Let me guess, you were against a statewide recount in Florida when Bush was leading by less than 200 votes. The recounts done later showed that Gore won. However you are calling Gore's 540,000 margin of victory in the national popular vote too close to call.
>Yes, let's all vote for Dean so our deficits will no longer just be unsightly, they'll be ungodly.
You mean worse than the $560 billion deficit that we had for the federeal fiscal year that just eneded? Rememeber, we had a $87 billion surplus in 2000.
Well, seeing as he stole the last Presidential election, and there's some funny shit going on with Diebold, it doesn't seem like much of a strech that he might steal the next election. Read about the stolen 2000 election in Chapter 1 here .
>Speed. Reading paper ballots takes a long time, but if the computer tallies the results, it's millions of times faster. Then the paper ones are only necessary for backup, recounts, etc.
Yeah, it makes rigging elections a much faster process.
What's being "discovered" is that the Bush adminstration was wrong. We are causing global warming. Of course, the Bush administration is also wrong on nearly everything else, but that's not my point.
> Speaking as a librarian-in-training, I think I should note that the DDC system isn't static. It's currently in its 21st revision (with 22 coming out soon). Because of this, the copyrights are still valid. It's a work-in-progress. It needs to change to accomodate the changing world of information.
What if they switch to using an old version? At the top level, probably not much as changed.
We seem to assume that they're predictable. One lousy guy has some explosives attached to his shoe, and now suddenly every airline passenger has to take off their shoes at lease once each time they fly.
This database used by some fools at the Dept. of Homeland Security to fight terrorism could end up aiding terrorists, since it could lead to identity theft. It appears that some of the 9/11 hijackers had stolen other people's identities. That website has a very good 9/11 timeline.
Redistricting normally happens once a decade. Anyways, so 2 years ago, the Democrats came up with a plan, the courts didn't like it, and drew up their own plan, and now the Republicans don't like the non-partisan court plan. You see, these conservative Democrats manage to win Republican leaning Congressional districts in Texas, and the Texas Republicans don't like it.
Lots of votes were never counted. The Supreme Court eneded the recounts. It was later shown that if there had been a statewide recount, Gore would have won. Both Hayes and Bush had less people go to the polls in Florida intending to vote for them than the Democrat on election day, but in both cases, officially won Florida. Both times if the Democrat had officially won one more state, he would have become President. Both times the Democrat won the popular vote. Because of the 1876 election, the 2000 election was only the 2nd most rigged. I really hope 2004 isn't like either of these. Of course, they'll be using 21-century technology (electronic voting machines), which is better at stealing elections.
> Interesting. John Quincy Adams was also the son of a former president. He only served one term as well.
Wait, it gets even better. He lost the popular vote to a Democrat from Tennesee. Also, he had the same first and last names as his father, but different middle names.
You said: About them calling the election for Gore after the polls closed. Wrong. I won't attempt to disprove the rest of your post... but....
CBS called Florida for Gore at 7:49 Eastern. They also claimed during the last hour that the polls were open that the polls were closed sixteen times.
Sorry for the lack of sources. They are all print.
The polls in the EST part of Florida (read, almost all of the state) closed 7:00 EST. The polls in CST (read, just a small part of the panhandle) closed 8:00 EST. According to exit polls, Gore was enough ahead that they decided they'd call 11 minutes before polls closed in the panhandle, costing Bush maybe 10 votes relative to Gore.
What about the ballots which were never counted in the first place?
Florida law required that all absentee ballots have postmarks in them.
In the 1876 Presidential election, it took them 4 months to decide who won Florida
They called Florida for Gore after all the polls in EST closed, and 10 minutes before the polls closed in CST. Maybe Bush lost 5 votes there? Big fucking deal.
Read Chapter 1 here , and tell me if you still believe that the election was fair.
As of the election, the Republicans controlled: The US Supreme Court The US Senate The US House The FL governorship The FL secretary of state Both branches of FL legilsature
The Democrats decided to allow Republicans to count votes that were illegal under Florida law existing on election day. Those alone tipped the election.
I'd suggest pressuring the Florida government to ditch the closed-source voting machines that they are going to use to steal the 2004 election. Also, they should allow anyone to vote whose felony conviction date is Jan. 2007 (I'm not making this up, some people were told they would get convicted of a felony in the future, and were not allowed to vote).
Slashdot Mirror
Is that why California Diebold machines uploaded election results to Diebold's web page several hours before polls closed?
Three in the same election.
All had 18181 vote margins of victories by Republicans.
Let me guess, you were against a statewide recount in Florida when Bush was leading by less than 200 votes. The recounts done later showed that Gore won. However you are calling Gore's 540,000 margin of victory in the national popular vote too close to call.
>Yes, let's all vote for Dean so our deficits will no longer just be unsightly, they'll be ungodly.
You mean worse than the $560 billion deficit that we had for the federeal fiscal year that just eneded? Rememeber, we had a $87 billion surplus in 2000.
Well, seeing as he stole the last Presidential election, and there's some funny shit going on with Diebold, it doesn't seem like much of a strech that he might steal the next election. Read about the stolen 2000 election in Chapter 1 here .
>Speed. Reading paper ballots takes a long time, but if the computer tallies the results, it's millions of times faster. Then the paper ones are only necessary for backup, recounts, etc.
Yeah, it makes rigging elections a much faster process.
What's being "discovered" is that the Bush adminstration was wrong. We are causing global warming. Of course, the Bush administration is also wrong on nearly everything else, but that's not my point.
> Speaking as a librarian-in-training, I think I should note that the DDC system isn't static. It's currently in its 21st revision (with 22 coming out soon). Because of this, the copyrights are still valid. It's a work-in-progress. It needs to change to accomodate the changing world of information.
What if they switch to using an old version? At the top level, probably not much as changed.
We seem to assume that they're predictable. One lousy guy has some explosives attached to his shoe, and now suddenly every airline passenger has to take off their shoes at lease once each time they fly.
This database used by some fools at the Dept. of Homeland Security to fight terrorism could end up aiding terrorists, since it could lead to identity theft. It appears that some of the 9/11 hijackers had stolen other people's identities. That website has a very good 9/11 timeline.
I know it's not what Limbaugh told you, but here's the truth:
As for the electoral vote, about 50,000 more people went to the polls in Florida intending to vote for Gore.
As for the popular vote, Bush was going to make a big stink if he won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote.
Redistricting normally happens once a decade. Anyways, so 2 years ago, the Democrats came up with a plan, the courts didn't like it, and drew up their own plan, and now the Republicans don't like the non-partisan court plan. You see, these conservative Democrats manage to win Republican leaning Congressional districts in Texas, and the Texas Republicans don't like it.
Murdoch of FoxNews said he was pretty sure that Bush will veto it.
Lots of votes were never counted. The Supreme Court eneded the recounts. It was later shown that if there had been a statewide recount, Gore would have won. Both Hayes and Bush had less people go to the polls in Florida intending to vote for them than the Democrat on election day, but in both cases, officially won Florida. Both times if the Democrat had officially won one more state, he would have become President. Both times the Democrat won the popular vote. Because of the 1876 election, the 2000 election was only the 2nd most rigged. I really hope 2004 isn't like either of these. Of course, they'll be using 21-century technology (electronic voting machines), which is better at stealing elections.
> Interesting. John Quincy Adams was also the son of a former president. He only served one term as well.
Wait, it gets even better. He lost the popular vote to a Democrat from Tennesee. Also, he had the same first and last names as his father, but different middle names.
You said:
About them calling the election for Gore after the polls closed. Wrong. I won't attempt to disprove the rest of your post... but....
CBS called Florida for Gore at 7:49 Eastern. They also claimed during the last hour that the polls were open that the polls were closed sixteen times.
Sorry for the lack of sources. They are all print.
The polls in the EST part of Florida (read, almost all of the state) closed 7:00 EST. The polls in CST (read, just a small part of the panhandle) closed 8:00 EST. According to exit polls, Gore was enough ahead that they decided they'd call 11 minutes before polls closed in the panhandle, costing Bush maybe 10 votes relative to Gore.
But that doesn't mean they'll use it. Do you really expect Sen. Hagel to be happy to see an open-source voting system replace his voting machines?
Exit polls are usefull as a judge of how rigged an election was. If there are no exit polls in 2004, I'm not going to trust any of the results.
What about the ballots which were never counted in the first place?
Florida law required that all absentee ballots have postmarks in them.
In the 1876 Presidential election, it took them 4 months to decide who won Florida
They called Florida for Gore after all the polls in EST closed, and 10 minutes before the polls closed in CST. Maybe Bush lost 5 votes there? Big fucking deal.
Read Chapter 1 here , and tell me if you still believe that the election was fair.
You mean like the laws that absentee ballots had to have a post-mark?
Oh, you only mean the laws that the Republicans liked. Fuck that.
Move along, nothing to see, nothing that Sen. Chuck Hagel hasn't been doing for years.
As of the election, the Republicans controlled:
The US Supreme Court
The US Senate
The US House
The FL governorship
The FL secretary of state
Both branches of FL legilsature
The Democrats decided to allow Republicans to count votes that were illegal under Florida law existing on election day. Those alone tipped the election.
Get your facts straight.
Got a link for more information?
If even a dust sized peanut particle can be fatal, then how did you find out you were allergic to peanuts?
I'd suggest pressuring the Florida government to ditch the closed-source voting machines that they are going to use to steal the 2004 election. Also, they should allow anyone to vote whose felony conviction date is Jan. 2007 (I'm not making this up, some people were told they would get convicted of a felony in the future, and were not allowed to vote).