Happy New Years Election Forum

[autorank]

Let's close the deal this year, get the job done. Election Fraud and Integrity research and action 2004 started on DU in the the Elections forum (variety of names;). There has been a non stop commitment regardless of the attacks, the scoffing by the ignorant (and not so ignorant), the lack of resources (most of us are citizen activists, no "slush funds," "grants," etc.).

This is the year we see the movement grow to full maturity. My knowledge of politics has been greatly expanded by what I have learned here and where it's guided me.

We will prevailb
-----------------------------------------

Here's some fun on GDP:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2344618

Happy New Year DU. This IS the year we start to roll in a big way. I’ve done the election news thread for months and in the past 40-60 days, I’ve noticed a steady increase in MSM press covering stories. It’s started with small town papers a while back, not it’s moving to suburban and mid size city dailies. We’re not far from real coverage.

Here’s the much requested TruthIsAll in plain English, no Excel needed (unless you want it). The past is prologue. Election Integrity Movements all over the world use exit polls as their FIRST LINE DEFENSE against election fraud. Here’s how to understand the nonsense and also protect our democracy. We need good candidates, hard work (especially GOTV), and vigilance against election fraud. Here are the basics for exit polls.

The numbers say Kerry won. Easily. It's all here.
Want to see how the exit polls matched the pre-election polls?
UNDERSTANDING IS THE BEST PROTECTION AGAINST RECURRENCE.

[Peace Patriot]

1. Dear autorank, you know I love you, and hugely admire your work on...

...on election fraud/election reform, and I will recommend your thread despite the following criticisms. But I think you still have time to make a few corrections.

Typos: See para 1, small typos (double the, and a few others). Para 2: prevail.

Para 3: Please correct the presumption that the "mainstream media" (MSM) is the "real coverage"--a statement that disses the small town and midsize city coverage from newspapers that are really doing their job. I detest this presumption that, unless something appears in the war profiteering corporate news monopoly press, it is somehow not real. We must BUST this presumption, not keep repeating it. And, goddammit, they are NOT the "mainstream." They do NOT reflect the great majority of opinion in this country on Bush and Bush policy. They would LIKE to be the "mainstream." And they would LIKE us all to buy into the ILLUSION they create that this is a rightwing country. And every time we call them "mainstream," we help them hoodwink more people about what's really going down--that the great American progressive majority is being deliberately, systematically marginalized, disempowered, isolated and DISENFRANCHISED.

Para 4: Typo, First Line (of) Defense.

Suggestion: Call for the Dem Party to fund independent exit polls in '06 and '08. Badly, badly needed. Edison/Mitofsky has promised that we will NEVER get hold of their real exit poll numbers again. We desperately need independent verification tools, such as exit polls.

Further info:

www.votersunite.org
www.verifiedvoting.org
www.UScountvotes.org
www.TruthIsAll.net
http://www.solarbus.org/election/index.shtml
Sign Russ Holt's petition for HR 550: http://www.rushholt.com/petition.html
Bob Koehler (what we're up against):
http://www.tmsfeatures.com/tmsfeatures/subcategory.jsp?file=20051124ctnbk-a.txt&catid=1824&code=ctnbk

[Kurovski]

2. It feels like a happy new year already.

Kudos to all Duers who push the truth despite popular opinion and condescending insults. If we're wrong--well then we're wrong.

But if we're right...well my dear lads and lasses, we've saved our own American asses.

And a big thank you to autorank, one of the good guys! :hi:

[OnTheOtherHand]

3. first line defense???

Folks, any election integrity movement that uses exit polls as its first line defense is in very deep trouble. No matter what you believe about the 2004 exit polls, that much should be clear. At best that's like saying that a football team's first line defense is official review from the upstairs booth.

I think Bush won the popular vote in 2004. But if you think Kerry won, then the notion that the exit polls are your first line defense must feel like a knife in the gut. Some defense.

Think prevention, y'all. Happy New Year!

[BeFree]

5. Any evidence bush won?

Besides the cooked exit polls? And forget what they say was the final tally.

Do you have any new evidence, circumstantial, or otherwise, that proves bush won?

Because we have plenty of evidence Kerry won, and it's not just the un-cooked numbers from the exit polls. For one, there is evidence of massive vote switching which was close to 99% slanted to bush. Two, was the massive use of e-voting machinery which is now presently being outlawed state by state.


So, show us your evidence..... anything new? How about his soaring approval numbers? LOL

In fact, I don't recall any of yall naysayers providing any evidence that bush won, while pages and pages of new evidence pointing out that Kerry won has crossed this forum.

[OnTheOtherHand]

6. hmmmm...

You have taken one sentence in my post and decided to pick a fight with me. Why is that?

No, I haven't seen any evidence that Kerry won. I have seen no evidence of "massive vote switching." The use of "e-voting machinery" (whatever specifically you mean by that) is obviously not in itself proof of fraud. The approval numbers are not proof of anything -- historically, his pre-election approval ratings were high enough to win. His pre-election poll numbers were good enough to win. His numbers right after the election said he won. We've been through this all before (well, maybe not all the details). But it actually has no bearing on my preceding post. You might want to reread it.

Whether you believe that Bush won, I couldn't care in the slightest. That is not my mission in life. If anyone can actually prove that Kerry got more votes, I will be delighted. I know you really, really think that this is obvious. Whatever. Life is too short to argue with everybody about everything, no?

[kster]

4. Kick-n-recommended.....nt

[Febble]

7. Happy New Year to you to, auto

and although I don't know who you mean by attackers and scoffers, I'm going to have a paranoia-free moment and assume you don't include me.

But can I suggest, as a New Year's Resolution, that we distinguish between those who are enemies of Election Reform (I don't personally know any, but there may indeed be such) and those who are unconvinced that the exit polls are evidence that Kerry won the 2004 election?

The two things are entirely unrelated. Election Reform is required because, among other things:

• Evidence of disenfranchisement of legitimate voters, mostly Democratic, and largely ethnic minority, is unassailable, is an abuse of Civil Rights, and is a disgrace to a democracy


• DREs are unreliable, and insecure, and devoid of the transparency that a democracy requires.


• The rules governing the conduct of elections are flouted in many jurisdictions, making corruption both possible and likely

None of the above is in any way dependent on whether you happen to think that Kerry won in 2004 or not. Nor, in fact, is the case for prosecution where there is clear evidence that there was any deliberate intent to deprive Kerry of votes, or even that sheer negligence resulted in a net loss of votes for Kerry.

My only beef is with the case that the exit polls are evidence of massive fraud having actually taken place in 2004. And perhaps with your statement that they are anyone's first line of defence. The first line of defence is an open and transparent voting system and the second is election management that is accountable to the voters.

It is because exit polls are a lousy way to audit an election that you need Election Reform, not because they are accurate. They aren't.

Edited to add: :party: :toast: :party: