Regarding accusations of fraud in MA Senate race...

[WilliamPitt]

Hold off on any definitive-sounding proclamations of vote fraud in the MA race. I know it's a convenient, and occasionally accurate, refuge to which we flee when matters turn against us.

But when I walked out of Coakley headquarters last night, Coakley was down by more than 100,000 votes.

Let me say it straight: if anyone is rigging elections in the state of Massachusetts, it ain't the GOP. SecState Galvin and his praetorian guard are not the kind of folks to let Republicans fuck around with ballots - electronic or otherwise - in a state so controlled at the local level by Democrats. The Dem machine here is fierce; they are the only ones with the wherewithal to nab elections in this state, which I guess is a testament to their honesty, cuz they sure-as-fuck didn't do it last night.

I heard about the pre-marked ballots for Brown. That kind of crap happens all the time, and maybe amounted to 0.000001% of the overall outcome.

We lost. Until I see substantive proof otherwise, that's what I'm going to think.

Hugs, all.

:hug:

[Bitwit1234]

1. I think the only fraud in MA was the democrats sitting on their butt at home

[whattheidonot]

22. reason too

The Democrats had reason too. many voted for a change by the Democrats. What they saw was Democrats doing the same things that were done before by the previous bunch. Dealing with lobbyist, pushing war that few understand, favoring big banks? . Too little too late. Evan Bayh is out to lunch. let Republicans be Republicans and Democrats be Democrats. Dem-Reps are what got us in this mess. This moderate stuff is not working right now. Big business is playing both sides. No one wants to criticize their sugar daddy. True moderation comes from a battle of left and right, not by being stuck there.

[Junkdrawer]

2. OK here's what bothers me:

1.) No exit polls.

2.) The whole day seemed scripted. The weekend meme of "A high turnout favors Coakley" was flipped (in the face of a high turnout) to "A high turnout favors Brown" in unison with nary a word of explanation. And, again without exit polls, the pundits were predicting a Brown victory all day long.

3.) Now we have word that there are 71 hand counted locations in Mass and that THOSE went to Coakley.

[cali]

5. many were saying that high turnout was not neccesssarily a sign

that Coakley would win.

[happy_liberal]

24. I agree completely

and why do we have to prove it was fraud when there is no evidence it was a fair election? This was really important to their propaganda as to how they will 'win' the Senate and House 2010 and how we will see a Palin/Cheney 'victory' 2012.

To think that we do not have traitors in the Dem party that would help with their propaganda and stolen elections...is just silly. And they don't even need anyone to help, one man and one computer can do it all.

[sandnsea]

3. Local Question

There was a diary at Kos yesterday that said that state Dems were avoiding her. The Boson Mayor (name escapes me) didn't do a lot for her, the GOTV effort was weak, etc. Truth to that?

I imagine you're fairly devastated. God do we need another Teddy and do we need him fast. :hug:

[FBaggins]

4. You're right... but it's a natural response.

It's simply easier to think "we didn't lose... the other side cheated". That's the case in politics as well as sports.

I heard about the pre-marked ballots for Brown. That kind of crap happens all the time, and maybe amounted to 0.000001% of the overall outcome.

Yes... not only does it "happen all the time" - but it's far more likely to be caused by the person reporting it. It's so easy to fill in a little circle and then yell "Hey! Someone cheated!"... far easier than pre-filling a bunch of circles and expecting to get away with it. Someone just wanted their 15 minutes of fame.

[elocs]

6. Here's a Rec for not crying voter fraud, not that the election was close.

Yes, sometimes more voters prefer the Republican to the Democrat. That's life.

[robinlynne]

12. Why is it a good thing to continue to let Diebold and ES&S count our votes, and

BElIEVE in the results even when computer scientists tell us fraud CANNOt be detected with these systems? Why trust the company who swore it would make Bush the winner in 2004?
Why pretend these corporations are counting our votes correctly? Democratic politicians can not see inside a computer tallying no matter how strong they are. No one can. Counting the paper ballots would in fact give you a correct election result. And yet you choose to ignore all of these facts? why? because it's easier?

[elocs]

16. Why? Because it makes us look like whiny-crybabies who cry "fraud" every time we lose.

That's why. We lose credibility that way and this election should not have even been close enough to be stolen in any way if the candidate had any passion and fire to campaign for the seat like it was an election and not a coronation.

[newtothegame]

7. Agreed. I think too often, we go to "IT WAS STOLEN" instead of actually...

trying to figure out what went wrong with the campaign and what the neocons did right, and how we can fix things for the next time. Even in 2000/2004, which likely were stolen, we probably could have learned alot more by examining the campaign instead of immediately talking of "dirty tricks."

That's the Michael Moore way, assuming that everyone must agree with you, and that if the #'s show otherwise, the numbers must be being fixed.

[robinlynne]

8. William. not voter fraud. election fraud. "Voter fraud" is what the Republicans

invented as an excuse to justify their purging in 2000, their demands for voter IDs (another way to purge, the poorest, in this case). Do you know who ES&S and Diebold are? Do you know who owns them? (far right wing christian fundamentalists). Computer scientists stand up and say "we should not use these machines to count votes, period. Clint Curtis testified before congress in 2004 that he was hired to switch the vote totals in Florida in 2000, and that is is simple to do and undetectable afterwards. Still you would let these companies count our votes, and not think fraud is going to happen? There is no way to even verify, UNLESS YOU HAND COUNT THE BALLOTS. It is that simple. So we can sit back and analyze over and over why the right wins. And the Democratic party, menawhile, refuses to investigate, acknowledge, or change the aboslutely corrupt voting systems the Republicans masterfully put in place all over our country with the HAVA bill.

[WilliamPitt]

10. Thanks, fixed.

[Blue Owl]

25. Also "flipping" the votes

in a close election can be easily done via one person with the right software/connections, and could only be detected by a hand count of scanned ballots (no funny business at the actual voting sites).

The drastic polling shifts just days before the election, the M$M spin, the early concession speech, the trend of lame-ass Democrats caving to the GOP -- IMO something seems a little askew.

Why wouldn't they HAND COUNT THE BALLOTS so we can be sure?

[BeFree]

26. Good question, Blue Owl

Maybe you'll get an answer?

[BeFree]

9. Heh

You haven't even given the people who are pouring over the numbers to make a report.

Knowing that the means, the motive, and the opportunity exists, and knowing the nature of the opposition, making such proclamations at this time is kinda stupid, eh?

What is the opposite of a tin foil hat?
Maybe it is a dunce cap?

[WilliamPitt]

11. Um...

"Until I see substantive proof otherwise, that's what I'm going to think."

I'll wait for the report.

[BeFree]

14. That's smart

But why wait? Why not examine the oddities yourself?
Why not examine the history of the machines vs hand counts?

Why not call for an audit?

This idea that "I think the election was fair and square" is stupid.

[WilliamPitt]

18. I love you to bits and pieces, lady

But I know my own state. I'm pretty confident with the assessment.

[BeFree]

19. Lady?

You don't have a clue!!

Hehe, sure, you can make up all kinds of stuff about the politics, but I am making up nothing about the voting machines.

All I am saying is give it a chance. Give the people working on the numbers a chance to show us how the numbers were produced before accepting what the computers claim.

[WilliamPitt]

21. Wow, sorry

I flaked. Thought you were an old friend who also has "Free" in their name. Still fried from yesterday. My apologies.

[BeFree]

23. So what? You're cool.

Sticks and stones
and computer counted votes
can break my bones.

But words? Pfttt.

It does hurt, tho, to see people jump to conclusions about the count.

[cali]

13. You know who's firmly in charge of the voting processes in MA?

dems.

[BeFree]

15. Thats ignorant

The machines are in charge. The code is a secret!!

Except in the hand count areas, where, the reports say, Coakley won.

Look, I know you haven't delved into the whole voting machine problem.
So I can forgive the ignorance. But to use that ignorance to try and describe what happened is stupid.

[whattheidonot]

17. snoozing.

The Democrats are asleep at the wheel. They screwed around with health care to seek a middle ground to the point few liked it. They went easy on the bankers too long. They did little about the problem of small banks. they messed around on unemployment. Unemployment is worse than 10%. Unemployed have next to nothing and many working have little. The Democrats are supposed to respond to problems like this. They did not or could not. The Republicans benefit but it is doubtful that right wing policies will do much good.

[texastoast]

20. How long do you think it should take to clean up an eight-year shitpile?

That we have to thank Bush and Raygun for?

It's not perfect yet, but a pile of crap has come out of the barn with more on its way.

[Blue Owl]

27. I'd like to think no election fraud was involved

But according to what I've read here, every district that hand-counted the ballots went to Coakley, and every district that let Diebold/ESS machines count the ballots went to Brown.

Let me repeat that -- every district that hand-counted the ballots went to Coakley, and every district that let Diebold/ESS machines count the ballots went to Brown.

One more time -- every district that hand-counted the ballots went to Coakley, and every district that let Diebold/ESS machines count the ballots went to Brown.

Combined with the fact that the M$M won't touch this story or any news story about election fraud, just makes it all the more suspicious.