Sure, it's a problem. Diebold machines that can be hacked so easily are a problem. So is the absence of paper trails. So is purging legitimate voters at the polls. So is demanding photo ID's from those who have no access to them. Much is wrong, but if the basis system is corrupt, what's the difference in the long run?
We've griped, legitimately, about stolen elections all during these disastrous Bushco years, but there's a far deeper flaw in the entire process that is invisible and systemic: the role of the power brokers who actually make the decisions about which candidates we may choose from, and as to which ones have any real chance of being nominated and ultimately elected.
It's something few people even whisper about too loudly, but it's something we really ought to think about.
I’ve done a bit of writing over the past couple of years about election integrity issues, election fraud, voter suppression and the "gaming the system from the inside" that has been the republican party’s modus operandi since 2000 when it comes to stealing elections in various forms.
And right on cue - even since the anti-voter voter ID laws that were recently passed in Indiana (and almost passed in Missouri), we are seeing, as my good buddy dday is referring to as the "new battleground" - that big bad boogyman of "voter fraud".
I diaried and commented in several places yesterday about a group called the International Republican Institute (IRI) and McCain's involvement as chairman of their board. A days worth of research has provided me with further compelling clarity that contrary to his public image as an outsider, McCain has for years been the ultimate Washington insider, directly linked through his involvement in the IRI with possible election fraud and several possible coups including the most recent installation of President Shaakasvili in Georgia. If you were wondering where his claim of foreign policy experience comes from besides his stint as a prisoner of war, look no further. Unfortunately for him (and for us), he can't claim this experience without igniting a huge controversy. The man's hands are dirty and this latest situation with Georgia raises many questions.
In June 2007, the New Zealand online publication Scoop published an article by Michael Collins called "Election 2004: The Urban Legend." (The article is now a chapter in Mark Crispin Miller's edited volume Loser Take All.) The actual argument of this article is open to interpretation. Here is what Ernest Partridge of "The Crisis Papers" thinks it means:
In a stunning essay, read by very few, Michael Collins explains how they did it. The DRE machines switched and stuffed millions of GOP votes in the big cities, where they would be least likely to be noticed. Collins’ evidence is compelling.
Actually, Collins never mentioned DREs. In brief, the article notes that one table from the 2004 exit poll tabulation reports too many big city voters -- and, therefore, too many big-city votes for Bush. So what? The closer one reads, the harder it is to tell. But Mark Crispin Miller seems to think it's important, so if you're curious, read on with me....
The article introduced me to a big player in 2000 and 2004, and unlike Karl Rove he is the guy that makes the republican votes happen. His name is Mike Connell and you can thank him for two terms of pREsident Bush.
From the article:
"Mike Connell is the RNC's IT guru connected to many websites of Ohio, Florida and the Federal governments. He is now believed to have been under the direction of Karl Rove during the contested elections of 2000 and 2004. In the current cycle, Karl Rove joined John McCain's campaign in March 2008 while Connell reportedly began laying his groundwork for it after August 2006. If allegations are true, what happened in 2000 and 2004 is merely the warm up act to what’s in store for 2008."
"Mike Connell built the non-partisan State of Ohio Election Night Results reporting system which, in real time, tracked the final Ohio vote tallies for its citizens. Yet that very same Mike Connell, in what could appear to be a conflict of interest, also created and ran the 2004 George Bush and Ken Blackwell websites as well as the Ohio state GOP site."
Here is another in my occasional series of critiques of bad election fraud arguments. I realize that some people consider it counterproductive to criticize bad election fraud arguments for fear of trivializing real problems. I wish that these people were equally concerned that making bad election fraud arguments will trivialize real problems.
Today I consider the "Connally anomaly": the fact that in 2004, C. Ellen Connally, Democratic candidate for chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court, received more votes than John Kerry in 12 of Ohio's 88 counties -- although Kerry received hundreds of thousands more votes than Connally statewide. The Conyers report, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Rolling Stone article on the 2004 election, and Richard Hayes Phillips' book Witness to a Crime all cite this result as suggesting fraud. Recently, Stephen Spoonamore has speculated that Republican IT expert Mike Connell is somehow implicated in the Connally anomaly. The problem is that the Connally anomaly isn't actually anomalous.
Why is it important to rehash what Mike Connell did in 2000 Florida and 2004 Ohio? Because those very same key elements for potential election theft are firmly in place within the McCain campaign for 2008.
The Washington Post reported yesterday that GOP operatives in Virginia are raising the spectre of "a very serious and troubling trend" of registration fraud.
In Virginia, as in other states, loads of first-time voters are registering to cast ballots in the fall elections. Through the first six months of this year, 147,000 people, almost half under the age of 25, registered in the commonwealth, a figure that election officials say is unprecedented. As registration drives accelerate, including those run by the Barack Obama campaign and its allies, it's no wonder that Republicans are increasingly anxious about retaining their hold on a state that GOP presidential candidates have carried since 1968. What is surprising is their utterly baseless charge of "coordinated and widespread voter fraud . . . throughout Virginia."
Some major developments this week involving corruption and domestic terrorism. Shootings, anthrax, and indictments. I have been talking for quite some time about Republican corruption and Ted Stevens of Alaska is somoene I declared as the most corrupt politician in America. Well, this week he was indicted. I have also been writing for some time about right wing fanatics in government and on talk shows inciting intolerance and violence. Well, we had another example of right wing terrorism in Knoxville, TN, quite possibly inspired by right wing talk shows.
Meanwhile, speculation about who Obama and McCain will pick for the VP spot is is the current rage. Everyone has tips, inside info and rumors to share. Well, I have no idea who either will choose, but one possibility for McCain was mentioned to me that would be interesting: Eric Cantor, Congressman from Virginia who makes Joe Lieberman look liberal. I discuss him this week. I also review my past coverage of Republican election fraud in Florida and Georgia. I am sure we will see the same kind of fraud in both states again this year. Plus I have been trying to flesh out my state-by-state coverage.
I like good arguments, and I hate bad arguments. When people offer bad arguments on election integrity issues, it makes me want to scream. Do bad arguments actually undermine the cause of election integrity? Honestly, I don't know. I think so, but unfortunately, we don't get to rerun the last four years without the bad arguments to see if things go any better.
As time permits, I hope to post relatively terse rebuttals to some bad election fraud arguments. Inevitably some folks will interpret (or portray) these diaries as attempts to dismiss election integrity issues. Anyone who has been here long enough has read some variant of: "If you don't believe the exit polls, then you don't care about democracy." It's sort of like, "If you question the war, then you don't support our troops," or "Evolutionists are out to destroy morality." I think we can do better. More on that -- and my bullet points on exit polls -- beyond the jump.
Raw Story has posted a pdf of a very curious memo.
This memo, leaked from someone who worked in Georgia's (then) Sec. of State Cathy Cox's office (more on her below), seems to show that red flags went up in Georgia after it was discovered that the (then) president of Diebold applied patches in only two predominantly-Democratic counties.
This pdf seems to indicate that in Dec. 2002, Cox sent Diebold a fax (see pdf link above) asking Diebold President Bob Urosevich if his patch (which, again, was applied in only two Democratic-dominated counties) necessitated those voting machines to be re-certified.
Apparently, per the date of the pdf, Cox didn't know the patch was applied before the election.
On the day before leaving for Netroots Nation, I voted for Jim Martin for U.S. Senate in the July 15 General Primary Election here in Georgia.
At the polling place I was the only voter but there were a dozen or so poll workers. After voting (on one of those damned Diebold machines) I asked if I'd get a receipt. In lieu of one I was given a cute little sticker with a graphic of a Georgia Peach with 'I’m a Georgia Voter' printed on it. I laughed and said that makes me feel better...there were some chuckles.
I said I wanted a receipt for my vote. This is what they gave me.
There is a diary on the rec list right now talking about voter purges going on in several states around the country. Without talking about the legality of what is and isn't going on, there are some things we know.
We know that Republicans have messed with elections in the past (see 2000 and 2004) and are likely to do so again. We also know that this is OUR year. We have the better candidate, the better party, the better ideas and we are even on fund raising. We have greater party identification and enthusiasm. We have an electorate tired of the Republican corruption of the last 8 years.
We also know that the media is interested in keeping the election a horse race. The MSM could make the election appear close enough for a Republican theft to go undetected. With that in mind, starting with Colorado, I am going to do a series of diaries on the voter registration rules for at risk states so that we have the information me need to ensure that all Democratic votes are counted. Follow after the jump for information on Colorado.
Edit: Thanks everyone who recommended this diary. It's very important we remain diligent about our voting process. The only way to deter fraud is to let it be known that we are constantly watching and to be vocal when we find something fishy.
I understand this isn't a "Diary" per say, but it is incredibly important we get this out in front of as many people as possible and I am willing to sacrafice my daily diary to do that.
Basically the one and only Greg Palast has teamed up with Robert F. Kennedy to investigate several cases on voter purges taking place right now all over the United States but most notably in the West/Southwest area. He's asking all of us to donate whatever we can to get his documentary about this produced and on the air. You can read the details below I will be quoting extensively from Palast's article since he wants the word to be spread on this.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein rose to prominence in the journalistic community during the early 1970's. Originally investigating a common burglary at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, they ultimately uncovered a political scandal that brought down a President.
Today, we have our own Woodward and Bernstein and their names are; Larisa Alexandrovna and Muriel Kane.
Yes, there is a difference between these two journalistic teams; Woodward and Bernstein's work was published and became front page material.
Follow me after the flip for a look at the work of an investigative team that uncovers a scandal larger than Watergate...
I was going to go a whole different way with this diary, but, given some of the responses to my first diary on this subject (which was really more of a rant on those who couldn't wait to yell "extraordinary claim" or "conspiracy theory"), I decided to go back and revisit the election fraud issue itself.
First, for the FAQ on "extraordinary claims":
Diaries on certain topics are likely to generate angry responses. Most of these topics fall under the general heading of "conspiracy theories", e.g., "JFK was killed by Martians". The rule for posting such diaries is "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". The more extreme the claim, the higher the burden of proof that commenters will demand. If you can't provide evidence to back up your claim, it is best not to post the diary. This guideline also applies to recommending extraordinary-claims diaries. If a diary makes an extreme claim with little or no evidence to back up that claim, it shouldn't be recommended, no matter what that claim is.
