Hey! . . . . DUMBASS DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERSHIP . . . . . . . . LISSINUP

[Stinky The Clown]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2288476

MEMO TO: Every person who takes a paycheck as a result of being a Democrat

Pennsylvania this week. Ohio ... what ..... two weeks ago?

Election day polling place 'anomolies'.

Wall to wall.

Hey you ... pay attention. LOOK AT ME WHEN I'M YELLING AT YOU.

Here's a little clue:

*F*I*X* *T*H*E* *F*U*C*K*I*N*G* *V*O*T*I*N*G* *M*A*C*H*I*N*E*S*

Now.

Shove your plans right up your ass. Sove your 06 hopes right up your asses. Shove you campaigns right up your ass. Shove your 08 aspirations right up your ass. Shove your PACS right up your ass. Shove you websites right up your ass.

And while your shoving all that MEANINGLESS FUCKING CRAP up your collective asses, you might try remoiving your fucking heads from said ass.

NO EXCUSES.

FIX THE MACHINES RIGHT GODDAMNED NOW.

Thank your giving this minor request its due consideration.

Your faithful minion,

Stinky the Clown

[porphyrian]

1. Woohoo! Git 'em! - n/t

[eleny]

2. What is it going to f'n take, right?

[Stinky The Clown]

4. No shit ........

Everybody's gotta 'plan' ........ feh

[ArbustoBuster]

5. My plan involves lots of booze.

I intend to trade it for necessities with the survivors of the horrific civil war when this house of cards government comes crashing down.

Or I intend to drink it when we get these bastards out of office and restore our democracy.

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. What Stinky said!

:applause:

[Arugula Latte]

6. YEAH -- What he said.

What the F@#$ are you WAITING for? WHY won't you address the problem?

Conyers gets it -- WHY DON'T YOU?

[IndyOp]

7. Don't focus on machines - focus on GOP -

We have to correctly identify the enemy before we can combat it. The enemy is a certain proportion of members of GOP who are willing to steal an election by a variety of means -- it isn't as if the voting machine companies did this of their own accord -- they did it at the behest of corrupt GOP members.

GOP corruption became apparent FIRST in elections - gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement (before, during, and after the elections) and voting machine rigging and hacking. Wall-to-wall GOP corruption.

[upi402]

8. memos are sure to fly...

and a committee will be formed to issue a statement



and a fart drifts off in the wind

[driver8]

9. Fucking-A , right!!

It doesn't matter what their positions are if we can't count the votes. Why can't the Dem leadership see this? Without accurate vote counts, it doesn't matter if your policy is to save the world or destroy civilization (as we have seen)...it just doesn't fucking matter.

How much longer can Dem leadership keep their heads in the freakin' sand? How many more elections have to be stolen before someone sits up and says, "hey, wait a minute...something ain't right!"

You bet your ass that something ain't right -- and it won't be right until people pull their heads out of their asses, quit pretending that voter fraud is a tin foil theory, and do something about it.

Kicked and recommended!!

Great post!

[ChrisdemW]

10. Calm down. Why steal votes with machines? There are easier ways

Its still safer and works better to go out where people stay and tell them the wrong place to vote. Also lose their registration and gerrymander the districts. I was so pissed about the voting machine hysteria last week, and it turned out that wasn't even real news. Focus where the fight is.

[mod mom]

26. Purges, challenges, mis-allocation of machines, lost voter registrations,

caging, provisional votes, were/are all used but when it's close, then other methods are available. In Ohio, many will remember that FAUX homeland security alert in Warren County, Ohio in 2004. Check this out (Freepress Uncovers punchcard ballot tampering):

http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2006/1355

[mod mom]

28. Voter registrations in Ohio in 2004:

Note: this is from only 2 (out of 88) high Dem Counties:

On March 21, 2005 the House Administration Committee held a hearing entitled “2004-Election and the Implementation of HAVA” at the Ohio Statehouse in Columbus, OH. Giving testimony that day was William Anthony, who served in the dual role of Chairman of the Franklin County BOE and Chair of the Franklin County Democratic Party. Mr Anthony gave the following testimony:


“Finally on Voter Registration Mr. Chairman, as the Committee is well aware, there were innumerable political parties and 537’s spending tens of millions of dollars on voter registration drives. In Franklin County alone, we processed more than a quarter of a million voter registration forms between January 1, 2004 and the close of registration in early October. This was twice the registration activity as compared to the same period in 2000.”

Bill Anthony testimony on March 21 2005
http://cha.house.gov/hearings/Testimony.aspx?TID=477

Mr Anthony’s testimony stated that in Franklin County alone, more than a quarter million voter registrations forms were processed between Jan. 1 2004 and the close of registration in early October. Yet when the registered voter numbers are compared from 2003 to 2004, we see a change of 120,869.

google: Ohio voter registration historical data
http://elections.ssrc.org/data/voterreg/

Ohio Election Data - Registered Voters before Certification
The Feminist Majority Foundation
Detailed chart of annual changes in Ohio voter registration numbers from 2000 to 2004. The data demonstrates a large voter roll purging in 2002 and relatively high numbers of new registrants from 2002-2004.
voters in 2004 = 845,720
voters in 2003 = 724,851
# Changed
from 03-04 = 120,869


AND FROM OH SOS J KENNETH BLACKWELL'S INVESTIGATION OF LUCAS COUNTY:

-October 4, 2004 was filing deadline for new voter registrations. At that point there were approximately 20,000 unprocessed voter registration applications with less than a month before the election. One mail tray containing 4,500-7,000 (estimates vary) unprocessed “Project Voter” registrations were discovered on or about October 18,2004.
SOURCE: SOS Investigation pg 10

***Of interest here is information obtained from the SOS website entitled ElectionsVoter/results 2003 and 2004 which show the # of registered voters number change from ‘03-’04 was 11,947 in Lucas County: reg voters 2003 in Lucas=288,190 ; registered voter in 2004=300,137.

[mod mom]

34. More on Reg?purges from Cuyahoga Co (Cleveland):

The 2004 Elections
Coalescing Evidence of Massive Voter Registration Fraud in Ohio 2004
By News report
Jan 1, 2006, 17:01



Time for change
More and more evidence continues to accumulate that Voter registration fraud was responsible for a great deal if not the total Bush vote margin in the 2004 Presidential election. The latest evidence comes from Mark Crispin Miller, as documented in his recent book, "Fooled Again - How the Right Stole the 2004 Election and Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them)¨. Added to previously existing evidence, the evidence presented by Miller makes it all but incontrovertible that massive voter registration fraud was a major factor in Kerry's "loss" of Ohio. Only an idiot or a liar could look at the current mass of accumulated evidence and conclude that there is not a huge story there:

Discrepancies between NY Times reports and official voter registration figures
I initially suspected that there was something very wrong with voter registration in Ohio, and especially in Cleveland, when I discovered a HUGE discrepancy between reports by the New York Times of massive new voter registration in Democratic areas of Ohio (ten times that of Republican areas) and official voter registration figures. I posted a DU article entitled "New York Times Reporters Probably Hold Key to Proving Kerry Victory in Ohio", in which one of my main points was that the Times reporters identified 230,000 new voters registered in heavily Democratic Cuyahoga County in 2004, compared to official Secretary of State figures indicating only 119,000 newly registered voters in Cuyahoga County. I suggested at the time that a major reason for the discrepancy of 111,000 voters was either illegal purging of voters or fraudulent manipulation of the official figures to hide the fact that votes in heavily Democratic areas were electronically deleted on Election Day, or a combination of those things. Along these lines, I later posted another DU article, entitled "What Happened in Cleveland - a Plausible Scenario for a Stolen Election", where I estimated that if the discrepancy between the official figures and the newspaper reports was due to voter registration fraud, that could have cost Kerry about 46 thousand net votes in Cleveland.

Confirmation by Greater Cleveland Voter Registration Coalition
Having failed to get the NY Times or its reporters to respond to my enquiries, I managed to get a large degree of confirmation from Norman Robbins, leader of the Greater Cleveland Voter Registration Coalition. According to his figures, as communicated to me by e-mail, there were160,894 new voter registrations received by the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in 2004 (compared to 31,903 new voter registrations in 2000). This was about 42,000 more registered voters than the 119 thousand increase in registered voters between March and November of 2004 indicated by the official figures (though Norman's number of newly registered voters in Cuyahoga County is somewhat less than that identified by the New York Times.) The discrepancy between Robbins' figures and the official figures could be due to purging of newly registered voters, or failure to process the new voter registrations, which Robbins describes in his report.

Illegal purging of registered voters
Confirmation of the probable reason for the above noted discrepancies came from research by Victoria Lovegren, who posted a report at Ohio Vigilance which indicates the purging, apparently illegal, of 165,224 voters from Cuyahoga County alone, for no other rationale than that they hadn't voted recently. Dr. Lovegren notes in her report that this practice violates the National Voting Rights Act. This matter is still being investigated. We don't know at this time precisely when these purges occurred, though it was some time between the 2002 and 2004 November elections. Perhaps the most troublesome aspect of these reports is that the purging appears to have been done discriminately, that is, with no specific criteria for who would be purged.

<snip more at link>

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/printer_20539.shtml

[mod mom]

37. 10,000 Voter Registration Documents May Have Been Shredded in Hocking

Ten Thousand Voter Registration Documents May Have Been Shredded in Hocking County, Ohio

July 13, 2005

Members of the Progressive Ohio Backbone Campaign traveled to Hocking County on Monday morning, July 11, and filed an affidavit of fact alleging criminal conduct with the Hocking County Sheriff’s Department against the county’s Board of Elections (BOE) Director Lisa Schwartze.

Schwartze had previously admitted at the July 5 BOE meeting that she had used the office to promote a Republican Party fund-raiser last fall. The affidavit of fact alleging criminal conduct filed against Schwartze, however, does not to pertain to Schwartze’s use of the BOE office for partisan political fund-raising. Rather, the affidavit filed pertains to her alleged illegal shredding of election documents, the Free Press has learned.

Sherole Eaton, the fired Hocking County BOE deputy director and Congressional whistleblower, who swore an affidavit against a Triad company technician for allegedly offering a cheat sheet and replacing the county’s central voting tabulator hard drive during last year’s presidential recount, says that Schwartze may have destroyed up to “ten thousand documents.”

“I told her that she couldn’t shred and delete the changes of addresses that were coming in from registered voters during the election year, but she wouldn’t listen to me,” Eaton explained, “In order for Lisa to destroy those documents, she’s got to go to the Board of Elections, state officials, and then ask the Ohio Historical Society if they want them. And even then, she can only destroy them according to a public records retention schedule that requires they are kept for four years.”

<snip>
http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2005/1164

[glitch]

51. Wake up. Thieves can multi-task,and they need all the votes they can steal

every method is in play.

[Pharaoh]

11. YUP!

K&R

[ChiciB1]

12. Didcha See Greg Palast Yesterday On Democracy Now??

He basically already called it! Said even '08 is a goner too!

Been working down here in Florida just to get PAPER BALLOTS!! PAPER BALLOTS and this is THE SECOND time we've tried! And no, don't ask me WHY I keep trying. I really don't have a good answer anymore. I guess I just can't give it up!

[fooj]

13. Our SYSTEM is broken! FIX IT!

:applause:

[nicknameless]

14. Better still:

*D*U*M*P* *T*H*E* *F*U*C*K*I*N*G* *V*O*T*I*N*G* *M*A*C*H*I*N*E*S*

And give us back our PAPER BALLOTS! Ya know? Ballots like the non-dictatorial countries use!!!

[Stinky The Clown]

15. In the end, that's *only* solution

[In Truth We Trust]

16. Paper ballots and Hand counts NOW!!! Democracy NOW!!!

[autorank]

17. K&R, real hard. Evidence -- Paid Democrat Alert...Check this out.

Evidence, empirical of what the OP most articulately said:

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=426701&mesg_id=426701

and

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=426886&mesg_id=426886

Time to wake up and no more statements like "optiscans" are better than "touch screens". They're both electronic voting, hidden from the very difficult to review and monitor IF we could. But we can't because the contracts place the machines off limits for meaningful inspection.

Still time to get with it.

Great Post. Thank you.

[Stinky The Clown]

19. autorank, you've been at this a lot longer and deeper than me .....

just what the HELL is if going to take to get the attention of the paid Dems?

What can *we* do?

What can ***I*** do?

I mean ... I call ..... I write ..... I send green paper with notes attached .... what else? What will it take?

I mean, I'm almost on a first name basis with the two young men and one young woman who answer the phones at my Senators' and Rep's offices ......

[autorank]

31. History plus PRACTICAL ADVICE, ACTION

Here's the origin of the problem.

Chris Dodd, Dem Ct. was a main co sponsor (along with R. Mitch McConnell, KY). The Dems in the Senate have questions on electronic voting, they talk to Chris Dodd. He's not going to say that he was hood winked so he's got this or that qualification...make it better, paper trails (which are a weak and inadequate fix), blablabla. Nothing gets done.

After the screwing of 2004, Donna Brazile is head of the voting rights group at DNC or consults for them and writes a report. "Democracy at Risk: The 2004 Election in Ohio."

If you down load it, you'll see quickly that they used a DNC LOGO face page to separate what are essentially separate reports from consultants or academics. The thing was just xeroxed because several of the sections start with letter head from some consulting form. IT WAS NOT A UNIFIED REPORT. IT DID NOT ADDRESS PLACES OTHER THAN OHIO. Ready to pull your hair out, IT SPENT 100 OF 200 PAGES TRYING TO PROVE THROUGH BIZARRE STATISTICS THAT KERRY ACTUALLY LOST OHIO. A DUer did a detailed response here.


Starting there, it's a pretty big mountain to climb. However, there are many locals who are aware of this and see screwing they take up close and personal.

Dean has bad advise but that excuse won't sell much longer. He recently said optiscans are better than touch screens. Well, a serious brain injury is better than dying (maybe) but they're both bad. Opticians have programmable memory but the benefit of paper ballots. So what, they're machines sold to us by Republican vendors and we CAN'T EXAMINE THE MACHINES. So that's lame.

I've got a position paper I did on voting rights issues related to electronic voting. It's going up soon and people can just take it use it anyway they want. It should address things for the local Democrats but on a larger scale, DNC is weak and uninformed, I'm sorry to say. They get so much feedback, the telemarketers who call me had a response script for this very issue. Switched my giving to the local candidates directly.

Your post will be seen. Keep up the great work.

ONE MORE THING. Here's something you and any Democrat who wants can do. Print this article out and take a look. If you agree, then xerox ot and mail it to your local/state Democrats. Also send the link or print version around as much as you like. I wrote it based on the outstanding work of Paul Lehto, election rights attorney and aka "Land Shark" here. It rocks and every point is substantiated and true. It's a shocker. We have an open copyright on it...free, use it as you like. DNC would benefit from another copy as well;)

Secret Vote Counting Crammed Down the Throat of Democracy

PRINT VERSION HERE

[marions ghost]

64. I know u and I disagree on this point autorank

I live in a county that has used opti-scans for 25 years. They CAN be made reliable. It is very difficult to convince local election boards to give them up in favor of hand-counting ONLY (though I would be fine with that). The reality is that if you use random hand counts WITH opti-scan at each precinct during voting, you can effectively reduce the chance of tampering with software on the opti-scans. I still believe that currently the opti-scan technology is basically reliable, 5X cheaper than touchscreen, and of course is auditable. You can recount the cards as many times and ways as you like. Going from touch-screens to paper ballots entirely hand-counted, while it is the best way, especially for smaller precincts...still won't fly with election boards that are heavily invested in opti-scan, which in and of itself, is a useful tool for large busy precincts especially.

No need to reply. I just wanted to answer to your "no more statements about opti-scans are better than touchscreens." In the short run, they certainly are better than touchscreens--IF (and only if) combined with hand counts. You also must have "precinct-counting," rather than direct networking to a central tabulator. Even if every precinct were hand-counted, you still have the problem of central tabulators. That is an even greater vulnerability IMO.

Go ahead and correct me if you think I am erroneous, but I say that opti-scans are widely used in many states and could be used to bring in hand-counting procedures in a way that would be palatable to election officials. They are not going to throw the opti-scans out (many states have invested in new opti-scans, parts of Florida and Ohio just recently). Obviously we need to reject the touchscreens as overly complex, unreliable, vulnerable and expensive boondoggle (and "paper trail" is no big help).

[mod mom]

18. Actually they are "fixed" thats the problem. Better work out a plan for

managing Hand Counted Paper Ballots (ie safe guards and procedures with public oversight and counting at the precinct level)

[yellerpup]

20. I write, I call, I volunteer

I'll count the paper ballots. What else should I do? K&R

[stellanoir]

21. I like your approach

Stinky you should post this every day :)

K & R gladly

[leftchick]

22. woo hoo!

:woohoo:

:applause:

:woohoo:

[JimDandy]

23. Get RID of the machines -- there is NO fixing them. You can't

make a voting machine transparently count our votes. Not possible.

You are so right -- all the campaigning and fundraising for a candidate is absolutely useless if machines are in the picture.

[madokie]

24. that deserves a nomination if there ever is one.

fix the voting first.

[Raster]

25. The fix is so obvious, an idiot or idiots should be able to see it.

That leaves one explanation for the CONTINUING electoral debacle: members of our esteemed democratic leadership are eyes-deep in the same shit as the rethuglicans. Instead of opposition party, we have a collaborating party. Same corporate masters, same feeding trough. Parasites tend to stand with each other...

[Stinky The Clown]

27. I'm not sure I agree with that .....

I think it is more a matter of not understanding the full depth of it ..... *****or***** ..... not wishing to be seen as a tinfoiler.

I know that sounds incredible, but its what I think. I suspect staffers are better informed than the blow dried set.

Now ..... as a counter balance to that, right here in Maryland we are 100% paperless Diebold. And the **Repub** givernor wanted to change/upgrade them and the Dem legislature blocked the measure. And the machines got here in the first place because of Dem legislators/officials. That gives weight to your argument.

All I know for sure is, we need to damn fast get **something** done.

[Raster]

29. The national electoral infrastructure should have been on

double-secrete probation after 2000. But no, we have 2002 and then 2004. And whom, collecting a dem paycheck, do you see screaming about the issues? A few like Conyers that both sides seem to work to marginalize. "...not understanding the full depth of it..."? Once again, only idiotus maximus would fail to grasp the full depth and implication(s) of a massively rotten electoral system. Either that or a willing participant.

[Mandate My Ass]

30. Sadly, I agree

The hand-wringing by the Dems and the excuses that they can't do anything as the minority party is getting old. Well they must like being the minority party because they're not doing the one thing that is absolutely necessary to ensure that they become the majority party. Raise holy hell to throw the effing machines out and insist on a transparent voting system.

With Bush's numbers in the toilet and people losing faith in the GOP in droves, people would listen.

K&R

[Stinky The Clown]

32. The final words of your final sentence are

right smack on the money.

This is a PERFECT bipartisan cause ... not so much in congress but certainly on main street.

[Mandate My Ass]

35. I had a little fun at my polling place last night

The dreaded new touchscreen machines were making their debut and I started asking the poll workers if they knew how the votes would be counted etc. They kept trying to reassure me that there would be paper and electronic tallies that had to match. I asked them how they would know that the two matching numbers would accurately reflect what went into the machines. Without a cumulative paper count, anything could be happening inside that machine that nobody knows about. Or what if the number of votes didn't match the number of voters? What plan was in place for that scenario? They kind of stopped short and looked at each other with surprised looks on their faces. Other people in line were nodding.

I took my act outside afterward and even the Republican guy had to agree that factual and transparent vote counts are something that benefits everybody, D & R. He asked me if I'd come to the next borough meeting and bring up this issue and explain it to the council exactly as I had to them and I agreed.

We shook hands and parted as friends. :-)

[EFerrari]

39. Yes! Baby! This is how you fix it!

Forget about the leadership -- YOU are the leadership and we fix it in our own counties where we can make a difference.


:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[Stinky The Clown]

40. You get a big gold sticker for THAT one!

[Mandate My Ass]

42. thanks

it was long overdue, actually. I hope PA joins other states and sues these companies. There were massive problems in Philly and Pittsburgh yesterday and I intend to use that as additional ammo at the next borough council meeting.

The leadership is strangely silent in spite of all this evidence that, at best, these machines are badly designed pieces of shit. You don't sound all tinfoily if you have this kind of proof that an easier, more transparent system is needed.

[Stinky The Clown]

43. I've always felt that .......

You can drag out all sorts of arcane data and statistics, but framing it very very simply is best.

Machines fuck up.

Hand marked, hand counted paper ballots do not.

Fair and honest is in **everyone's** best interest ...... except if you want to cheat.

it is really a VERY simple argument. The only counterargument to it is the time it takes to count and report.

Bring them coloring books and crayons. That will answer the question of what to do while waiting for a final count.

[marions ghost]

67. yes it's a simple argument

and one that's needs to be hammered. But the reality is that it may take awhile. Touchscreens do fuck up (and that may yet be their downfall) but optiscans have proven reliability for over 30 years. Many states have ordered new optiscans recently (made by Diebold et al). So yes, we must assume they are vulnerable. But they can be checked by bringing in random hand count procedures. The opti-scan ballots are hand-marked and can be hand-counted easily.

You've got to realize that these localities who have spent millions under HAVA or whenever are not going to suddenly ditch the opti-scans. But we could use them to get access to source code and begin to institute new oversight procedures. The reality is that while some states may successfully reject touchscreen, on grounds of unreliability, the opti-scans have no such bad history and are seen as a good alternative (the 'smart' alternative).

You have to allow time for the states to save face. They are going to reject calls to do away with all machines. We do need to get public control of central tabulators. We need to hammer the transparency and oversight issues JUST as much as actual machine issues. This is going to take time. Our system is very byzantine, very state and locality controlled. There is not much effective federal oversight of the actual voting systems--the Election Assistance Commission, recently created by HAVA is supposed to "Carry out duties related to the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting system hardware and software." But so far they have been hamstrung by the Bushies and absurdly underfunded. They seem to be just a letterhead.

[marions ghost]

68. yes! good questions

:applause: this is really how it has to happen--speaking up at local level. People are receptive now--even Repuglicans. It hurts everybody to have a system that the voters don't have any faith in.

[faithnotgreed]

46. DOUBLE SECRET AGREED

they are all filthy save a few - as you say conyers is the man (apparently the only one....)

[CrispyQ]

36. Spot on!!!

"Same corporate masters, same feeding trough."

As the majority party dems would gain rank at the trough, but even in the minority they are hoggin' it up better than if they weren't at the trough at all. Such a tragic state our country is in.

To the OP, excellent letter! I'm inclined to compose a similar rant & send to all dem congress persons -- then wait for the incredible response. :sarcasm:

[Robeson]

76. Agreed Raster...

...and spot on.

[Auntie Bush]

33. You are the bad assiest Dem we know...so everyone better listen

and get to work. Seriously, what can we do? Anyone got some suggestions?

[Bandit]

38. What exactly do you mean by "fix" the machines

I want them eliminated not "fixed". When you use a machine like that there is never any guarentee they will function properly. Pencil and paper are pretty damn hard to screw up.

[Stinky The Clown]

41. Actually, that's what I meant

My foaming mouth got in the way of my typing hands. The spittle made me type that.

Actually, I meant 'fix the machines' in the larger sense.

[rumpel]

44. Neuter?

Main Entry: sterilize
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: make clean
Synonyms: alter, antisepticize, aseptify, aseptize, autoclave, castrate, change, clean, decontaminate, desexualize, disinfect, emasculate, fix, fumigate, incapacitate, make sterile, neuter, pasteurize, purify, sanitize, spay
Antonyms: contaminate
Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.2.1)
Copyright © 2006 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=neuter

:applause:

K&R

[Stinky The Clown]

45. I'll take 'castrate' for $400

Yeah, that's the kinda 'fix' I had in mind.

My cerebral Roget's failed me.

[rumpel]

55. LOL n/t

[lonestarnot]

47. Yeah you bastards!

[mikelewis]

48. Kicked and nominated - I'd try to add something but this pretty...

much sums it up.

[Hissyspit]

49. How many Democrats voted for HAVA? n/t

[marions ghost]

65. Lots

not sure of the exact number, but most were sucked in.

Since then, Conyers, Reid, Clinton, & Boxer have tried to do some damage control. Kerry gave some support to them.

[glitch]

50. Most excellent post. K & R nt

[Jack Rabbit]

52. The best way to accomlish the goal

*F*I*X* *T*H*E* *F*U*C*K*I*N*G* *V*O*T*I*N*G* *M*A*C*H*I*N*E*S*

The best thing to do is don't use them to count votes.

If the machines make voting easier. fine and well. Let the machine dispense a piece of paper, which the voter can inspect before casting it. That is the ballot which is counted. By hand.

That is about as high tech as democracy should get. Democracy is not a top-down mechanical concept.

[mnhtnbb]

53. YES!!! YES!!!!! YES!!!!!!

[Joe Chi Minh]

54. It's going to happen, so the longer they keep silent about it, the

worse it's going to look on their respective CVs.

[autorank]

57. KCDMIII, did Husb2Sparkly nail it or what?

This OP is a true work of art, particularly the closing remarks.

Now thats a Navy man for you!

Cheers

[Joe Chi Minh]

72. Sure is, Auto! Avast the mainsail and splice the mainbrace!

[Land Shark]

56. latecomer, but wondering if there's a clearinghouse on the info for PA

[Dr Fate]

58. But-but- I'm frightened Hannity will accuse me of watching X-Files!

Cant we just pretend everything is okay?

[Joe Chi Minh]

73. Ha! Ha! That's funny. Watching his program must be like

watching the X-Files. Or more like Third Rock from The Sun.

[Up2Late]

59. LOL Thanks for that! I've been yelling that for 4 years now.

Hey, does Stinky the Clown have a website?

[Up2Late]

60. Add this one to your list of "unusual voting results"

I posted this yesterday: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2629913&mesg_id=2630277>

[Canuckistanian]

61. This is the crux of the biscuit

No fucking voting machine fixing (as my learned friend elucidates),... no nothing else. Nada. Zilch. Zip.

It's what I came on board to say for my very first post.

[threadkillaz]

62. I say

NIX the machines, not FIX.

[JNelson6563]

63. Well first of all

If you had sent me your message I likely wouldn't be replying to you, regardless of whether I took action or not, such dialogue doesn't deserve a civil response. No, really, if yoiu decide to write to anyone important, I would strongly suggest you use grown up language.

Secondly, I can't help but wonder what is being done on the ground by Dems in these and other trouble areas? I sure hope interested Dems from those regions do more than write belligerent letters and post on DU.

Lastly, it is truly absurd to abandon all other efforts. While party building and effective campaigning won't do us much good with rigged machines, fixed machines won't do us much good either if we aren't also working hard to win votes to our side.

I agree, the voting machines are a big issue. We would be truly stupid to make it our one and only focus.


Julie

[Stinky The Clown]

69. Hi Julie

Let me start by saying that I don't disagree with you or your essential premises.

Rants are as capable of being articulate as a well written letter. The difference is audience and intent. This rant was intended to inflame and exhort. I suspect it did that. It even got your attention and caused you to make a cogent and on-point comment. By that measure it was success. It stood out from the crowd and the point was made: We have a problem with our voting system and it needs to be fixed right now.

This was never intended as a letter to a specific official. For that, it would require my real name, address, voting district, etc., to say nothing of my specific request presented in an understandable - grown-up, if you will - style; exactly like the ones I've written many times in the past. But it did have, as a secondary audience, the very people to whom such a more polite letter would be directed. I am reasonably sure this site, among others, is at least casually monitored by the staff of our elected representatives. A verbal hand grenade such as this is likely to be noticed. And if it is, then by that measure as well, it was a success.

The call to abandon all other efforts was, on its face, if not by its intent, absurd. But in that absurdity was the hope to make the essential point. I think it succeeded on that count as well. Were anyone reading the rant, to include anyone who, by dint of being a Democrat, receives a weekly paycheck, capable of only one thing at a time, I suspect they'd need to be fired.

Thanks for your comment. And that's sincere - not a snark.

Stinky

[JNelson6563]

70. It's all good

I understand you didn't mean any snark and neither did I. You'd be surprised how many read such stuff on DU and think it's perfectly ok to include n real correspondence.

Cheers,
Julie

[Stinky The Clown]

71. Sadly, that is not the sole province of those from

'the site that shall remain nameless'.

:::::sigh:::::

Nuttiness knows no boundary.

[rucky]

66. Is there any room left in their asses...

for normal ass-related functions?

Your verbal sledgehammer is much needed. If only the people who need to hear it were paying attention.

[leftchick]

74. kick

:kick:

[oasis]

75. Paper ballots.nt