Does the Democratic leadership care about Electoral Fraud?

[iconoclastNYC]

What will be done before the 2006 election? With all the indicators of from 2000,2002,2004 how can anyone in the Democratic party expect a fair election?

[BillyDoc]

1. Why should they?

They are often enough the beneficiaries.

Two Simple Plans to Combat Electronic Voting Machine "Glitches" and Fraud

http://electionfraudbounty.org/Two%20simple%20election%20plans.php

[Kurovski]

2. It's up to us.

How did they handle it in the Ukraine?

[iconoclastNYC]

3. LOL.

It will never come to that because the pollsters and the voting companies are in bed with the Republicans. It is my understanding that in the Ukraine the numbers were reported separate so it made the fraud easy to see. Here the exit polls are the done only for the media.

The Democrats (or some other group outside the party) should be laying a trap for the the next attempt at fraud. I can't believe they didn't see it in 2004.

This is the only issue that could drive me to leave my country or join a third party.

[forgethell]

6. What I want to know is

why didn't they do it in 2004? I mean Dem lawyers were all over the place. Fraud was being watched for. So why wasn't something filed? My best guess is that any fraud detected was not going to be enough to make a difference.

Otherwise, you have to believe that the Dems are cowardly scumbags in league with the Republicans to keep themselves out of office. I don't think so. I would certainly prefer not to think so.

[iconoclastNYC]

9. Trying to be hopeful.

God I may be giving them too much credit, but maybe this go around they discovered information useful enough to lay a better trap and pull up the whole conspiracy to the top.

If this scenario were to be true, and come to fruition, the short term loss of the 04 election might be worth it for bringing down so many parts of the Republican party.

Yeah its very unlikely but i'm going to hope for it.

This would damage the Republican party for twenty years.

[forgethell]

12. I don't

think most politicians, Dem or Repub, think in terms of "twenty years". I think they think in terms of "this election". After all, they have a family to feed.

My take on it: nothing has been done because we honestly lost the election. Until we change what we did wrong, we will continue to lose. We will not change what we did wrong until we know what it is. We will not know until we start looking for it rather than some fantasy "theft".

[Kurovski]

7. It is a drag. Have you seen these threads?

Regarding statistics.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=109x20066


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x349559

Until these things sink in, you're absolutely correct, it is to laugh.

[Peace Patriot]

16. "Here the exit polls are...done only for the media." --iconoclastNYC

It was quite specific, what the TV networks did. They CHANGED the exit poll data late on election day--the polls that everyone was watching on their TV screens. They ADJUSTED the exit poll data to fit the official results. The official results, of course, were being fed to the networks from central electronic vote tabulators, run on secret, proprietary programming code, owned and controlled by major donors to the Bush-Cheney campaign, including Walden O'Dell (Diebold), chair of the B/C campaign in Ohio who had pledged in writing to "deliver" Ohio to B/C.

The TV networks thus DENIED the American people strong evidence of fraud (that Kerry won the exit polls), prevented a mass outcry and most investigation (except by Conyers, the Greens, etc.), and took additional measures to kill all discussion of this matter.

The people in the Ukraine could plainly see that something was very wrong. The exit polls (used worldwide to verify elections and check for fraud) did not agree with the official results. They had the two separate figures--exit polls vs. official results (whereas the exit polls we saw on our TV screens had been polluted with the official results--in a quite crude way, obvious now). And it was a similar situation, where one side had partisan control of the election machinery.

One of the biggest puzzles in political history is, a) why the Democratic Party leaders failed to strongly object to the election SYSTEM prior to the election (Wally O'Dell counting all the votes in secret?--I mean, come on...), and b) why they then utterly shut down on us, on 11/3, after promising to "count every vote."

It may be that they decided they simply couldn't fight both the BushCons in Congress (Bush majority in Congress, of lockstep "pod people" who would not have reversed the election, no matter what evidence was presented), AND the obvious news monopoly collusion. But personally, I don't think it's that simple or that benign (re Dem leaders).

If it was just a matter of impossible circumstances, why didn't the Dem leaders object to the election SYSTEM, prior to the election, to create more favorable circumstances for an honest election--or at least loudly warn voters of the election system's nontransparency and hackability?

To me, this is unfathomable. And I can only conclude that some Dem leaders, and some Kerry advisers, wanted to lose the election. Possibly some are just very twisted and corrupt. They want war in the Middle East, but because their rank and file overwhelmingly oppose it, they don't want to get tagged with its carnage and its costs and its illegality; they wanted Bush and the Republicans to take the rap. So they failed to advise Kerry just how fraud-prone the election system was, then afterwards that he had no chance of overturning the result. (Bear in mind that a presidential candidate lives in an almost impenetrable bubble of powermongers and kingmakers--a very unreal world.)

In addition to this huge problem--Dem leaders having motives they won't fully admit to--there are the more obvious forms of corruption: military-industrial complex corruption (they are almost all guilty of this), and HAVA corruption, $4 billion in election "reform" funds with this latter corruption clearly bleeding into the states and corrupting local Dems-- except for California's incorruptible Sec of State, Kevin Shelley, who sued Diebold and decertified their machines prior to the election, which brings me to Democratic leadership problem no. 3, fear.

Don't forget that it was the "anthrax" Congress that passed HAVA (the biggest election system scam in history with maybe the exception of Stalinist Russia). Fear. Fear of being taken down, like Shelley was (by smears, and ruination of your career). And maybe fear of death (both self and family). (The "anthrax Congress" was also the one that lacked Paul Wellstone's leadership--via an untimely, and if the truth were known, inexplicable plane crash.)

Many Dems are corrupt in many ways--and now are operating in a political atmosphere of terror. Why didn't they demand transparency in the election system and/or scream bloody murder when they didn't get it? Why didn't they fight this obviously fraudulent election result? Why didn't they do their own exit polls? Why, in California, have they acquiesced to the takedown of Shelley (and replacement of a duly elected Democrat with a Schwarzenegger appointee, whose "transition team" has direct connections to Diebold)?

Corruption, fear, disarray--and extraordinary malfeasance. A very complex situation, in which the Bush Cartel is moving very fast to consolidate ALL power, and to exploit every last weakness of the benighted opposition.

I say all this not to scare and depress people, but to help us understand what's happening and clarify what we, the people, need to do about it. We have to conquer fear and depression, individually, and collectively--but not by blinding ourselves to the reality of our situation.

I see many, many hopeful signs. I think this is by and large a progressive country, with a very sensible and well-meaning population, which has had its will thwarted time and again, and this time, on a massive scale. So, we just have to rise above it, and BECOME the democracy that we all hold in our hearts as our ideal.

The many election reform bills in the states are a very good sign. The grass roots effort that they represent is a wonderful sign. That so many Ph.D.'s and expert statisticians are willing to risk their own necks by crying foul on the election, and pushing election reform, is awesome. The Velvet Revolution boycott is a good sign (aiming at the heart of the matter), as are all the fabulous election researchers, bloggers, groups and activists. A huge movement is afoot to restore democracy in this country.

And think of the whistleblowers--Wilson, Clark, Edmunds and so many others--all having risked so much. We are not alone. We are part of a collective democratic will that is gathering its strength.

Democracy can't be killed. It is too sweet an idea. People will always, always come back to it. It can only be eclipsed temporarily. And as we recover our democracy, there will have to be a reckoning, within the Democratic Party, regarding the leaders and office holders who have failed us.

[Amaryllis]

19. Votescam says dems have been complicit in fraud for a long time.

[CrispyQ]

4. That won't happen until the sheeple are cold & hungry.

Of course, it will be too late then.

[forgethell]

5. This ain't the Ukraine.

Different peoples, different rules, different everything.

[Kurovski]

8. I forgot. The Ukraine is a Democracy.

The people weren't sedated and overfed. ( that's a nod to you, CrispyQGirl.) :-)

[forgethell]

13. See

post 12.

[GettysbergII]

10. The Democratic leadership kowtows to the corporations and ruling class

....damn near as much as the Repugs do. Witness the bipartisan support for these three signature bills of the Bush Administration:

1) NCLB Act- which was clearly designed to 'privatize' Public Education

2) Patriot Act- which was clearly designed to suppress political opposition to the Oil Wars and the thirdworldization of the American working person

3) The Invasion of Iraq (Operation Iraqi Liberation)- enough said

Add to that the almost unanimous support for the fatally flawed HAVA bill which ended up handing the Rightwing the 2004 election on a platter and most likely many more to come.

Here's a interesting exerpt from When Corporations Rule the World by David C. Korten published by Kumarian Press, 1995.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Korten/BuildEliteConsens_WCRW.html
<snip>
The policy actions being advanced by the elite consensus constitute an increasingly effective attack on the institutions of democracy-the very purpose of which is to prevent a small inside elite from capturing control of the instruments of governance. Their dominance of the policy debate largely precludes raising alternatives to prevailing assumptions.

Economic globalization is neither in the human interest nor inevitable. It is axiomatic that political power aligns with economic power. The larger the economic unit, the larger its dominant players, and the more political power becomes concentrated in the largest corporations. The greater the political power of corporations and those aligned with them, the less the political power of the people, and the less meaningful democracy becomes. There is an alternative: to localize economies, disperse economic power, and bring democracy closer to the people. However, networks and alliances made up exclusively of Stratos dwellers are unlikely to articulate and pursue such an alternative. To the contrary, as we shall see in the next chapter, the Stratos dwellers are mobilizing the full resources of the world's largest corporations behind an effort to consolidate global corporate rule.

Korten, by the way, is no wild eyed, bomb throwing anarchist. His pedigree includes:

http://www.davidkorten.org/
Dr. Korten holds MBA and Ph.D. degrees from the Stanford Business School and has thirty years experience as a development worker in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. He has been a Harvard Business School professor, US Air Force captain, Ford Foundation Project Specialist in Manila, and Asia regional advisor to the US Agency for International Development.

For a more complete biograph
http://www.pcdf.org/About_PCDF/korten.htm

[Peace Patriot]

18. GettsburgII, it seems to me we had a balance of forces for a while...

(basic idea of the Constitution), from the 1930s to Bush the Second, with a gradual erosion over time of the peoples' sovereign power to regulate corporations and its own affairs, and thence to this open floodgate of fascist power mongering (Bush II). Our political system is now so awesomely corrupt, it's hard to know where to begin to correct it. Prior to the 2004 election, I thought we needed a Constitutional amendment banning all private money in political campaigns. (Enough! Fini!) But now, to even get to that point--the point of having the sovereign power to do that--we have first to restore the most fundamental right: voting.

It, too, has been privatized, corrupted and destroyed. And I find the Democratic Party leadership collusion in that privatization, corruption and destruction the most puzzling thing of all.

The balance that we had was an uneasy one, but it worked for a while: Corporations creating commerce and jobs, with the government protecting workers and insuring that they get a decent living from the vast wealth being created, and protecting the vulnerable (the old, the sick, the poor). Rich and poor had common cause--a common society that we were all creating, and living in. But the flaws in this system--particularly the predatory nature of huge corporations, and the overmilitarization of the whole economy, and also its Achilles heel, oil--have really come home with a vengeance.

We have a lot more to repair than the election system. That's just step one.

[Bill Bored]

11. First iconoclast, if you're in NYC,

and you haven't done so already, please go to www.nyvv.org and write to or call the State Senators and Assembly Reps on the HAVA Committee and politely demand that they NOT allow Touch Screen/DRE voting machines in our state.

Whether the so-called Dem leadership gives a crap or not, if we can have fair elections in our state, it can make a difference.

This is where the focus needs to be right now, and I'm sure Howard Dean would agree at least to some extent.

So spread the word!

Thanks!

[Andy_Stephenson]

14. Some do...some don't

But there is no room in the Republic for vote rigging.

[Bouvet_Island]

15. That´s an interesting question,

one of my first reactions when I got an understanding about the US election system was that with only two parties, it is simple to rig because any accusations by one party can be met with disclosures of readily prepared vote frauds scandals by the accusers party. It could be carried away with far less control of the press etc, and you should consider the low managability of the situation on behalf of the accusers. No way to tell what would happen if you evaporate (half?) the people´s faith in the political system overnight.
For a presidential election, I believe rigging one state democratic election would be a proportional measure, I would then focus the rest of the energy on say, slandering JFKs election which is conveniently distant in time. Shortly I see the options the democratic leadership had/has as rather limited, so the fact that they have been rather silent on the issue doesn´t tell me they are not aware of the situation and very much so.

No matter how corrupt you might believe the people on top are, I consider the desire for power a constant, and in (?) democracies it comes from election results.

The political route after a "Hey, election fraud!" would likely lead to a *bipartisan* election reform, and with little political capital to spend, what could be accomplished would be likely entirely up to the republicans to decide. They could change this and that and make "complaints commision" and blah blah, open some machines etc. and leave the elections just as hackable and intransparent, which would leave us at about 0 -1

I don´t think the situation is hopeless though, but I think what is called public opinion will have to be changed before we can accomplish any political results. If an real election were to be hacked and then the hack publicised, as an example, the climate would change instantly and the democrats in congress would gain more of a clout with election reform. If they didn´t act when given a real chance, I would be more suspicious. As of yet I believe it is a "partisan issue".

[NationalEnquirer]

17. Heck no.

I'll be honest, I think the Democrats have probably benefited in the past from cheating in elections, in some close races.
Calling out the Repunks on cheating now, opens THEM up to the cheating they did in the past.
Of course now the punks have got it down to a science man...

[Amaryllis]

20. Votescam says dems complicit in election fraud for years.

[NationalEnquirer]

21. The whole system has been corrupts for years..

Now, the Repunks have perfected the corruption..

[WHAT]

22. complicity, fear, blackmail...

I'm not buying ignorance.

[Peace Patriot]

23. I pretty much agree with you, WHAT--I'm not buying ignorance,

particularly on the part of the major Democratic Party leaders and office holders--DNC leaders, Senators, et al. It's their JOB to know how votes are counted!

I DO think that the electronic voting scam works in part through creating an esoteric system that ordinary voters and probably some ordinary Congress critters, state electon officials, and political party activists do not understand. It has become a subject for "experts" and "professionals." Look how dependent WE non-techie activists all are on those among us who can rattle off the alphabet soup of voting systems, and understand how these systems work. It is beyond ordinary people (one of my major objections to it--all should be able to understand how their votes are counted).

BUT, the Democratic LEADERS have/had an OBLIGATION to understand it--not to mention the self-interest involved (getting elected). They helped put this system in place. They did not warn people about it. They shut up about its fraudulent result.

Granted, office holders and candidates have a lot on their minds. But this is so fundamental! If they are not techies themselves, they should have had the appropriate experts to tell them what was going on with this. WHY has it been so hard--such a struggle--just to get public officials to SEE the OBVIOUS fraudulent nature of this election SYSTEM?

It is beyond understanding. And it therefore must involve various kinds of corruption. That is the only conclusion that one can come to. (--as well as other problems, such as fear--not a small matter with the Bush Cartel in power).