The Significance of a Corrupted Recount of the Cleveland 2004 Presidential Vote

[Time for change]

With the pending trial of three election officials for rigging the recount of Cuyahoga County in the 2004 presidential election, I think that it is worth reconsidering the importance of that recount to the 2004 election.

The prosecutors have implied that the sole purpose of the crime was to avoid extra work on the part of the election officials. I believe that the purpose of the crime probably had far greater motivations and implications than that, and that this could (and should) possibly be an opportunity to get to the bottom of what happened in the 2004 Presidential election in Ohio.

Here is a thread that I posted on that subject in GD:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3164857

[Ellipsis]

1. I agree with you 100%. n/t

[mod mom]

2. Definitely significant. I wish the folks here on DU who frequently bash the Greens

would appreciate the efforts and $ raised which lead to the recount. Many worked with John Conyers in compiling the info hopefully to be used in the future.

[Wilms]

3. .

[Time for change]

4. Yes, I certainly do appreciate them

:toast:

[davidwparker]

5. I identify with the Greens. However, we are set up as a two party system.

Voting for a Green in anything but a true blue, will always be county/state hurts the Dem and gives advantage to the Republican. That's just the way it is. We don't have proportional representation unfortunately.

[tbyg52]

7. Instant runoff voting!

And, while we're at it, hand counted paper ballots. I know there can be a way to have both.

[davidwparker]

9. I'll take both of those to go, please.

[Kurovski]

6. K&R.(nt)

[ohio2007]

8. the lazy bass turds didn't want to recount 600,000 votes so they did a "spot check" of a few votes

The 2006 results conducted at the board of elections that is. There is more than one case on trial in the office of the Cleaveland board of elections

[Time for change]

11. I doubt very much that it was lazyness

Unless they had information that the election itself was fraudulent, why rig the recount? If the election itself was clean, the recount would match the official results and wouldn't have to be rigged, right?

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that the election was fraudulent, and the recount was rigged so that the fraudulent election wouldn't come to light.

[salin]

10. I think that we will be hearing about the Ohio elections under

Blackwell for a *long* time, on many fronts. I hope that folks across the country keep watching, reading and writing about it.

There was just an item last week about the financial mess he left the office in (the new SOC has to petition the state for additional funds, just to be able to function through the Spring) - along with controversial bonuses he handed out to top officials on their way out of office (hush money?)

What is so interesting in Ohio - is there seem to have been so many different types of fraud actions (or potential fraud actions for those who are cautious in their wording) going on simultaneously. But done so clumsily in some cases that it was detectable - leaving a roadmap to the "how to rig an election" antics.

Kudos and great appreciation to ALL of those in Ohio (or working with those in Ohio) to expose and hold accountable those involved in the various schemes.

[Time for change]

12. I do hope you're right about that

I believe that Blackwell handed the election to Bush, just as Katherine Harris did 4 years earlier. I think it's outrageous that his actions would go uninvestigated and unpunished. That would just set a precedent that would make this kind of thing more likely to happen in the future.