|
Edited on Fri Jun-06-08 12:20 PM by Peace Patriot
Whether they will or not is the question. It's a matter of reading entrails. What would be most advantageous to the global corporate predators who rule over us, at this point? Probably they don't want a big citizen revolt against their election theft machines. Those have important future uses. Too obvious a steal will imperil their "trade secret" code voting machines. And they probably don't want a rebellious American population sharpening our pitchforks and organizing American Revolution II--the revolt against the Corporate Rulers. So, my guess is, they will let Obama win, but seriously shave his mandate (turn a landslide into a close voter), give him a difficult, "Blue Dog" Congress, and hamper him in other ways--perhaps inducing Great Depression II (put it on his head, not the Pukes), continued psyops in the corporate media, and who knows what else they can do? (Money and arms--and psyops--are in place to start an oil war in South America, for instance.)
The basic facts of their capability are these: Virtually all the votes in the country are now 'counted' by three rightwing Bushite corporations, using 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, with virtually no audit/recount controls. Many states have ZERO audit--whether because that have no paper trail at all (nothing TO recount), or they don't count ANY of the paper ballots (except in the unusual circumstances of a recount--which is very difficult and expensive to obtain--and is often just a 3% recount). And even the best of states only do a 1% audit (automatic recount)--extremely inadequate in a 'TRADE SECRET' CODE system.
By contrast, Venezuela uses electronic voting, but they use OPEN SOURCE CODE--code that anyone may review--and they handcount a whopping 55% of the votes as a check on machine fraud.
We have what can only be described as a fraudulent SYSTEM. It is INHERENTLY fraudulent. It is fraudulent going in. "Trade secret vote counting violates the fundamental premise of voting, and democracy, so completely, that it cannot be called democracy. It is a CRAP SHOOT. Who will be Diebolded into office? Who the hell knows? We have NO WAY OF KNOWING.
That said, I do think that the Corporate Rulers are worried about us. We are potentially the most powerful progressive force on earth. The American People, unleashed, could well bring Corporate Rule to an end. And they've certainly given us reason to--or at the least, to start putting some serious controls on U.S.-based multinationals and war profiteers.
A U.S. national election is a complex affair. The voting machines themselves are a complex business--different in every state, and often from county to county, rife with acronyms, needing technical expertise to understand, and often quite bewildering to ordinary citizens--but they are only one factor--although a very important one. We can outvote the machines--produce such a landslide that the corps just aren't prepared enough (can't get enough machines coded, or with the right formulas, to reverse a landslide), or don't want to risk their election theft capability by reversing a landslide. It's harder to steal it for a losing candidate (poor pre-election polls); easier in a truly close race. So money and campaign strategy DO matter. I think you can figure--based on past elections--that we're working with a 5% to 10% handicap, generally--in favor of Pukes, warmongers and corporatists. There is also the corporate media monopoly factor. They write the plausible narratives for stolen elections, and help prevent recounts, questions and rebellions. They also sway votes with imagery, psyops, lies and propaganda.
The Obama campaign, and its wonderful citizen activists--and Obama himself--were remarkably skillful at overcoming some of these handicaps during the nomination process. He got his first edge in the caucuses--which are NOT counted by Diebold and brethren--and used the 50-state strategy to advantage. Aside from that, I don't know, and no one knows, what happened. Most of the votes were counted by Diebold & brethren, with virtually no audit/recount controls. Did these corps want it to be a tight, bitter race--pitting two of the Dems' major voting groups against each other--blacks vs. women? That fits with the corporate news narrative. Did they favor one over the other? Did they care who won? Did they let it just play out--holding their power in reserve for November? Did they ignore the Dem prez race, and concentrate instead on getting war/corporate Dems nominated for Congress--so that the coming Dem sweep wouldn't be an anti-war, anti-corporate sweep? This would fit with a corporate strategy of letting Obama win, but hampering his administration (as to ending the war, and reform). Who knows? We can't know. All we can do is be as vigilant as possible, and work for the long-term restoration of transparent vote counting--which is something we can still accomplish, in local/state jurisdictions--with a lot of citizen effort--whatever happens in November.
One worry is that there are no caucuses in November. It's a straight Diebold & brethren-counted vote. Other worries, of course, include voter "caging" lists (most often used against the poor and against the military), and a host of other election theft techniques developed by the Pukes over eight years of rampant power, and with a Dept. of Justice notorious for failure to enforce the Voting Rights Act, and political prosecution favoring Pukes. The political climate has certainly changed. Some of this Pukism has been investigated and exposed. Some state/local election reform movements have at least achieved a paper ballot backup (even if isn't counted--or is only 1% counted--it is something of a preventative), and have furthermore created more vigilance and oversight--often in difficult battles with corrupt election officials. I don't think we should count on a shaved-Obama mandate being the Corporate Ruler strategy, although I think it's probable. We need to fight like hell for a change in government, and produce a landslide to try to insure it. We can't count on ANYTHING.
I also don't think Obama intends real serious reform--although someone pointed out to me, the other day, that neither did FDR, when he first ran for and won the presidency. Obama has a "win/win" corporate P.R. line. In truth, the people can't win with Corporations--not these monster Corporations we have now. You have to pull their corporate charters, dismantle them and seize their assets for the common good--at least the worst of them. Put them in their place. Re-assert the sovereignty of the People. As FDR later aid, "Organized money hates me--and I welcome their hatred." That's not Obama--at least not from what I can see.
The struggle to reform our country and create a better country is going to be long and hard, and electing Obama will more than likely help, although that is not the end of it, by any means. We must learn to think beyond the next election. And we really, really, REALLY must attend to the machinery of voting and take it back from private "organized money" interests.
|