Is computer fraud a Red Herring?

[many a good man]

THE CASE AGAINST COMPUTER FRAUD

Could it be possible that all of the hullabaloo about computer fraud is a brilliantly-designed diversion away from the more conventional forms of stealing an election?

1) ballot box stuffing
2) voter intimidation and suppression
3) control over the information media
4) advanced business intelligence (BI) capabilities

In a very close statewide election (5% or less) very few ballots in every precinct need to changed to alter the outcome.

The largest precincts have around a thousand voters. To effect a 3% change in the outcome, you would only have to fix 1.5% of the ballots. In a precinct with 1000 voters that means fixing only 15 ballots. Ballot box stuffing could be centralized at the BoE of each county because they control voter registration and tabulation.

A difference of only 15 votes in a large precinct would hardly raise an eyebrow. In a small precinct of 200 voters only 3 ballots need to be changed. As we shall see this 1.5% could be reduced further when combined with other practices...

Voter suppression could be counted on to shave off another .5% of the needed difference.

We all know suppression takes place in densely populated urban minority districts. Suppression is much more effective in these large precincts because you can more easily restrict a larger number of your opponents supporters.

Media control can influence people's perception of events.

The influence of the media is obvious in the events leading to election day and can be decisive in managing opinion in the aftermath. The media can also influence outcome in the days or hours leading up the voting and even on election day itself. This could be counted on to sway maybe a quarter of one percent.

A huge competitive advantage in BI makes GOTV much more effective.

BI is the business practice of accumulating ALL the information you have in huge data warehouses so it can be analyzed to predict trends and do it what-if? scenarios. It is widely acknowledged that the GOP is "light years" ahead of the Dems in this regard. Every piece of information they get their hands on gets stored in the database. Democrats will jot the data down on paper napkins, if we're lucky.

Republicans have all the data you can dream of right down to the street level. They know your party affiliation, how many times you voted, your median income, value of your home, consumption patterns, entertainment choices, etc. Their phone bank is well-staffed and keeps voter contact information constantly up to date. Their election day volunteer networks are up to date and accurate. All these things could give them another one-quarter percent advantage over their rivals in election day GOTV.


If all warfare is based on deception (Sun Tzu), then computer fraud would be an excellent choice for illusion because it offers so many areas that are open to question. One could spend years investigating the myriad possibilities of devising hacks or elaborate mathematical algorithms. Only when absolutely necessary would they let the computers be inspected -- only to find they are perfectly clean. Meanwhile they sharpen their other tools of the trade and elect their cronies to political offices that allow them to cement their majority.

Of course, just a tiny bit of computer fraud would make it a "done deal."

[IndyOp]

1. I'm willing to believe that the election may have been stolen by

"embezzlement" - a combination of a variety of techniques - but I need a whole lot more evidence to know for sure how much of an impact any one factor had. In the meantime, there is good evidence of computer fraud that had a major impact on results in multiple states (FL, TX, OH).

Here is my summary of ALL of the factors by which fraud was accomplished in Ohio: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x221594>


:kick:

[suston96]

2. Yep!

Good points. You nailed it.

That "tiny bit of computer fraud" is what did it.

When the larceny was planned, the "getaway" was also devised so that the "tiny bit of computer fraud" was covered up.

Maybe.

Stalin said: It's not the voters, it's the vote counters.

[pacalo]

5. In regard to your Stalin quote, I think Rep. Peter King would agree...

Alex Pelosi's new film "Diary of a Political Tourist" catches a tipsy Congressman Peter King making a comment at a White House function before the election had been finished that, "It's already over. The Election's over. We Won."

When Pelosi asks, "How do you know that?" King replies, "It's all over but the counting. And we'll take care of the counting."

Link for the video clip: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/peterking.mov

[papau]

17. Standard fraud with absentee ballots was not stopped by the GOP just

because they had electronic voting fraud plans in place.

I do not see why the proven ability of the GOP in

1) ballot box stuffing
2) voter intimidation and suppression
3) control over the information media

means there is not a huge problem with BBV controled by the GOP Senator and the two brothers.

In 1960 there were no "orders" by the GOP to cheat in every way they could - it was just understood that a good GOPer knew that this was the only way to offset DEM votes - and presumed cheating - in urban levels.

The GOP WAS CORRUPT IN 1960 - AND HAS ONLY GOTTON WORSE.

AND IT IS ALWAYS THE EXCUSE THAT THE "OTHERSIDE CHEATS SO WE MUST OUT CHEAT THEM"

They have no ethics and therefore can not concieve of Dems having ethics and values. Indeed the GOP values campaign was concieved as a con - and when it worked post Nixon, morals in all things not economic - including control of your neighbors body and sex life - became the GOP con de jure.


Thanks for the great Link for the video clip: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/peterking.mov

:-)

[pacalo]

34. YW, papau. :)

[Quakerfriend]

3. Very nice point!

I keep wondering if Conyers has some video stream (a la M.Moore) that he's going to bring out in the courtroom (if we ever get there).

Yes, they did it by a thousand cuts........

[Wilms]

4. A little bit here, a little bit there...

Next thing you know...

Walla. "Political Cap-it-tul"

RICO

[Merlot]

6. No, I don't think they are that "brilliant"

They will use any and all means. I know everyone likes to give rove so much credit for manipulating things. But if you look at what he does, it's all small-minded, mean spirited personal and reputation smears. Everyone contributes what they have into the main plan, whatever that may be: voter fraud, character assination, disenfranchisement, lawsuits. They all do what they are best at with the idea of disrupting democracy.

The only logic is to keep so many issues out there that we run after each one, and don't step away to see the bigger picture.

I don't think the computes will be found to a red herring. They are just another layer in the 7-layer cake of fraud. Consider the MSM to be the frosting on the cake.

[glitch]

9. Without the media propping up Rover, he'd be running cheap scams in bars.

Leaving town after town, one step ahead of the posse.

[berniew1]

7. In numbers of votes, number of touchscreen votes switched was huge

The GOP apparently had a plan for systematic suppression of minority voters both in registration and vote counting, dirty tricks, absentee fruad, ballot stuffing, and vote machine fraud. All affected large numbers of votes and it took all to accomplish their goal. But the vote machine fraud affected large numbers of votes, so its not a diversion, it may be the biggest and most easily documented case- since the problem is documented down to the precinct and machine level in many cases already. And its clear a lot more occurred that can be easily documented if investigated. The poll workers in the precincts were aware that it was occurring widely and were being asked by the voters to help in dealing with it, so its known who to get affidavits from. And there aren't many options regarding who had access to program the machines.
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[ananda]

8. All of the above

All of the above are true.. so I don't really see a red herring. It just shows how versatile the Reeptiles are at fraud.

The real problem is that they're now playing the game of pretending hard that they really won cleanly and fairly... and the presstitutes are playing along nicely.

Also, the ones who got disenfranchised are not rising up in anger and protest. Of course there's no one to protect and help them if they do because they're the ones who are minority or working poor, and they know how riots and demos can hurt them in the long run financially and politically.

Somehow it seems that the time is just not ripe for a major change. People in the USA honestly believe they have it so good compared to the rest of the world, and in a way they do.

Things will just have to get as bad as they're gonna get before people will move to effect change. It will probably happen sometime after they lose all those rights and freedoms they had become accustomed to and took for granted... and that's looking to be sooner rather than later, the way things are going.

Most women will lose reproductive choice and freedom.
Most minorities will lose access to university education.
More families will lose access to affordable healthcare, including pregnant women and many children.
Seniors will lose social security and affordable prescription drugs.
Seniors will lose retirement benefits and pensions.
The rich will continue to get richer while the number of working poor will increase greatly.

Only when enough people suffer enough to feel chronic, significant pain in their lives will they take action for change.

Yes, the rightwingers and conservative fundies are cruel, vicious, ruthless, racist, hypocritical social darwinists hiding behind religion and the Bible.. or behind a media-controlled appearance of middle-class niceness. We like that -appearance-... everything neat, clean, groomed, smiling, wearing an air of arrogant or sanctimonious unction and righteousness.. hating -liberals- and those who don't look or act WASP. They know how to schmooze and be good ol boys and gals so they seem likable and good.

But their fruits are so ugly and tainted. Away from the camera, they are so full of corruption and hate that they're about to burst. Away from the camera, millions of people that they're killing or harming are suffering, bleeding, dying...

I liked what that person on the other thread wrote about the gospel of Matthew. If Christians actually followed Jesus' teachings in that book, we'd have a different world.

"By their fruits shall ye know them."

Sue

[many a good man]

11. Well said

Sounds like the Republican party I know. I've long given up trying to figure out the American electorate. I also tend to think things will have to get worse before they get better...but I've been saying that for 15 years now!

Thanks.

[McCamy Taylor]

10. No. I like these simple yes/no questions.

[yinkaafrica]

12. Looks like they had this covered at every angle

There was no way they were letting this election go.
Somehow I seem to have missed the outrage.

[suston96]

14. Don't let go!

If you bury the dead, the smell will go away.

If we just let this go, the stench of this election will go away and all will be forgotten or so far away from the public senses that nothing will be done.

Don't let go!

[sandnsea]

13. It confuses what we do know

We do know machines malfunctioned. We do know some precincts didn't have enough machines. We do know some people were given the wrong precinct ballot. We know alot of things went very wrong.

We don't know if machines were hacked to switch votes. Whether it's a Rovian look over there while we steal over here, I don't know. But when you focus on machine hacking that hasn't been proven even once, it sure creates the illusion of a bunch of people who will say anything to win.

[marcologico]

15. Not a red herring, but not the only trick they used

They not only stole this election, they stole it carefully enough to cover their tracks and produce a credible illusion of fairness -- 51% popular vote, electoral majorities, and bogus analyses to explain it -- which means they had to control as msny access points as posssible including individual voting machines and central tabulation systems.

Why else would these companies have fought so viciously in every state -- and I mean viciously, including character assassinations of nonconforming secrataries of state, as in California -- to keep their software secret and to resist auditable paper trails? And why else would they put wireless modems in the voting machines?

[understandinglife]

16. No: It's one component of a multi-faceted attack on the franchise (nt)

[bunny planet]

18. The whole thing has seemed like a rather elaborate 'three card monty'

game to me. Look over here, no look over here, over there, now over here............ Deliberately crooked on multiple fronts, Plan A, B, C, D, and E all in effect simultaneously. What crooks, they are such a disgraceful bunch.

[Chili]

19. a little known and hardly reported fact:

...the polling books for Cuyahoga County for a number of precincts did not match the number of signatures. They were off 5 here, 3 there, 7 here... I was a part of the recount, and I listened to the other observers report this afterwards. In fact, I don't even know how large or small the differences were, so all I can do is label what I'm saying as hearsay. I didn't see the polling books myself, I was counting a large precinct and didn't get to see them... and not even all the books were examined. But it was enough to raise some eyebrows, and... that's where it ended. The lawyers are aware of it, and hopefully will move on it next week in some form or other, but the press, by and large, ignored that little fact that could mean so much.

This is how it got reported:

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/110336613519171.xml

"In some cases, Cuyahoga County witnesses said, ballot totals showed that more people voted in a precinct than had signed the poll book."

End of story.

[necso]

20. There was almost certainly some "computer" fraud.

For example, "*" showed up in certain cases when "Kerry", or "Democratic Ticket", (or whatever) was selected. And from what I have seen of the number of reported cases (in both "directions"), this seems unlikely to have been purely a matter of "chance". Moreover, while the number of reported cases is relatively small, many cases probably were noticed and unreported and many others simply unnoticed. (In the case of long lines, in particular, there was certainly at least some unspoken pressure to "vote" quickly.)

And this is probably just one layer of the "onion". -- There is, for most intents and purposes, a vast "machine" working to ensure the neocons' ends, and little things like "the law" and "scruples" mean nothing to them.

But exactly how many "stolen" votes this amounts to may never be known.

However, I am more interested in stressing the important point that you bring up about what you call "BI". Detailed (and specific) analysis of individual voters (and micro-groups) is a powerful tool. It allows for "micro-marketing" (potentially even individual marketing -- the marketeers' dream) and creates a most useful and detailed model of the voting population, and this allows for fragmenting what were formerly "blocks" of voters.

And not only does this allow for "below the radar" (the other guy does not see or does not realize what it is occurring) and narrowly tailored campaigning, but it may enable manipulation of micro-groups that "fall through" the opponent's sampling model, leaving that opponent to believe that his statistics show one thing, when in fact his model is no longer sufficient to describe the "reality". Of course, this might not amount to more than a few percentage points at most (some of these smaller micro-groups will show up in the larger sampling blocks, but in the case of very small sampling numbers the data will probably be skewed -- particularly if one targets groups that generally "fall through" normal sampling ), but in close elections this is a powerful advantage. -- And it is a powerful weapon -- one that it can be expected that the neocons are using like a silent dagger.

Now, of course, we must combat all of these neocon tactics -- but we must also work to ensure margins large enough to withstand those attacks that we cannot defeat. -- After all, we are playing "catch-up".

And it is the capabilities of our opponents that we must worry about, because even if these are not being used today, they may well be used tomorrow. The neocons never rest on their laurels -- they always plot more treachery -- and then work to make it happen.

But certainly there is some risk of becoming fixated on "computer" fraud to the point of neglecting other elements of the "whole package".

[Last Lemming]

21. Computer fraud was the backup

they probably thought they were safe we the "usual stuff" but kept electron manipulation as both a safety net and a way to ensure a "mandate" I think they were surprised and almost lost it all because they didn't realize how much computer manipulation they had to do (That was why everyone of Bush's minions got panicy towards the end of the day--The fix wasn't working like they thought it would

[Eloriel]

22. Such a shame that you bury some VERy good information

under a subject line like that. Of COURSE it's not "either/or" but BOTH/ALL. I don't know why you would want to use your otherwise very good analysis to detract from an equally horrific problem.

[many a good man]

27. I've been fixated on the software question for the past week

After studying what the requirements would be for such a system and figuring out how they'd pull it off, I became aware of how small the numbers really were on a precinct level if you wanted to steal a statewide race. It turns out the numbers are so small covering your tracks seems barely worth the effort...

[Peace Patriot]

23. The BushCons carefully laid the ground work for electronic fraud, but...

...obviously they didn't want to trust their necks to it entirely. Would it work as advertised? Would it be as easy as all that? Old pols not trusting young buck techies.

So--combining several purposes, such as stuffing their friends' pockets with taxpayers' money, which then comes back to them in campaign contributions, and counting on Bush unpopularity in '04 (war, death, thievery, lying), they arranged, through the "Help American Votes Be Stolen Again Act," for BushCon ATM companies (Bush "Pioneers," big donors, B/C campaign chairs (!), and rightwing nut billionaires) to sell computer voting systems to the states, with machines that run on secret, proprietary source code (no public review), using Windows and C++ (highly insecure and hackable), and insisted that no paper trail was necessary (millions spent on wining and dining Dem and Repub Secretaries of State, strong arming and lying about any doubts, they got sued in California--so what?, Tom Delay preventing any reasonable controls by Congress).

A set up for fraud. An open bank vault. Walk in, steal the money, walk out. Completely undetectable. One hacker, a couple of minutes.

Tell us what you want, they said. 2%, 3%, 4% across the board? Or pick up %'s here and there around the country more randomly? Secure early win on the east coast, then all else is gravy? Most critical battleground states? Any extra state needed for Electoral vote? Want a couple of Senate seats, too?

But the Old Pols are wily, and put some other plans in place as well. Took much at stake.

Sproul, shredding Dem voter registration forms across the west, paid by the RNC.

Blackwell, ah, Blackwell, the irony! Give whitey plenty of voting machines, they'll vote up a storm for Bush. Deprive the colored folk, they'll have to go to work, take care of their kids, can't stand in line for 10 hours to vote (but some did). And make them register to vote on 80 lb. paper.

And Jeb. Jeb. Purge 'em all off the list ahead of time. Lose 50,000 absentee ballots in the mail two days before. Put the most incompetent, bought, manipulable people you can find in charge of the election. Call in the chips. (Re-program the chips!)

And they saw the grass roots Left coming, never before so united with the Democratic Party leadership. Thousands of volunteers. Fundraising like crazy on the Internet. Bruce Springsteen, Michael Moore! Couldn't divide and conquer them with the war. Couldn't smear Kerry, Americans weren't buying it. Everybody and his sister voting. This is THE election. One purpose: Throw the bastards out!

Kerry tied or ahead in the polls. Huge Dem voter registration. Dem campaigns feeling good, good. Unstoppable. Momentum. Bush a drooling idiot in the debates. Even the CIA alarmed. Defections. Whistleblowers. Consensus: Throw the bastards out!

And, sure enough, come Election Day: Exit Polls show big Kerry win all afternoon.

And the bastards saw all this, and put every plan into action:

Vote suppression: Short them on voting machines, use provisional ballot challenges, call felon lists (you'll be arrested), change their precincts without telling them, make them drive 30 miles to vote then challenge them, disappear their names from the poll lists, disqualify for voting at the wrong table (multiple precincts), etc. etc., AND

2% across the board, plus extra %'s here and there to secure battleground states, using central electronic tabulation machines with secret source code, PLUS pre-programmed touchscreens changing Kerry votes to Bush votes all day long, PLUS Triad taking care of punchcards...all stops out.

PLUS, get your friends at the networks to ALTER the Exit Poll figures on everybody's TV screens, by "adjusting" the Exit Polls to REFLECT the in-coming controlled electronic central vote tabulator "results," to make it appear that Bush was winning BOTH the Exit Polls AND the "official results" so that--unlike in the Ukraine--Americans DON'T KNOW there are two different results: Exit Polls-Kerry win. "Official results"-Bush win.

Nothing to compare. Everybody who is anybody agreed. Bush wins.

Continuity. Good of the country. Good sportsmanship. And since we whack anybody who is anybody who might conceivably cast doubt upon the most egregiously fraudulent election since Josef Stalin, i.e., CBS and planted document, let the "tinfoil hats" throw conniption fits about it on the Internet, we have that covered. (They're "tinfoil hats"--everybody who is anybody is agreed.)

And the war goes on. And the looting of the federal government goes on. Buy an island. Invite selected Democrats. Have a party.

However, the old pols were foolish to mess with black voters, and to violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965 so openly, so brutally. They didn't figure on John Conyers getting uppity about that.

Soulless bastards, really. Not a clue.

[NVMojo]

24. it was voter registration fraud and intimidation and then election fraud

and election voter intimidation and many, many other things that the repukes have strategically done for quite a long period of time....like even the HAVA Act. I believe that the Repukes are setting up Nevada to be the demise of the liberal left in California through several little steps no one is paying attention to. And I believe they are doing this all over and the Dems are either part of it through their DLC "whoring" with the right or through not seeing the signs.

[Joe Chi Minh]

25. Self-deleted

[IStriker]

32. The "Help American To Vote" act - is that HAVA?

If that's what your referring to was bipartisan. The Dems would not allow the Pukes to pass what they wanted; the Pukes would not allow the Dems to pass what they wanted, but everybody knew they ought to pass something, so they settled on some things they all agreed on which look to be worthless.

[EuroObserver]

26. Voter suppression

>>Voter suppression could be counted on to shave off another .5% of the needed difference.<<

Reckon voter suppression (racially, economically targetted) is a hell of a lot bigger than that.

And, that kind of suppression, oppression, is a serious crime, is it not?

[southwood]

28. Little things mean a lot

It first dawned on me that fixing an election does not require truckloads of ballots, when I read Dr. Werner Lange's original paper on phantom votes in Trumbull County, Ohio some weeks ago now: on average 5.5 ballots for this precinct, I think it was, and with some 11000 precincts - well, when extrapolated that would be a lot of votes.

The early focus on machines led to the recounts in New Hampshire and later Ohio, under the assumption that the votes just had to be there, but the count was fixed. Well, the ballots basically matched the vote, as could be reasonably expected - the other side is not stupid - but where did they come from and where were all of the Democratic votes?

All of the mechanisms you point out are in place, but let me try to add a few more. There is an incredible % of spoiled votes in primarily Democratic precincts, of up to 5 % in some cases (where 0.5 % max would be acceptable). This may systemic rather than intentional, old machines, machines not cleaned on time, the not-far-enough down effect, but it serves the purpose. In a 500 votes mainly poor or black precinct this effect could amount to a loss of 20 Kerry votes.

Then a true gem I read in a post on DU a few days ago, and can't find right now (anyone?). The people observing the recount in Greene County, Ohio came across the phenomenon of "pre-challenging". Someone had "pre-challenged" a number of voters very shortly before the election, they were crossed of the list of eligible voters and summoned to appear in person before the BOE. The time between the pre-challenge and the election was such that this was impossible, let alone that it is unheard of that a democracy would do this to its citizens. So, presumably, the voters showed up to vote, were not on the list, were issued provisional ballots which were subsequently not counted because the voters were still not on the list. If this happened, it is almost elegant in its malice. Not even illegal! Just imagine the possibilities and the potential numbers involved if this happened in many counties.
Option for activism: next election pre-challenge every Rep. and Senator, that should get their attention! Didn't the Patriot Act's black lists really get noticed only when Ted Kennedy was prevented from boarding airplanes?

What every American seems to take for granted is this notion of having to "register to vote". Now, most of Europe, where I'm from and live, was briefly conquered by the French under Napoleon, around 1800, and they introduced - among many other useful things such as the metric system - something called a "register of population". When you're born, you're registered with the local municipality, when you move your registration moves with you, when you die someone else registers your death. Everyone 18 or older and not currently in jail (or dead) gets a voting card when there is an election. No need to register. (Also, over the last 30 years, it never took me more than 90 seconds to cast my vote, ballot or machine).
Obviously, in the U.S., there are forces interested to keep out the poor, black, students, anyone for whom registration may present an obstacle, out of the voting process. Implement a decent population registration system and the GOP - in its present form - will never have a majority again.

Final point. Can't agree with you more on the GOP's use of "Business Information". I would assume that BI is not used just as a GOTV instrument, but also as a way of (pre-)challenging. After all, if the other guys know who their potential voters are, they will also be able to figure out who are most susceptible to intimidation of one kind or another (pre-challenging, threatening phone calls by the "Texas Strike Force", and so on). This is where a nice thread elsewhere on this forum on fixing student elections by "Greeks" (fraternities etc.)comes in. Not only is this where the old guard has first learned their tricks - common wisdom has it that "Tricky Dick" got his nickname by rigging campus elections - but I would guess that frat groups like this do some of the dirty work in the real world. Get the sophisticated companies to do the data-mining (Datamaxx may re-enter the scene here) and produce the lists, and get the frats to do the ugly stuff. Remember the video of the white kids harassing black voters?

[48pan]

29. I think so and here's why...

Most of the computers used in voting are not black boxes. They are optical scanning machines. The ballots that go into these machines are observed and counted by both Democrats and Republicans. The count is visible to anyone at an time.

Voters are checked in and out of the polls and the number of votes cast is compared with the machine count. The original ballots are kept with the machines and can be checked for accurate scanning.

Fraud is easily detected with these machines. They are more reliable at counting than hand counting. The only problems are when the voter fails to mark the correct spots on the ballot and in close races, those ballots can be separated out and counted by hand, as they have been in Ohio. Those ballots are mostly from people who are either too stupid to understand that they are supposed to fill in the oval, or from people with bad eyesight (older).

The real chance for fraud is in registration and in absentee ballots.

On the other hand, the black boxes used in parts of Florida do not have a paper trail. Those machines should be banned immediately.

So at least here in New Hampshire, the machines are very hard to scam, but registration and absentee ballots are easy to scam. Anybody can show up at the polls with an envelope with a local address and they can register and vote the same day. Most of the students at the local college aren't legal residents, but lots of them vote in the town. They just show a dorm address and claim they plan to be permanent residents when they graduate.

Absentee ballots sit around in boxes for weeks. People go to nursing homes with forms and sign up everybody for absentee ballots. Then they help the seniors vote and mail the ballots. Scamming the absentee ballot system is easy.

Another favorite in my area is for local politicians to go out to a local derelict trailer park/camping area. They take a keg of beer and a van. The keg is tapped only after everybody in the park rides the van to the polls and votes for the politician providing the beer (and usually a few cartons of smokes). It has been going on for generations.

So, the answer to your question is yes and no. In the case of optical scanning computers, you are probably right. In the case of pure black-box voting, the danger is extreme.

[many a good man]

30. Easy to scam old machines

Card readers need tabulators, too.

[IStriker]

31. The operative words in your post are "in a very close election..."

100,000+ votes is NOT a close election in Ohio and a 5% difference in the final vote is not a close election; 6 1/2 million or 7 million or whatever the number was nationally is NOT a close election. This is why none of the fraud allegations I've seen posted ring true. You must dispense with your common sense and allow your feelings and hopes to determine whether fraud is apparent. Media control (how about effective advertising) and what you call BI are not illegal; they are good political campaigning.

I WANT their to be fraud, but until somebody shows me proof, I have to think that Kerry lost the election.

[shiina]

33. No, because polls showed Kerry winning

1. Is possible, but requires a huge conspiracy of people all across the country, whereas a computerized method could be done with only a few people

2. Exit polls showed Kerry winning, meaning the voter suppression was not enough to give B*sh the win

3. Obviously, if the media told the truth, no one would have voted for B*sh at all. But again, according to the exit polls, it wasn't enough.

4. Again, exit polls...not enough...