Let the Election Fraud Begin! - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ratbastid · 11-02-2006, 06:31 PM

Ars Technica: "Primary and early e-voting problems point to gathering storm."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061101-8131.html

--

http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/for...954/44823.html

Easy instructions on how to vote as many times as you like on Sequoia Voting Systems machines. Sequoia is the third largest voting machine vendor in the world--and you can earn free bonus votes by pressing a yellow button on the back of the machine!

magictoy · 11-02-2006, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elphaba

Thank you, rb. So far, the "irregularities" are getting little national coverage that I have seen.

That Karl Rove is EVERYWHERE, isn't he?

Elphaba · 11-02-2006, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magictoy

That Karl Rove is EVERYWHERE, isn't he?

Very likely, so far as the National strategies for keeping Republicans' in power. Certainly, you don't doubt that?

You point is what, exactly?

More information coming In:

Hosted by TO

Quote:

Rights Groups: Jumble of State Laws Could Disenfranchise Voters
By Catherine Komp
The NewStandard

Thursday 02 November 2006

A maze of state voting policies has public-interest advocates concerned that mass confusion will erupt next week at the polls, potentially resulting in actual and "de facto" disenfranchisement of voters.

New statewide databases, voter purges, a patchwork of policies governing "provisional ballots," and rapidly changing identification requirements could cause problems in many states with close races, voter-rights groups say.

Groups including the public-interest organization DEMOS and New York University's Brennan Center for Justice say implementation of provisional ballots – designed for individuals who are not found on a list of registered voters – has been flawed. Provisional ballots are meant to ensure all those who are eligible can vote, even if a voter list is erroneous or if an elections official challenges a voter's eligibility.

Provisional ballots were mandated under the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The law states that elections officials "shall notify" an individual of their right to cast a provisional ballot. State or local election officials are then charged with "prompt verification" of the voter's eligibility. Voters are entitled to find out whether their ballot was counted, with states providing online or telephone verification systems.

Scott Novakowski, policy analyst with DEMOS, said vague language in HAVA has given states wide latitude in determining how provisional ballots will be counted. Novakowski told The NewStandard that many voters may falsely believe that just by casting a provisional ballot, their vote will be counted.

A study commissioned by the federal government found that some 675,000 provisional ballots cast during the 2004 general elections were not counted. The most common reasons for a rejected ballot included: individuals were not registered, were in the wrong precincts, had improper IDs, or turned in an incomplete ballot form.

The 2004 Election Day Survey, conducted by the consulting firm Election Data Services for the federal Election Assistance Commission, noted that HAVA's "ambiguity" has led to different interpretations of where a voter can cast a valid provisional ballot. In 2004, researchers counted that in 25 states, provisional ballots were disqualified if not cast in the voter's "home precinct."

As more states adopt "consolidated" polling places, in which multiple precincts are located in the same building, groups say there are increased chances that voters may cast a ballot in the wrong place, and have their vote invalidated.

In South Dakota, one of the states that rejects provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct, there are 658 polling places serving 818 precincts, according Chris Nelson, South Dakota's secretary of state. Nelson told TNS that if a voter insists they are voting in the right place and uses a provisional ballot to cast their vote, it will only be counted if auditors "can find the voter registration form that the voter claims he filled out to be registered in [that] precinct."

James Lee, spokesperson for the Ohio Secretary of State, confirmed that some Ohio counties will also have multiple precincts in one polling location, though he could not say how many. He said Ohio will reject provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct to prevent people from voting "for candidates and issues for which the voter is not entitled to vote."

According to the Election Assistance Commission's 2004 survey, 18 states, including California, Arizona, Colorado and Pennsylvania, will count provisional ballots even if cast outside of a voter's registered precinct.

Groups also point to problems with new statewide voter-registration databases, mandated by HAVA to be in place by January 1, 2006. Many are being implemented for the first time this year. The databases, a centerpiece of HAVA, were meant to create a more accurate, uniform voter list to replace the multitude of rolls maintained at the county level.

But in the rush to meet federal deadlines, many states implemented their new database technology haphazardly, according to Justin Levitt, counsel with the Brennan Center for Justice. The Center conducted a national survey last March on states' new database systems.

Levitt warned that voters' information may be removed or wrongly entered as states consolidate their voter rolls into new databases.

"Because these databases are new, often the policies that govern how they are used are informal – or worse, spur of the moment," Levitt told TNS, adding that most states have not codified database practices into law, making it difficult to ascertain what states are actually doing as they create these centralized voter lists.

The exception is Washington state, which implemented a formal "no match, no vote" law in January 2006. The system required the state to match voters' registration to their motor vehicle, state identification or social security records. If the automated database system found no match, the voter would be disqualified unless the applicant resolved the discrepancy.

On behalf of a coalition of community groups, the Brennan Center challenged the law in federal court last May as an "illegal precondition to registering the state's voters."

"This brand new bureaucratic obstacle to voter registration will illegally disenfranchise thousands of eligible Washingtonians," wrote the plaintiffs. "'Matching' personal information in different databases is an error-prone process that is notoriously unreliable in the elections context."

The suit states that typos and data-entry errors are common scenarios that, by no fault of the eligible voter, could result in a failed "match" in the system. Examples of errors include omitting an "e" at the end of "Locke" or misspelling "Reid" as "Reed." The suit also cites mistakes entering information into database fields, especially with compound last names or Asian names, in which the surname is listed before the given name.

A judge agreed with the plaintiffs in Washington and temporarily blocked implementation of the law in August. In response, several states with similar rules dropped or changed them, including California, where the LA Times reported that 43 percent of people who registered to vote in Los Angeles County during the first quarter of 2006 were deemed ineligible by the state's new database system.

But voting rights advocates are concerned that a few states may still be using a version of "no match, no vote." According to Ohio Secretary of State's spokesperson Lee, while there is no state-wide policy, individual county boards of elections will set rules to determine if a registration is eligible based on matches with information in other state databases.

Lee added, "Would that disqualify a voter as a matter of fact? Probably not. It simply is a way for county boards of elections to better manage their lists."

Officials from both South Dakota and North Carolina told TNS that though they use a matching system to verify a voter's registration, they also take measures to correct data-entry mistakes or contact voters if there is a discrepancy.

The Brennan Center also cautions that some eligible voters may be swept up in voter-roll "purges" or "cleaning," which is also required by federal law. The Center's Levitt said while cleaning lists is necessary to remove people who have moved or passed away, "if states are sloppy about it, there can be real problems with purging eligible voters."

In one recent case, Kentucky's Attorney General Greg Stumbo filed suit against Secretary of State Trey Grayson after the state purged more than 8,000 people from the centralized state voter database rolls last April. The judge in the case found that the systematic removal had more than a 10 percent error rate, eliminating hundreds of eligible voters.

"The other big problem," said Levitt, "is that most of this happens out of public light. There's very little publicity behind most voter purges and very little disclosure of the lists being used … Without someone double checking the work that's been done, triple checking [the work], it's possible that entirely benign mistakes can end up disenfranchising eligible voters."

Groups predict there will be fewer problems in states that have same-day registration, including Idaho, Maine, Minnesota and Wisconsin, as citizens can simply re-register if they have been omitted from the voter rolls. In North Dakota, voters do not have to register in advance of an election at all.

I suspect 2000 and 2004 won't compare to what we are about to see in 2006.

ratbastid · 11-02-2006, 08:59 PM

http://jamesbabb.blogspot.com/2006/1...elections.html

News release on the website of the Libertarian congressional candidate in PA-157. Even after reading it, I'm not clear on the details--it presumes facts not yet in record. But it appears that some Pennsylvanian election officials are resigning over illegal (or at least unfair) ballot requirements that are keeping third parties off the ticket.

xxSquirtxx · 11-03-2006, 08:26 AM

Fraud indeed.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110009189

Quote:

So, less than a week before the midterm elections, four workers from Acorn, the liberal activist group that has registered millions of voters, have been indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms to the Kansas City, Missouri, election board. But hey, who needs voter ID laws?

We wish this were an aberration, but allegations of fraud have tainted Acorn voter drives across the country. Acorn workers have been convicted in Wisconsin and Colorado, and investigations are still under way in Ohio, Tennessee and Pennsylvania.

The good news for anyone who cares about voter integrity is that the Justice Department finally seems poised to connect these dots instead of dismissing such revelations as the work of a few yahoos. After the federal indictments were handed up in Kansas City this week, the U.S. Attorney's office said in a statement that "This national investigation is very much ongoing."

Let's hope so. Acorn officials bill themselves as nonpartisan community organizers merely interested in giving a voice to minorities and the poor. In reality, Acorn is a union-backed, multimillion-dollar outfit that uses intimidation and other tactics to push for higher minimum wage mandates and to trash Wal-Mart and other non-union companies.

ratbastid · 11-03-2006, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxSquirtxx

Fraud indeed.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110009189

D'oh--I was headed here to post that very story, but you beat me by 20 whole minutes. Good work!

--

Woo hoo! The anti-smoking league is in on it now!

http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjourna...e/15922328.htm

The place: Belfontaine, OH. The time: now.

An anti-smoking group attempts to put a "no smoking in public places" issue on the state ballot by submitting a petition with fraudulent signatures. 10 petition workers are accused of fraud.

xxSquirtxx · 11-03-2006, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Woo hoo! The anti-smoking league is in on it now!

http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjourna...e/15922328.htm

The place: Belfontaine, OH. The time: now.

An anti-smoking group attempts to put a "no smoking in public places" issue on the state ballot by submitting a petition with fraudulent signatures. 10 petition workers are accused of fraud.

I hate the anti-smoking nazis.

ratbastid · 11-06-2006, 05:37 AM

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/5/191647/511

I know it's from DailyKOS, but the blog post cites sources that will hopefully be more credible to right-leaning readers.

Evidently Republicans in some states are making computer-dialed calls claiming to be their Democrat opponent. If the voter hangs up on the call, the computer calls them right back, making it look like the Democrat is auto-harrassing the voter. If they stay on the line, they get rhetoric bashing the Democrat.

Federal law requires commercial and political callers to honestly state who they are and what organization they're calling with, so these calls are illegal.

This isn't quite what I meant by election fraud (I had my eye more on vote suppression and tampering), but it's worth knowing about anyway.

EDIT: Here's a better source on that:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...the_campaigns/

Also this, at Metafilter:
http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/56076

Yakk · 11-06-2006, 11:54 AM

rat, the phone calls aren't just illegal.

They are 500$+ fine per offence (1500$ if it was done "knowingly").

200,000 phone calls * 500$ each = 100 million $.

host · 11-06-2006, 12:41 PM

Hundreds of links to news reports of www.nrcc.org "robo-calls" to fool voters into blaming democrats for repeated, harrassing calls:
http://news.google.com/news?ie=UTF-8...nG=Search+News

<img src="http://www.brazosriver.com/andymeyers1.jpg">
http://www.brazosriver.com/#nov5pow

Quote:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4304612.html
Nov. 2, 2006, 12:09AM
Signs link Dems to terror and illegal immigrants
GOP Fort Bend official says they are just repeating party's position

By LORI RODRIGUEZ and ERIC HANSON

Fort Bend County Democrats are irate about campaign signs linking Democrats to illegal immigrants and terrorists, but the Republican county commissioner who paid for them said they accurately reflect Democratic positions.....

Quote:

http://www.newsobserver.com/138/story/505370.html
Published: Nov 02, 2006 12:30 AM
Modified: Nov 02, 2006 03:19 AM

Pulling a fast one at the polls

Ruth Sheehan, Staff Writer
On Monday morning, when Chapel Hill lawyer Bob Epting approached the early voting center at Morehead Planetarium, he had every intention of casting his ballot and heading to the office.

But in a town famous for its Halloween revelry, a little trickery was apparently at work a day early.

By Epting's account: He walked to the side entrance and was approached by a female college student who asked whether he was a registered Democrat.

"Yes I am," he said.

She replied, "Good, here's a list of our judicial candidates."

Epting thanked her, folded the piece of paper without looking at it and put it in his pocket. As a lawyer who is fairly active in politics (his law partner is longtime Rep. Joe Hackney), he didn't need a list to tell him who to vote for, especially among the judges.

But after exiting the poll, he remembered the piece of paper and removed it from his pocket. Standing at the top of a dozen or so marble steps, he scanned the list in disbelief. It was a list of Republican candidates.

"I was so focused on the list, I wasn't watching where I was going and fell on my [behind]," he said.

Epting said he confronted the young woman and told her he found her practices deceitful.

But he didn't stop there. Back at his office, he shot off an e-mail message to friends and a few folks in the media (myself included).

I was out of the office on Monday, but Daniel Siler, news director for the Chapel Hill radio station Newstalk 1360 WCHL, headed straight to the planetarium.

"At that point," Siler said, "she was still misrepresenting herself."

Siler said the young woman did not ask his party affiliation but did offer him a "list of good candidates."

When he pressed her on her affiliation or the affiliation of the candidates, "it took six questions for her to admit that it was a list of Republicans," he said.

She finally walked away rather than identify herself by name.

Siler was kind enough to send me a recording of the exchange.

Now, the fact that this woman was a Republican rather than a Democrat really bears little relevance to the story. Had she been a Democrat, I would have the same disdain for her manipulative ways.

To me it is a reminder of the difference between the allure and the reality of our new "nonpartisan" judicial elections.

Established by the legislature four years ago, nonpartisan judicial elections sounded so good. So pure. Above the fray.

Except that most of us don't spend our days in the courthouse. We rely on endorsements.

Many voters, I'd wager, would be happy to have a handy list to vote from in the polling booth.

And in fact, both parties have spent plenty to have such lists printed. So much for the nonpartisan veneer.

On Wednesday morning, Siler and I went to the early voting station at Morehead Planetarium. But the only person working the polls was a white-haired woman representing the Orange County Democratic Party.

Unlike the coed, this woman didn't offer me any unsolicited -- not to mention incorrect -- voting advice.

On either side of the political aisle, such trickery has no place at the polls -- even at Halloween.

repubs: if you have similar reports from sources OTHER than your own outlets (LGF, NRO, mrc.org, newsbusters....etc....in other words....from the "real" press....please post them on these threads!

roachboy · 11-06-2006, 01:44 PM

amazing photo, host.
and it's monday still.

commentary section:

when the notion of the "fjnords" were developed in the context of the illuminatus trilogy, you might have thought that robert anton wilson was joking. but no. there they are.
funny, isn't it?

and so it is that we see the underbelly of conservativeland--fraud and repetition.

i am sure that you will get a version of the "a few bad apples" line to explain the phonecalls....and as for the repetition of the organizing signifiers--vote democrat and vote for terrorism--well, what is there really to be said? it is obvious, it has been obvious for 5 years--and now there we are, explicit.

conservativeland is the giant themepark that fear built.
from which it follows that the most efficient and envied of terrorists run the conservative media apparatus.
they are like the alarm salesmen whose market share presupposes the fear that their systems are meant to counteract, whose systems generate the fear they are supposed to allay. the obsession with security generates anxieties symmetrical with it.
of course this is a "soft" terrorism in that it destroys no buildings and leaves no bruises.
but if the notion of terrorism is built around the use of fear inflicted on a population for political ends--and it is--then i dont know what else to call this kind of vote democrat-vote terrorist kinda thing.

in conservativeland, it appears that the demographic is understood as cattle to be directed through the appropriate chutes via little electrical charges.
i would think the folk on the right would be offended by this--not by the observation of it, but by the assumption that this kind of herding is being applied to them.
but maybe not. maybe they like it. who knows?

the real problem for the right this kind of thing raises is of a different order:
you reveal the device too often and it ceases to function.

Rekna · 11-06-2006, 01:56 PM

I think it is time to change one of the most famous sayings ever

"All's fair in love and war"

should now be

"All's fair in love, war, and elections"

Elphaba · 11-06-2006, 02:37 PM

Greg Palast documents efforts to disenfranchise Black and Hispanic voters that has been in the works for some time:

GregPalast

Quote:

HOW THEY STOLE THE MID-TERM ELECTION
Published by Greg Palast November 6th, 2006 in Articles
by Greg Palast

for The Guardian (UK), Comment is Free
Monday November 6, 2006

Here’s how the 2006 mid-term election was stolen.

Note the past tense. And I’m not kidding.

And shoot me for saying this, but it won’t be stolen by jerking with the touch-screen machines (though they’ll do their nasty part). While progressives panic over the viral spread of suspect computer black boxes, the Karl Rove-bots have been tunneling into the vote vaults through entirely different means.

For six years now, our investigations team, at first on assignment for BBC TV and the Guardian, has been digging into the nitty-gritty of the gaming of US elections. We’ve found that November 7, 2006 is a day that will live in infamy. Four and a half million votes have been shoplifted. Here’s how they’ll do it, in three easy steps:

Theft #1: Registrations gone with the wind

On January 1, 2006, while America slept off New Year’s Eve hangovers, a new federal law crept out of the swamps that has devoured 1.9 million votes, overwhelmingly those of African-Americans and Hispanics. The vote-snatching statute is a cankerous codicil slipped into the 2002 Help America Vote Act — strategically timed to go into effect in this mid-term year. It requires every state to reject new would-be voters whose identity can’t be verified against a state verification database.

Sounds arcane and not too threatening. But look at the numbers and you won’t feel so fine. About 24.3 million Americans attempt to register or re-register each year. The New York University Law School’s Brennan Center told me that, under the new law, Republican Secretaries of State began the year by blocking about one in three new voters.

How? To begin with, Mr. Bush’s Social Security Administration has failed to verify 47% of registrants. After appeals and new attempts to register, US Elections Assistance Agency statistics indicate 1.9 million would-be voters will still find themselves barred from the ballot on Tuesday.

But don’t worry: those holding passports from their ski vacations to Switzerland are doing just fine. And that’s the point. It’s not the number of voters rejected, it’s their color. For example, California’s Republican Secretary of State Bruce McPherson figured out how to block 40% of registrants, mostly Hispanics. In a rare counter-move, Los Angeles, with a Hispanic mayor, contacted these citizens, “verified” them and got almost every single one back on the rolls. But throughout the rest of the West, new Hispanics remain victims of the “Jose Crow” treatment.

In hotly contested Ohio, Kenneth Blackwell, Secretary of State and the Republican’s candidate for Governor, remains voter-rejection champ — partly by keeping the rejection criteria a complete secret.

Theft #2: Turned Away - the ID game

A legion of pimple-faced Republicans with Blackberries loaded with lists of new voters is assigned to challenge citizens in heavily Black and Hispanic (i.e. Democratic) precincts to demand photo ID that perfectly matches registration data.

Sounds benign, but it’s not. The federal HAVA law and complex new ID requirements in states like New Mexico will easily allow the GOP squads to triple the number of voters turned away. Rather than deny using these voter suppression tactics, Republican spokesmen are claiming they are “protecting the integrity of the vote.”

I’ve heard that before. In 2004, we got our hands on fifty confidential internal memos from the files of the Republican National Committee. Attached to these were some pretty strange spreadsheets. They called them “caging lists” — and it wasn’t about zoo feeding times. They were lists (70,000 for Florida alone) of new Black and Jewish voters — a very Democratic demographic — to challenge on Election Day. The GOP did so with a vengeance: In 2004, for the first time in half a century, more than 3.5 million voters were challenged on Election Day. Worse, nearly half lost their vote: 300,000 were turned away for wrong ID; 1.1 million were allowed a “provisional” ballot — which was then simply tossed out.

Tomorrow, new federal ID requirements and a dozen new state show-me-your-ID laws will permit the GOP challenge campaign to triple their 300,000 record to nearly one million voters blocked.

Theft #3: Votes Spoiled Rotten

The nasty little secret of US elections is that three million ballots are cast in national elections but not counted — 3,600,380 not counted in 2004 according to US Election Commission stats. These are votes lost because a punch card didn’t punch (its chad got “hung”), a stray mark voided a paper ballot and other machinery glitches.

Officials call it “spoilage.” I call it, “inaugurating Republicans.” Why? According to statisticians working with the US Civil Rights Commission, the chance your vote will “spoil” this way is 900% higher for Black folk and 500% higher for Hispanics than for white voters. When we do the arithmetic, we find that well over half of all votes spoiled or “blank” are cast by voters of color. On balance, this spoilage game produces a million-vote edge for the GOP.

That’s where the Black Boxes come into play. Forget about Karl Rove messing with the software to change your vote. Rather, the big losses occur when computers crash, fail to start or simply don’t respond to your touch. They are the new spoilage machines of choice with, statistically, the same racial bias as the old vote-snatching lever machines. (Funny, but paper ballots with in-precinct scanners don’t go rotten on Black voters. Maybe that’s why Republican Secretaries of State have installed so few of them.)

So Let’s Add it Up

Two million legitimate voters will be turned away because of wrongly rejected or purged registrations.

Add another one million voters challenged and turned away for “improper ID.”

Then add yet another million for Democratic votes “spoiled” by busted black boxes and by bad ballots.

And let’s not forget to include the one million “provisional” ballots which will never get counted. Based on the experience of 2004, we know that, overwhelmingly, minority voters are the ones shunted to these baloney ballots.

And there’s one more group of votes that won’t be counted: absentee ballots challenged and discarded. Elections Assistance Agency data tell us a half million of these absentee votes will go down the drain.

Driving this massive suppression of the vote are sophisticated challenge operations. And here I must note that the Democrats have no national challenge campaign. That’s morally laudable; electorally suicidal.

Add it all up — all those Democratic-leaning votes rejected, barred and spoiled — and the Republican Party begins Election Day with a 4.5 million-vote thumb on the vote-tally scale.

So, what are you going to do about it? May I suggest you… steal back your vote.

It’s true you can’t win with 51% of the vote anymore. So just get over it. The regime’s sneak attack via vote suppression will only net them 4.5 million votes, about 5% of the total. You should be able to beat that blindfolded. If you can’t get 55%, then you’re just a bunch of crybaby pussycats who don’t deserve to win back America.

NCB · 11-06-2006, 03:44 PM

So if the Dems win tommorrow, will that be proof of a clean election with no election fraud?

jorgelito · 11-06-2006, 04:03 PM

Damn host, crazy photo. Is that legal (somewhat rhetorical)? Seems libelous to me. I mean, can someone put up a sign that says, "a Vote for Democrat is a Vote for baby Killers" or "Vote Republican the New Nazi Party"?

NCB · 11-06-2006, 04:06 PM

BTW...if the Dems do win tommorrow, how many videos will there be of Muslims dancing in the streets celebrating their victory? Over/Under- 4

xxSquirtxx · 11-06-2006, 04:06 PM

It's everywhere, isn't it?

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/bf8a1...e-2ad9680287cb

NCB · 11-06-2006, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxSquirtxx

It's everywhere, isn't it?

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/bf8a1...e-2ad9680287cb

Bullshit Squirt. The deceased have as much right to vote as you do

host · 11-07-2006, 03:28 AM

Do you vote for....or against....two more years of this?

Olbermann comments on Santorum's "Stalin moment", and on the robo-calling
psy-op and the democratic response to it. Watch it:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/1...ugh-is-enough/

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...110501302.html
Campaigns Implore the Party Faithful To Bring Their Loyalty to the Polls

By Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 6, 2006; Page A01

........It's too late to raise money, win debates or unveil six-point health-care plans. Now it's time to get out the vote. So at a campaign rally in Blue Bell, Pa., Sen. Rick Santorum was telling Republican diehards to ignore polls showing big leads for his Democratic challenger, Robert P. Casey Jr. "Democrats have polls," he declared. "We have workers at the polls!"..........

Quote:

It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." - Josef Stalin, sourced from Boris Bazhanov's 'The Memoirs of former Stalin's secretary'. Saint Petersburg, 1992

.....the corruption....the deceit....apparently knows no bounds:

Quote:

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/..._useweights=no
Published on July 16, 2004, Lancaster New Era (PA)

Bush quietly meets with Amish here; they offer their prayers

President Bush met privately with a group of Old Order Amish during his visit to Lancaster County last Friday. He discussed their farms and their hats and his religion.

He asked them to vote for him in November.

The Amish told the president that not all members of the church vote but they would pray for him.

Bush had tears in his eyes when he replied. He said the president needs their prayers. He also said that having a strong belief in God is the only way he can do his job....

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer
GOP's Soft Sell Swayed the Amish
Unlikely Voters Cast Lot With Bush

By Evelyn Nieves
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 30, 2004; Page A03

BIRD-IN-HAND, Pa.

Early on a pale blue morning, a horse-drawn buggy clop-clopped along a farmland stretch of Route 340. A lone little Chevy compact came toward it at a Sunday pace.

From an intersection, a black SUV the size of an Indian elephant barreled up to the buggy's back, passing with a quick jerk that nearly clipped the oncoming car -- and the horse's nose.

That's Pennsylvania's Amish country, where the 19th and 21st centuries coexist, commingle and collide on a regular basis. The Amish may hold fast to their plain ways, rejecting cars, indoor electricity, home phones and televisions. But contact with the outside world is unavoidable. Malls stand on land where corn used to grow, tourists run around the village streets, and even the old unspoken rule -- leave the Amish alone -- is gone, left in the dust of the presidential campaign, when the Republicans came calling for votes.

Yes, the Republicans, true to their vow to leave no vote unwooed, came to Lancaster County hoping to win over the famously reclusive Old Order Amish -- who shun most modern ways -- along with their slightly less-strict brethren, the Mennonites. Democrats laughed at the very idea. The Amish had no use for politics. Were the Republicans that desperate? But the GOP effort, underscored by President Bush's meeting with some Amish families in early July, did the trick.

"Yup, we voted this time," said an elder Old Order Amish man approached at his home-based quilt shop on Route 340. He had a beard that straggled down to his chest and bright blue eyes. His first name, he said, is Amos, but in keeping with the Amish edict against calling attention to oneself, he would not give his last name.

"I didn't vote for the last 30 years," he said, puffing on a pipe. "But Bush seemed to have our Christian principles."

Outside looking in, it makes sense that the Amish would pay little attention to national politics. They have their own schools (formal education for eight years), their own churches (or religious gatherings, at one another's homes) and their own rules. This has worked for them. The population of Amish and Mennonites, at more than 20,000 in Lancaster County, keeps growing.

But it seems the outside world, the "English" world, as the Amish call it, has been creeping in too closely for the plain people not to worry. In recent months, reports of child abuse in Amish country have made local papers and national news.....

....."We were down," Sam said, "and when the president visited, it cheered us right up. We got a firsthand look at him, and it really warmed our hearts."

In short, as Sam and half a dozen other Amish men explained (women were hard to find, and harder to talk to), Bush won votes with a time-honored campaign convention: He showed up. On July 9 his campaign bus rolled down Route 340, hoping to fire up the base in Republican Lancaster County. The Amish, watching the spectacle from the road, became part of it.

"We came out," Amos said. "We were about 70 people. One of his security said he wanted to meet us and invited us to meet with him across the road at Lapp's Electric."

"They knew we didn't like publicity," said Amos, smiling at the recollection. "So the president met with us all in an office at Lapp's. He shook everyone's hand -- even the littlest ones in their mother's arms -- and he told us all he hoped we would exercise our right and vote."

Did Bush ask them to vote for him?

"Nope," Amos said. "That's another thing we liked about him."

<h3>Not to mention, the 4,000 Republican volunteers who blanketed Lancaster County for months and visited the fairs and farm auctions in Amish country talking up the president's Christian values.</h3> That helped them think abortion might be outlawed, Sam said. Thinking of Bush's Christian values even helped with their questions about the carnage in Iraq.

And so, while Bush lost Pennsylvania by more than 120,000 votes, he nearly halved his losing margin from 2000. In large part, that was because of the GOP's push among rural voters. Here in Lancaster County, where the party set a goal of besting the Democrat by 70,000 votes (or about 10,000 more than in 2000), Bush ended up winning by 70,896. Several hundred of those votes came from men in suspenders and black suits and women in bonnets and wide-skirt black dresses. Republicans registered more than 300 new voters in each of three mostly Amish districts. In Leacock Township, the GOP nearly doubled its voter rolls, from 1,000 to 1,800, with all but a handful of the new voters being Amish or Mennonite.

Just as everyone predicted the plain folks would not vote, the postmortems all suggested the Amish vote was a fluke. Amos -- another Amos, who sells wooden toys and other Amish crafts at a roadside stand -- said that bothers him. He could see more plain people voting next time, he said, "for another candidate with good morals."

Sam, the carpenter-journalist, had read reports suggesting that the GOP manipulated the Amish. That did not sit well at all. "They didn't come here just recruiting the Amish," he said. "They were trying to get anybody to vote."

The Amish, in turn, voted with pure hearts, he said, asking for nothing in return.....

Quote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15514338/
Read the transcript to the Tuesday show
Updated: 1:29 p.m. CT Nov 1, 2006

Guests: Dick Armey, Rick Davis, Steve McMahon, Matthew Dowd

.......MATTHEWS: Well, this s a good crowd for the president, we can see that. It‘s a good opportunity to score his licks against John Kerry. I‘ve got joining me right now former Republican leader of the House Dick Armey.

Mr. Armey, what do you make of this—well, it‘s a rhubarb I guess in politics terms. What is it? Is this a real catch him, we got him, or is it they‘re making it look like they‘ve got Kerry saying something?

DICK ARMEY ®, FMR. HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: Well, it‘s pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage. And Democrats have been doing it for years.

MATTHEWS: So it‘s a bicoastal, bipartisan opportunity.

ARMEY: And I would say to John Kerry, look, you live by the P.C., you die by the P.C. I mean, the P.C. was a Democrat creation, so share and share alike.

MATTHEWS: What do you mean the P.C.?

ARMEY: Political correctness, you know, feigning moral outrage for what might be perceived to have been a possible slight, given my interpretation of what was said.

MATTHEWS: And so the president—well, according to the prepared statement we have gotten a copy of, will jump on Kerry defending the troops when, in fact, Kerry may well have meant—according to reading the script of what he said and the account of it, he was trashing the very man who is now defending the troops. He was trashing Bush himself and Bush says don‘t say those terrible things about my troops!

ARMEY: Right.

MATTHEWS: So this is a bit of theater orchestrated well by the White House. They have got the American Legion commander out there making a statement. They got him to do it. I‘m sure—I assume that most of these people didn‘t read the whole statement of Kerry yesterday, but they are happy to jump on the quote they got.

ARMEY: A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out....

ratbastid · 11-07-2006, 05:36 AM

http://www.dccc.org/stakeholder/archives/005546.html

I know it's the Democratic Committee website. It doesn't cite any other source, so take it for what you will. It claims that Republicans are now using illegal and deceptive robocalls in 46 races. Evidently voters have been getting some of these "harrassing calls from Democrats" calls at 2:00 or 3:00am.

---

http://www.americanchronicle.com/art...rticleID=16105

Quote:

Over the past several days, voters throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia have filed complaints of incidents aimed at suppressing voter turn out in heavily Democratic and African American neighborhoods. Today, the Secretary of the Virginia State Board of Elections Jean Jensen concluded that the incidents appear widespread and deliberate.

Evidently people have been getting calls telling them that the polling place has changed, black residents got a flier with the head line "SKIP THE ELECTION!"... Basic turnout suppression stuff.

---

<img src="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/Steele_Democrat_Sign.jpg">

Michael Steele... is the Republican Senate candidate from Maryland.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/election..._a_dirty_trick

--

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.ph...1967&Itemid=26

In early voting, all four major makes of voting machines have been seen flipping votes. This article (which I suspect is Democrat-biased) specifies which direction the vote flipped in some, but not all, cases, and in the cases it specifies it, all the votes flipped from Dem to Rep.

Touch-screen calibration is evidently a major factor (and what touch-screen device manufacturer requires a 15-step recalibration procedure!?), but one device that uses dials and buttons evidently checked all the Republican boxes when the voter entered a straight-ticket Democrat selection.

xxSquirtxx · 11-07-2006, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Olbermann comments on Santorum's "Stalin moment", and on the robo-calling psy-op and the democratic response to it.

Wow. The asshattery around here amuses me so.

Guess what?

The Democrats

use them

too.

Don't act like it's all one-sided.

Quote:

“The ability of 527 groups to engage in political activity without approval of candidates for elective office is the loophole in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2001 authored by Congressmen Shays and Meehan that allows for so called robo-callers to operate with impunity.

The law needs to be changed, and as a member of Congress, I will make amending the campaign finance law a priority. None of the robo-call activity that is being conducted in the 4th Congressional District originates from Farrell for Congress. I do not condone these calls.

Candidates should speak for themselves. Congressman Shays and I should be having an open and honest debate about issues important to citizens of the 4th District – the war in Iraq, our worsening energy crisis, impending problems with Social Security and the inequity of our prescription drug prices.

Anonymous callers who seek to undermine this public exchange of ideas that voters want and deserve, have no business in our political process.”

http://www.farrellforcongress.com/ne...jul26-robo.htm

ratbastid · 11-07-2006, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxSquirtxx

Wow. The asshattery around here amuses me so.

Guess what?

The Democrats

use them

too.

Don't act like it's all one-sided.

The complaint isn't about robocalls per se. The complaint is that--in 46 races, now--Republicans are calling with recorded messages that purport to be from the Democrat, and when the person hangs up on the recording it calls them right back maybe six or seven times, giving the impression that the Democrat robo-call is harassing them.

People who hang on long enough to hear the message hear an attack on the Democrat who the call claims to be from.

Any kind of commercial or political phone call must, by law, state accurately the nature and identity of the caller.

That's what makes these different from the robo-calls the Democrats have been engaged in.

NCB · 11-07-2006, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

<img src="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/Steele_Democrat_Sign.jpg">

Michael Steele... is the Republican Senate candidate from Maryland.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/election..._a_dirty_trick

If the voters are too ignorant to know who theyre voting for, then they shouldnt be voting in the first place. But then again, if the Dems lose their sheep, just who would vote for them? Oh dear....

kutulu · 11-07-2006, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxSquirtxx

Wow. The asshattery around here amuses me so.

Guess what?

The Democrats

use them

too.

Don't act like it's all one-sided.

http://www.farrellforcongress.com/ne...jul26-robo.htm

Guess what? It's not the Democrats that are using the harrassment tactics. Take the partisan blinders off and look at the difference between your links and the ones you are ignoring.

Willravel · 11-07-2006, 08:36 AM

Well my vote went just fine.

ratbastid · 11-07-2006, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

If the voters are too ignorant to know who theyre voting for, then they shouldnt be voting in the first place. But then again, if the Dems lose their sheep, just who would vote for them? Oh dear....

But doesn't it tell you something if Republicans are claiming to be Democrats? Like maybe they KNOW their party is dead meat?

NCB · 11-07-2006, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

But doesn't it tell you something if Republicans are claiming to be Democrats? Like maybe they KNOW their party is dead meat?

No offense, but are you really having a hard time figuring out whats going on in that picture. This is your attempt to spin the obvious. Right? Right? Hello? Bueller? Anyone? Is this thing working???

cj2112 · 11-07-2006, 09:04 AM

I swear, a lot of these threads belong in Tilted Paranoia.

silent_jay · 11-07-2006, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

If the voters are too ignorant to know who theyre voting for, then they shouldnt be voting in the first place. But then again, if the Dems lose their sheep, just who would vote for them? Oh dear....

Are you seriously saying the people who vote for the Democrats are blindly following them like sheep? You can't be saying this right? I mean seems funny considering the way conservatives blindly follow dubya from one cluster fuck to another.

I love how you turn it on the voters, not like it's the candidates have a responsibility to represent themselves truthfully or anything

NCB · 11-07-2006, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Are you seriously saying the people who vote for the Democrats are blindly following them like sheep? You can't be saying this right? I mean seems funny considering the way conservatives blindly follow dubya from one cluster fuck to another.

I love how you turn it on the voters, not like it's the candidates have a responsibility to represent themselves truthfully or anything

Dems vote straight party at a higher clip than republicans. So yes, they do follow Dems blindly. Sorry

ratbastid · 11-07-2006, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

No offense, but are you really having a hard time figuring out whats going on in that picture. This is your attempt to spin the obvious. Right? Right? Hello? Bueller? Anyone? Is this thing working???

What's going on in that picture is, Steele is aligning himself with the Democratic party in an attempt to gain votes from casual Democrat voters who may not be following politics. He's particularly targeting the black voters in Maryland with this advertising. He's deliberately blurring and confusing party lines. He's so desperate not to be a Republican, he's actually jumping ship on the day before the election.

Is that really harder to swallow than his official line? He claims those signs are meant to be carried by the Democrats who support him. You know... both of them. If that were ALL those signs were meant for, they'd start with the phrase "I'm a".

Some Republicans appear to be resorting to outright deception in their campaigns. And you're defending them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Dems vote straight party at a higher clip than republicans. So yes, they do follow Dems blindly. Sorry

That's an interesting assertion. I've never heard that before. Got a source on that?

NCB · 11-07-2006, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

What's going on in that picture is, Steele is aligning himself with the Democratic party in an attempt to gain votes from casual Democrat voters who may not be following politics. He's particularly targeting the black voters in Maryland with this advertising. He's deliberately blurring and confusing party lines. He's so desperate not to be a Republican, he's actually jumping ship on the day before the election.

Is that really harder to swallow than his official line? He claims those signs are meant to be carried by the Democrats who support him. You know... both of them. If that were ALL those signs were meant for, they'd start with the phrase "I'm a".

That's an interesting assertion. I've never heard that before. Got a source on that?

Dude, its the people holding the signs who are Democrats that consider themselves to be "Steele Democrats", kinda like when we had "Reagan Democrats". I cant believe I actually had to sit here and explain it to you.

silent_jay · 11-07-2006, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Dems vote straight party at a higher clip than republicans. So yes, they do follow Dems blindly. Sorry

Well if you say that's the way it is, I guess it must be then.
Doesn't change the fact repubs follow blindly as well, sorry

samcol · 11-07-2006, 09:22 AM

I like how the GOP is already setting the stage for overwelming exit polling errors.
BEWARE OF EXIT POLLS

Quote:

Iowa: NEP Projected Sen. Kerry Winning By 1% - President Bush Carried Iowa By .7%;

Nevada: NEP Projected Sen. Kerry Winning By 1.4% - President Bush Carried Nevada By 2.6%;

New Mexico: NEP Projected Sen. Kerry Winning By 4.2%- President Bush Carried New Mexico By .8%;

Ohio: NEP Projected Sen. Kerry Winning By 6.5% - President Bush Carried By 2.1%;

Virginia: NEP Projected Sen. Kerry Winning By 0.5% - President Bush Carried Virginia By 8.2%.

Compare the Ohio exit polls to this statement

Quote:

The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio told Republicans in a recent fund-raising letter that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

I think the GOP is setting the stage for some more magical party-line vote flips from the infamous Diebold machines.

cj2112 · 11-07-2006, 10:16 AM

I find it very telling that the same people who were screaming about the republicans wanting to rape the environment, are now screaming about the move away from paper ballots.

samcol · 11-07-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj2112

I find it very telling that the same people who were screaming about the republicans wanting to rape the environment, are now screaming about the move away from paper ballots.

wow...I don't know what to say.

shakran · 11-07-2006, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Dems vote straight party at a higher clip than republicans. So yes, they do follow Dems blindly. Sorry

Got a source for that, Sport, or did the guy who came up with the WMD in Iraq yarn tell it to you?

ratbastid · 11-07-2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj2112

I find it very telling that the same people who were screaming about the republicans wanting to rape the environment, are now screaming about the move away from paper ballots.

Some things (like, say, preserving our democracy) are worth using a few trees.

I find it very telling that the people screaming about the values our troops are fighting for are willing to ignore the integrity of the electoral process--the very foundation of our whole democratic system and the very thing at the CORE of what our troops are fighting for.

(See, cj? Two can play the straw-man game!

)

----

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/po...y-in-utah.html

Quote:

Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Election fixing charges fly in Utah county
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Voting appears to be very popular in Daggett County, Utah.

Daggett County has registered 947 voters for Tuesday's election. According to the most recent Census figures, that's four more than the county's population in 2005.

A spokesman for Attorney General Mark Shurtleff says complaints of vote-stuffing in the county are being investigated. Democrats suspect County Clerk Vickie McKee is letting outsiders swell the Daggett County registration rolls to give Republicans an advantage. The Democrats also say the father of a Republican deputy running for sheriff has 14 adults registered at his household. McKee hasn't responded to messages from The Associated Press.

host · 11-07-2006, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Dems vote straight party at a higher clip than republicans. So yes, they do follow Dems blindly. Sorry

It is amusing to watch your spirited, "sheeple like" defense of a "fellow republican", NCB. Would Steele do the same to defend you and your ideology, or is he simply an ambitious politician out to harness the blind, reflexive, political sentiments of his fellow republicans?

Quote:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200611030005

....Blitzer also failed to challenge Steele's assertion that he is "not running away from President Bush" and that he has "never run away from" being a Republican. In a July 25 Washington Post column by Dana Milbank, a candidate speaking "under the condition that he be identified only as a GOP Senate candidate," spoke "critically, if anonymously, about the party he will represent on Election Day." Milbank wrote that the candidate "spoke of his party affiliation as though it were a congenital defect rather than a choice."......

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...072400953.html
For One Senate Candidate, the 'R' Is a 'Scarlet Letter'

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, July 25, 2006; Page A02

....Not that he necessarily wants it. "Well, you know, I don't know," the candidate said when asked if he wanted President Bush to campaign for him. Noting Bush's low standing in his home state, he finally added: "To be honest with you, probably not."

The candidate gave the luncheon briefing to nine reporters from newspapers, magazines and networks under the condition that he be identified only as a GOP Senate candidate. When he was pressed to go on the record, his campaign toyed with the idea but got cold feet. He was anxious enough to air his gripes but cautious enough to avoid a public brawl with the White House.

Still, his willingness to speak so critically, if anonymously, about the party he will represent on Election Day points to a growing sense among Republicans that if they are to retain their majorities in Congress, they may have to throw the president under the train in all but the safest, reddest states.

It's not an ideological matter. Even as he berated the president, the candidate allowed that he opposes a pullout from Iraq, agrees with Bush's veto of human embryonic stem cell research, and supports constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage and flag burning.

"He's the best!" cheered Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) when he stopped in to shake the candidate's hand during the lunch yesterday.

But if such affection is mutual, the candidate did not always show it. "We've lost our way, we've gone to the well and we drank the water, and we shouldn't have," he said of congressional Republicans. "You don't go to Congress to become the party that you've been fighting for 40 years." Lamenting "the spending, the finger-pointing, not getting the bills passed," he counseled: "Just shut up and get something done.".....

....He seemed less agitated by the policy failure than by Bush's unwillingness to admit failure......

......The candidate looked the part of the contender, wearing a monogrammed shirt, his French cuffs sprouting cuff links coordinated with his necktie. ........
<img src="http://www.phillysonline.com/lunch_counter/images/2005/11/02/steele.jpg">
http://www.washingtontimes.com/metro...4932-4054r.htm
[Picture provided for comparison to description....is Steele, the senate candidate described by Dana Milbank?]

.....But he spoke with little caution as he ladled a heaping portion of criticism on his own party.

"In 2001, we were attacked and the president is on the ground, on a mound with his arm around the fireman, symbol of America," he said, between bites of hanger steak and risotto. "In Katrina, the president is at 30,000 feet in an airplane looking down at people dying, living on a bridge. And that disconnect, I think, sums up, for me at least, the frustration that Americans feel."

The response to Katrina was "a monumental failure," he continued. "We became so powerful in our ivory towers, in our gated communities. We forgot that there are poor people." The detachment remained after the storm, he said. "I could see that they weren't getting it, they weren't necessarily clued in. . . . For me, the seminal moment was the [Dubai] port decision."

Of course, picking on Bush for Katrina and the Dubai ports is hardly a daring position, even for a Republican. And in some cases, the candidate hit Bush from the right, such as when he opposed Bush's proposed guest-worker program for immigrants. "Republicans aren't very happy people right now," he argued. "The base is kind of ticked off."

He spoke of his party affiliation as though it were a congenital defect rather than a choice. "It's an impediment. It's a hurdle I have to overcome," he said. "I've got an 'R' here, a scarlet letter."

That left the candidate in a difficult spot. "For me to pretend I'm not a Republican would be a lie," he reasoned. But to run as a proud Republican? "That's going to be tough, it's going to be tough to do," he said. "If this race is about Republicans and Democrats, I lose."

....and....if you still doubt that Milbank was quoting Steele, there is this:

Quote:

http://www.examiner.com/a-196320~Ste...e_ignored.html

Len Lazarick, The Examiner
Jul 27, 2006 5:00 AM (103 days ago)
Current rank: Not ranked
BALTIMORE - Lt. Gov. Michael Steele insisted on Wednesday that a Washington Post columnist was trying “to stick his finger in my eye and in the eye of the president” when he quoted Steele’s remarks criticizing President Bush and the Republican Party, attributing them to an unnamed Republican Senate candidate.

“It was an off-the-record conversation, as I understood it to be,” Steele said on WBAL radio’s Chip Franklin show. The interview with the conservative radio talk host was the only request for comment Steele granted
Wednesday.....

ratbastid · 11-07-2006, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Dude, its the people holding the signs who are Democrats that consider themselves to be "Steele Democrats", kinda like when we had "Reagan Democrats". I cant believe I actually had to sit here and explain it to you.

I've already explained it to you twice, actually. But if you choose to believe that a Republican candidate can't possibly be deceptive in his advertising and his campaign, more power to you. If, God forbid, he wins, it'll be the blind leading the blind.

Are you really telling me that you think a person who sees a blue sign reading:

STEELE
Democrat

... what they'll say to themselves is, "Hey! That sign must be held or put there by a Democrat... who likes Republican Senate Candidate Michael Steele! Heavens! How clever! I simply MUST vote for him!"

Or would they think, "Another campaign sign. Steele, Democrat. Ok."

They guy has been DOCUMENTED running away from the Republicans. He's embarrassed of his party. He knows he can't win as a Repub. so he's trying to run as a Dem.

I can't believe I had to sit here and explain this to you. As if there's any chance you won't just dismiss this.

11-02-2006, 06:31 PM	#41 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Ars Technica: "Primary and early e-voting problems point to gathering storm." http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061101-8131.html -- http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/for...954/44823.html Easy instructions on how to vote as many times as you like on Sequoia Voting Systems machines. Sequoia is the third largest voting machine vendor in the world--and you can earn free bonus votes by pressing a yellow button on the back of the machine! Last edited by ratbastid; 11-02-2006 at 06:46 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

11-06-2006, 05:37 AM	#48 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/5/191647/511 I know it's from DailyKOS, but the blog post cites sources that will hopefully be more credible to right-leaning readers. Evidently Republicans in some states are making computer-dialed calls claiming to be their Democrat opponent. If the voter hangs up on the call, the computer calls them right back, making it look like the Democrat is auto-harrassing the voter. If they stay on the line, they get rhetoric bashing the Democrat. Federal law requires commercial and political callers to honestly state who they are and what organization they're calling with, so these calls are illegal. This isn't quite what I meant by election fraud (I had my eye more on vote suppression and tampering), but it's worth knowing about anyway. EDIT: Here's a better source on that: http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...the_campaigns/ Also this, at Metafilter: http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/56076 Last edited by ratbastid; 11-06-2006 at 05:45 AM..

11-06-2006, 11:54 AM	#49 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	rat, the phone calls aren't just illegal. They are 500$+ fine per offence (1500$ if it was done "knowingly"). 200,000 phone calls * 500$ each = 100 million $. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

11-06-2006, 01:44 PM	#51 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	amazing photo, host. and it's monday still. commentary section: when the notion of the "fjnords" were developed in the context of the illuminatus trilogy, you might have thought that robert anton wilson was joking. but no. there they are. funny, isn't it? and so it is that we see the underbelly of conservativeland--fraud and repetition. i am sure that you will get a version of the "a few bad apples" line to explain the phonecalls....and as for the repetition of the organizing signifiers--vote democrat and vote for terrorism--well, what is there really to be said? it is obvious, it has been obvious for 5 years--and now there we are, explicit. conservativeland is the giant themepark that fear built. from which it follows that the most efficient and envied of terrorists run the conservative media apparatus. they are like the alarm salesmen whose market share presupposes the fear that their systems are meant to counteract, whose systems generate the fear they are supposed to allay. the obsession with security generates anxieties symmetrical with it. of course this is a "soft" terrorism in that it destroys no buildings and leaves no bruises. but if the notion of terrorism is built around the use of fear inflicted on a population for political ends--and it is--then i dont know what else to call this kind of vote democrat-vote terrorist kinda thing. in conservativeland, it appears that the demographic is understood as cattle to be directed through the appropriate chutes via little electrical charges. i would think the folk on the right would be offended by this--not by the observation of it, but by the assumption that this kind of herding is being applied to them. but maybe not. maybe they like it. who knows? the real problem for the right this kind of thing raises is of a different order: you reveal the device too often and it ceases to function. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 11-06-2006 at 01:47 PM..

11-06-2006, 04:06 PM	#57 (permalink)
xxSquirtxx More anal, less shenanigans Location: Always lurking	It's everywhere, isn't it? http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/bf8a1...e-2ad9680287cb __________________ .

11-02-2006, 08:59 PM	#44 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	http://jamesbabb.blogspot.com/2006/1...elections.html News release on the website of the Libertarian congressional candidate in PA-157. Even after reading it, I'm not clear on the details--it presumes facts not yet in record. But it appears that some Pennsylvanian election officials are resigning over illegal (or at least unfair) ballot requirements that are keeping third parties off the ticket.

11-06-2006, 01:56 PM	#52 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	I think it is time to change one of the most famous sayings ever "All's fair in love and war" should now be "All's fair in love, war, and elections"

11-06-2006, 04:03 PM	#55 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	Damn host, crazy photo. Is that legal (somewhat rhetorical)? Seems libelous to me. I mean, can someone put up a sign that says, "a Vote for Democrat is a Vote for baby Killers" or "Vote Republican the New Nazi Party"?

11-07-2006, 08:36 AM	#65 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Well my vote went just fine.

11-07-2006, 09:04 AM	#68 (permalink)
cj2112 Unbelievable Location: Grants Pass OR	I swear, a lot of these threads belong in Tilted Paranoia.

11-07-2006, 10:16 AM	#75 (permalink)
cj2112 Unbelievable Location: Grants Pass OR	I find it very telling that the same people who were screaming about the republicans wanting to rape the environment, are now screaming about the move away from paper ballots.