More evidence of a stolen election

thanks to the kind folks at DU for this info

from JoeUser Forums
Link



At that link, provided by the folks at DU, one can find the official county by county vote tallies from Florida in a compact database. However, if one goes down to the "op-scan" section, interesting irregularities begin to show in the numbers. For example: look at Liberty County...Calhoun County...Taylor County...Bradford County...just to name a few. I think you all get the point by this time.

*update 1*
Just to let all you right-wingers know, this is issue is about to explode:

1) Three congressmen have signed on to a letter demanding an investigation.
Link

2)Blackboxvoting.org has filed a massive freedom of information act claim on Florida, and I am proud to say that I donated to help further that cause, and I encourage anyone who feels like this matter needs to be investigated to do the same. (Thank you Mrs. Rhodes)
Link

3)The left is not going to sit by while the millions of people who voted for Senator Kerry are disenfranchised.
politics
20,465 views 50 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Oh I get the point, I think you will find a kindred spirit here.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yes, we get it, DU users are nuts.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
It will be interesting to see if anyone gets caught with their pants down this time. I don't trust either party, As we know both parties have participated in such shennanigans at one time or another andI suspect one, the other, or both did this time. If so the question will be at what level it was orchestrated from. In any case I try not to speculate too much from the get go.

One thing I did notice were the exit polls. They were leaked to start with and all the swing states had severe irregularities. I have heard a few people state that they have never seen such irregularities, that exit polls are used when the UN conducts elections in 3rd world countries to look for fraud, and they think that there should be an investigation to see if the exit polls were "cooked". May or may not reveal fraud, but cooking exit polls is a civil rights violation. As far as leaking the exit polls I don't know where the legality of that stands.
Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
Your right, it looks like the Democrats were stuffing the ballot boxes in the larger counties. Seriously, the smaller counties are where the purported anomalies exist both Sumter and Nassau (in E-touch) exhibit similar behavior that is supposedly odd in the Op-scan. I see no reason to expect a correlation between voting pattern and machine. What is more likely is that the "expected" vote numbers were WRONG (much of the whole analysis hinges on the expected vote), that the smaller counties are more conservative and that the FEMA aid due to hurricanes helped swing Florida toward GWB (it gave GWB and his brother lots of opportunity to shake hands and make personal appeals to Floridians).
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
What I found intresting about that was that all the counties with high turnover, had very small populations... I didn't really see anything that would make me cry fraud though, unless the huricanes were a gov conspiracy to boost the republican vote.... Hmmm.
Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top
msladydeath - 11/6/2004 3:07:47 AM
What I found intresting about that was that all the counties with high turnover, had very small populations... I didn't really see anything that would make me cry fraud though, unless the huricanes were a gov conspiracy to boost the republican vote.... Hmmm.


The telling statistic is not in the turnout, its in the results. Calhoun county has 82% of those registered as Democrat and only 11 % Republican and Bush pulls 63% of the votes? Duval county has 37 % Republicans compared to 46 % Democrats and Bush pulls almost 60% of the votes? Even in counties won by Kerry, its not by the margin one would expect. Gadsen county 83% registered Democrats compared to 11% Republican, and Kerry can only get 70 % of the vote? Less than 3000 registered Republicans in that county and yet in the final vote talley, Bush received over 6000 votes.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

At that link, provided by the folks at DU,


That's all I needed to hear. 


Do you honestly think that complaining and screaming 'fraud' like this furthers your cause? 

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
bleedingheartliberal:

As you can see by the threads, our conservative friends don't care if abuses occured. So, let's open up the discussion. Hey everybody: Is it all right to cheat if you win? Since that makes you the MAJORITY, imposing your will doesn't matter?
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
The telling statistic is not in the turnout, its in the results.


Since when does being registered as one party or the other mean you have to vote for that party's candidate 100% of the time? I guess that means that if someone is registered as an Independent they are restricted to only voting for an Independent candidate?

I guess my understanding of voting rules is different from yours
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #9 By: CrispE - 11/6/2004 9:56:40 AM
bleedingheartliberal:

As you can see by the threads, our conservative friends don't care if abuses occured. So, let's open up the discussion. Hey everybody: Is it all right to cheat if you win? Since that makes you the MAJORITY, imposing your will doesn't matter


Before you go talking smack, you should have proof to back you up!
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
More evidence of a stolen election
By: bleedingheartliberal
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2004 on Speak Truth to Power
Message Board: Politics
>
3)The left is not going to sit by while the millions of people who voted for Senator Kerry are disenfranchised.


Do you even know the meaning of the word?


One entry found for disfranchise.


Main Entry: dis·fran·chise
Pronunciation: (")dis-'fran-"chIz
Function: transitive verb
: to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote
- dis·fran·chise·ment /-"chIz-m&nt, -ch&z-/ noun


No one was deprived of their right to vote! Get a grip!
Reply #12 from PolMach Forums Top
Since when does being registered as one party or the other mean you have to vote for that party's candidate 100% of the time? I guess that means that if someone is registered as an Independent they are restricted to only voting for an Independent candidate?

I guess my understanding of voting rules is different from yours


The fact that across the country that partsians regularly voted over 90% for their party candidate for President means nothing, huh. Are we expected to believe that only in Florida Democrats split evenly for Kerry/Bush? If something stinks its probably going bad.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
little_whip:

Bravo! BTW: I haven't said the abuses invalidate the election. (and I don't think you accused me of saying it, but just to set the record straight). The key is that we don't let this situation just fester over and over.... over and over... over and over... I hope we are all in agreement on that.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
drmiler:

Once again, you question whether abuses occur, even when your own party MADE THE ACCUSATIONS in many cases?! When are you going to realize that an election manipulated in any way is wrong?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #6 By: whoman69 - 11/6/2004 9:03:38 AM
msladydeath - 11/6/2004 3:07:47 AM
What I found intresting about that was that all the counties with high turnover, had very small populations... I didn't really see anything that would make me cry fraud though, unless the huricanes were a gov conspiracy to boost the republican vote.... Hmmm.


The telling statistic is not in the turnout, its in the results. Calhoun county has 82% of those registered as Democrat and only 11 % Republican and Bush pulls 63% of the votes? Duval county has 37 % Republicans compared to 46 % Democrats and Bush pulls almost 60% of the votes? Even in counties won by Kerry, its not by the margin one would expect. Gadsen county 83% registered Democrats compared to 11% Republican, and Kerry can only get 70 % of the vote? Less than 3000 registered Republicans in that county and yet in the final vote talley, Bush received over 6000 votes.


Whats the matter? Don't think a Democrat would EVER vote for a Republican? mhahahahahahahahaha!!!!
Reply #16 from PolMach Forums Top
Whats the matter? Don't think a Democrat would EVER vote for a Republican? mhahahahahahahahaha!!!!


Whoa, that's convincing. Sure there are Dems that vote the other way, just as there are Reps that do. However none so evident as in FL where Democratic strongholds vote Republican with over 66% of the vote. Is there anywhere in the country you would expect a county that is over 80% partisan one way based on registrations, to turn into a 2/3 mandate for the other side?
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
So this is what our liberal users are reduced to? Grasping at phantom conspiracies.  Somehow, the new world order of the Bush administration seeded rural counties across America with special voting machines.  Truly sad.
Reply #18 from PolMach Forums Top
This is exactly why the Democrat has lost. They do not face the truth. When 1960 Nixon lost to Kennedy by 0.2 %. He didn't ask for recount. Is there any reason why Democrat is the only party cry foul all the time? Bush defeats Kerry by 5%. It is a solid lead. Not a landslide, but a solid lead.

Whoman, I am not surprise democrats votefor republican candidate in large number. First, we have more regristrated Democrats in this country than Republican by 10% or more. If democrats do not vote republican, there is no way a republican president can be elected. Second, democrats in the south tend to vote democrat statewide but republican nationwide. To give you an example, this is the first year a republican has won a Senate seat in Louisiana. You did think every souls in Louisiana are republicans if you only look at the presidential election result in the last 20 years. The truth is that southern democrats vote for republican president, but they still identify themselves as democrat because of the local election.
Reply #19 from PolMach Forums Top
I think everyone is ignoring the real winner of this election. http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i6896
Reply #20 from PolMach Forums Top
This is exactly why the Democrat has lost. They do not face the truth. When 1960 Nixon lost to Kennedy by 0.2 %. He didn't ask for recount. Is there any reason why Democrat is the only party cry foul all the time? Bush defeats Kerry by 5%. It is a solid lead. Not a landslide, but a solid lead.

Whoman, I am not surprise democrats votefor republican candidate in large number. First, we have more regristrated Democrats in this country than Republican by 10% or more. If democrats do not vote republican, there is no way a republican president can be elected. Second, democrats in the south tend to vote democrat statewide but republican nationwide. To give you an example, this is the first year a republican has won a Senate seat in Louisiana. You did think every souls in Louisiana are republicans if you only look at the presidential election result in the last 20 years. The truth is that southern democrats vote for republican president, but they still identify themselves as democrat because of the local election.


The reason that Nixon did not protest the results is because his complicity would be brought to the front as well as the other side. The reason Republicans can win elections is that in most states the number of voters for any party is under 40% and the independents make the difference. Nationally the average is that close to 90 % of those who consider themselves Democrat vote Democrat, and the same for Republicans.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #21 By: nyvelion - 11/6/2004 1:56:22 PM
I think everyone is ignoring the real winner of this election. http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i6896


ROFLMBO Sharpton for Prez!!!!! Where the heck is my chicken and buscuts!!
Reply #22 from PolMach Forums Top
The fact that across the country that partsians regularly voted over 90% for their party candidate for President means nothing, huh.


I'd like to know where this number came from, and what the standard deviation is (can you direct me to the data set?)

As you can see by the threads, our conservative friends don't care if abuses occured


Hey, if abuses occured I'm more than willing to look at it and speak up about it. From my cursory evaluation of the data I'm certainly not finding anything conclusive. It's curious that the smaller (around 30,000) counties (regardles of machine used) appear to exhibit the SAME behavior, ref. Sumter and Nassau. The fact that there are only 15 data points for the E-touch machine render it statistically useless in the overall picture. Additionally, it appears that the smaller counties are predominantly white (85 to 90%, again this is cursory). A quick check of the FEMA disaster maps for hurricanes Ivan, Jeanne, Frances, Charley and storm Bonnie seem to be indicating a possible correlation between counties receiving FEMA assistance (for individuals and households) and USDA farm service assitance with the purported anomalous counties. It also appears that the "expected vote" numbers are questionable (at best), based on their data, it looks like they "EXPECTED" the percent turnout to match exactly along party lines (ex: Baker county expected Dems is 77% [the turnout percent] of the total registered Dems in the county, or 77% of 8931 registered Dems). We already know the Republican turnout for the first time in history MATCHED the Democrat turnout nationally (37% to 37%, that is 37% of the national vote was Dem and 37% was Rep).

It also doesn't appear to me that these individuals were attempting to perform an objective statistical analysis but were rather attempting to correlate something that they WANTED to be correlated (which would explain why other possible factors were not introduced, or apparently even looked at). Scatter diagrams are not particularly useful except to determine possible intial correlation or used as an indicator as to whether or not to perform a more comprehensive analysis.
Reply #23 from PolMach Forums Top
I'd like to know where this number came from, and what the standard deviation is (can you direct me to the data set?)


I would like to know too!!

Last time I heard there is only 40% of the whole nation that professes to be either a Democrat or Republican the rest considers them self independent or non-party affiliated. Unless I am mistaken and every other person I meet is a Rep or Dem, I think not!!

Plinko for the Lunar Lunacy!!
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #18 By: whoman69 - 11/6/2004 12:37:54 PM
Whats the matter? Don't think a Democrat would EVER vote for a Republican? mhahahahahahahahaha!!!!
< However none so evident as in FL where Democratic strongholds vote Republican with over 66% of the vote. Is there anywhere in the country you would expect a county that is over 80% partisan one way based on registrations, to turn into a 2/3 mandate for the other side?


Do you have "proof" to the contrary?
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
I believe he is saying that OF the part of the country that is registered as a party member, be it 40 percent, or what have you. 90 percent of those 40 percent party registrants voted down party lines.