Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS] read this one on electronic voting and Diebold

[Josh <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

The contentions on the chart, if true, are interesting. However, I don't 
see any evidence that the statistics/facts aren't the figment of the 
writer's imagination. Anyone have reputable sources to validate or 
disprove the contentions?

I have a number of questions about many of the contentions as well. 
Maybe Mike or someone else can fill in the blanks on these.

Why would a GOP paid consulting firm have access to voter registrations 
for democrats?

The chart contends that 20K votes registered no vote for president, but 
then goes on to say that there were more votes cast for president than 
voters.

The chart contends that the GOP illegally "targeted" black voters but 
offers absolutely no proof. It also indicates that voting machine 
distribution caused black voters to wait in line longer than white. Does 
the GOP decide how machines are distributed? And isn't it a bit off to 
assume that black voters will automatically vote democrat? While 
minorities have traditionally supported democrats in this country, I 
think that trend is weakening. (For a variety of reasons that are 
outside of the scope of this discussion)

The article says Florida voters were denied the right to vote due to 
"inconsequential errors" on their registration forms. It doesn't 
indicate how many of those were democrats and it doesn't give any 
information as to the nature of the errors. "Inconsequential" is a 
pretty subjective standard in my opinion.

The second chart shows inconsistencies with regard to a judge on the 
ballot and Kerry. While this is interesting, I don't think its evidence 
to support the case. In my experience, people rarely know the details of 
the more minor races on the ballot and just vote party-line whereas the 
presidential election tends to see slightly more informed opinions. 
Perhaps some portion of the voters in question simply preferred Bush to 
Kerry but "vote democrat" when they don't know the particulars of a race.

The second chart also uses "expected votes" as evidence but doesn't 
provide sources for the expectation. I presume its exit-polls and 
someone has already pointed out a number of problems in the way exit 
polls were done in 2004.

Regarding Clermont - any proof? This is a very interesting claim if it 
holds up to scrutiny.

Regarding Warren - any proof? Who were these officials and what was 
their party affiliation? Was everyone in the room a conservative? Is 
there any evidence of tampering?

Auglaize - We need more information to count this as evidence on either 
side. Who's to say he wasn't tampering to give Kerry votes?

The third chart uses "in and around cleveland" as a metric for overall 
voter comparison. However, how many of these voters were in major cities 
like Cleveland? Urban voters tend to favor democrats so this is a pretty 
misleading way to do the comparison.

72,000 disenfranchised by avoidable registration errors - who made those 
errors? Did the GOP in some way fill-out the forms or otherwise 
interfere? I don't see any evidence of that.

30,000 purged... How many were democrats? How many showed up to vote and 
couldn't?

174,000 unable to vote due to long lines. Again how many were democrats? 
How did the GOP make the lines long?

66,000 invalidated...And only democratic ballots were invalidated?

5,000 turned away..proof? Sounds like a crime if so. Any charges pressed 
or is this just an accusation with an estimate?

10,000 discarded.. Did no republicans stand in the wrong line?

These charts just don't provide any evidence in my view. They offer a 
number of accusations but nothing to back it up.

Mike Miller wrote:
> You don't want to miss this Rolling Stone editorial:
>
> http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10463874/editorial_a_call_for_investigation 
>
>
> Diebold, Abramoff, Ney, Blackwell -- an axis of evil!
>
> And check out these three charts...
>
> http://www.rollingstone.com/photos/gallery/10467024/was_the_2004_election_stolen/photo/1/large 
>
>
> ...especially the second one.  What happened in Miami county??!
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion