


5. Other anomalies

I also pointed out other anomalies and suspicious findings, including electronic vote switching from Kerry to Bush in Mahoning County, and several anomalies in southwestern Ohio, including a swing of 37,000 votes to Bush (compared to his 2000 vote) from the three large counties in southwestern Ohio (Warren, Butler, and Clermont), unexpectedly poor performance of Kerry compared to the relatively unknown liberal Democratic candidate for Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court, the infamous “lockdown” in Warren County to prevent anyone other than Republicans from observing the vote count, and the tremendously high increase in voter registration in these counties, despite the fact that the DNC report finds that this was supposed to be associated with Democratic gains. These are all detailed in item #s 4 and 6 of my Dean letter thread.

Professor Mebane’s response to all this was: “The problems you review for Mahoning and the other counties you mentioned seem to me to call for investigation, regardless of what is in the precinct data we analyzed.


6. Possible problems with central tabulators

I asked Professor Mebane if it is possible or likely that if one or more of these episodes (i.e., the several findings that I describe above) do in fact represent fraud, that the fraud was perpetrated through manipulation of central tabulators, and therefore was not necessarily manifested by wide variance in precinct data?

His answer to that was: “The mysteries of central tabulation are important to understand and eliminate. Section VII and especially Section VIII of the DNC report address this. The DNC team did not have access either to the tabulation hardware or software or to the original ballots (where paper ballots were used).”


Well, that’s all I have for now. Not as much as we would like by any means, but I hope that there are at least some useful points here. Some of Professor Mebane's responses that I've summarized here were already included in the DNC report, but they weren't included in the Executive Summary, which is what most people read.