Ohio Results will be debated

If I thought that things were as altruistic as you make out, I might find some sort of joy in this.

Instead, it just makes the Democratic party taste even more bitter to me.

The Dems lost me as a voter as a result of the last two elections -- not that they lost, but that they whined and bitched like a bunch of junior high kids.

I'll be a third party voter from now on.

Myrr, I give you an insightful....sometimes you shock me, buddy....

I agree though....it is coming across as whining and sore-loser disease.

Even Kerry has said he is not going to take part in it....

The Dems lost me as a voter as a result of the last two elections -- not that they lost, but that they whined and bitched like a bunch of junior high kids.

I just created a similar article on just this issue and just your point.

You and many others are getting fed up with this nonsense, and they don't want to be seen as members of a party of whiny losers.

It's the best results a Republican can ask for.

Seriously, the best answer for the Democrats would have been to quietly go out and work on grass roots efforts to change things. If -- instead of trying to stir up a pot of hatred against Pres. Bush -- these people had quietly gone about just trying to elect their candidate (and I don't mean quietly as in never saying a word, I mean quietly as in supporting their own candiate without the anti-Bush rhetoric) they may have actually snuck out a win.

Instead, they screamed with such loud antagonistic voices that they fired up the base on the other side and insured that Pres. Bush won with the largest vote total in recorded history.

When Democrats learn that they are chasing away people like you (Myrr) and see that they've cost them another 5 - 10 million voters that they aren't likely to gain back, they'll still be stuck sitting and asking why people aren't buying what they are selling. It won't occur to them that they themselves are the problem. Instead, they'll decry the stupidity of the voters in the U.S.

"It's to discuss, and hopefully fix the problems that developed during the elections in Ohio and elsewere."

If this is the purpose, why is the democrat party (once again) being so selective on where the discussion should be based? Here in Wisconsin voter fraud and corruption was done out in the open, no apologies, excuses or attempts to cover it up. "The New Voter Project" and other groups encouraged their members to become deputised voter registrants, then paid them $1.50 per registration... no questions asked.

High Schools in Milwaukee were sending kids out to neighborhoods in "Get out the vote" campaigns. This one wouldn't have been so bad, I mean, teaching teens a little civic responsibility should be a good thing right? Well, when it was learned that they were specifically targeting known democrat areas and staying far away from known republican areas, the activity was put to an end.

I am all for investigations and rehabilitation of the voting problems in all states. However, since the Democrats only seem to be interested in areas which can help their causes, the whole issue is dead on arrival.

Agreed with ParaTed2k, if this is to fix the problems, then why not look at Pennsylvania? How about Washington state? If counting votes is so important, and getting results right is so important, then why not an outcry there for a new election where we can really get it right?

Why do Democrats complain and cry that demanding identification when voting is the same as intimidating a voter?

Because AS LONG AS THE RESULTS ARE PRO DEMOCRAT then nothing is wrong.

They are showing themselves to be complete hypocrites, whiners, and poor losers, and it will continue to turn off people like Myrr to the point that the Democrats may never recover.

Agreed with ParaTed2k, if this is to fix the problems, then why not look at Pennsylvania? How about Washington state? If counting votes is so important, and getting results right is so important, then why not an outcry there for a new election where we can really get it right?

Why do Democrats complain and cry that demanding identification when voting is the same as intimidating a voter?

Because AS LONG AS THE RESULTS ARE PRO DEMOCRAT then nothing is wrong.

They are showing themselves to be complete hypocrites, whiners, and poor losers, and it will continue to turn off people like Myrr to the point that the Democrats may never recover.

Agreed with ParaTed2k, if this is to fix the problems, then why not look at Pennsylvania? How about Washington state? If counting votes is so important, and getting results right is so important, then why not an outcry there for a new election where we can really get it right?

Why do Democrats complain and cry that demanding identification when voting is the same as intimidating a voter?

Because AS LONG AS THE RESULTS ARE PRO DEMOCRAT then nothing is wrong.

They are showing themselves to be complete hypocrites, whiners, and poor losers, and it will continue to turn off people like Myrr to the point that the Democrats may never recover.

Agreed with ParaTed2k, if this is to fix the problems, then why not look at Pennsylvania? How about Washington state? If counting votes is so important, and getting results right is so important, then why not an outcry there for a new election where we can really get it right?

Why do Democrats complain and cry that demanding identification when voting is the same as intimidating a voter?

Because AS LONG AS THE RESULTS ARE PRO DEMOCRAT then nothing is wrong.

They are showing themselves to be complete hypocrites, whiners, and poor losers, and it will continue to turn off people like Myrr to the point that the Democrats may never recover.

Well, you've turned me off for posting the same thing four times in a row.

Reply #9 By: Citizen Venial Narcissist - 1/6/2005 9:49:32 PM Well, you've turned me off for posting the same thing four times in a row.

Forum software time-out hiccup. Sorry. Not something I like either.

Although I have been blacklisted by Gideon, I agree with him on his post that the voting system in this country must be fixed. We hold ourselves up to some higher standard everywhere else in the world, except within our own country. How stupid does that look to the rest of the world? How hypocritical......... As for paratek's questioning why I only mention Ohio, he obviously didn't read the rest of the sentence, even though he quoted me. I said "Ohio and elsewhere". Sheesh.......................

And, as I pointed out, this isn't about whining about the outcome, per se. It's about Congress taking the opportunity to debate the entire issue, and the nation-wide discrepancies. As I said, no one, including democrats, expect to overturn the election. Just want to see why there where reports from both republicans and democrats alike alleging voter intimidations, voter frauds, malfunctioning machines, various discrepancies all over the place, most of which were filed via signed affidavids. And, we must do away with partisan election operatives having any kind of controls over state elections. We must fix the election process in this country. I'm hoping that the debates accomplish at least a start.

I can complain about the outcome of the election, and I sure do on a regular basis, but this characterization of "whining" is so juvenile, you don't eve get it. Of course you wouldn't. You're a bunch of freakin' jingoists in love with Bush. He's an embarrassment to the office he holds. I will complain about him until he leaves office, either by ending his term, or better yet, getting impeached (which I realize is highly unlikely).

I can complain about the outcome of the election, and I sure do on a regular basis, but this characterization of "whining" is so juvenile, you don't eve get it. Of course you wouldn't. You're a bunch of freakin' jingoists in love with Bush. He's an embarrassment to the office he holds. I will complain about him until he leaves office, either by ending his term, or better yet, getting impeached (which I realize is highly unlikely).

I think that's the problem. You might genuinely be concerned about fixing elections, and might even agree that investigations should take place in states that Kerry won. However, your obvious disappointment with the results and your dislike of Bush eclipses that, and makes you seem like a whiney Democrat. Just as there was a conflict of interest in who oversaw the Ohio results, there is a conflict of interest in Democrats demanding investigations in the states they lost. To pretend they're doing it for the benefit of the people is silly. Even many of the Democrats here would agree that the Democrats wouldn't demand recounts or anything in states they won.

think that's the problem. You might genuinely be concerned about fixing elections, and might even agree that investigations should take place in states that Kerry won. However, your obvious disappointment with the results and your dislike of Bush eclipses that, and makes you seem like a whiney Democrat. Just as there was a conflict of interest in who oversaw the Ohio results, there is a conflict of interest in Democrats demanding investigations in the states they lost. To pretend they're doing it for the benefit of the people is silly. Even many of the Democrats here would agree that the Democrats wouldn't demand recounts or anything in states they won.

/insightful

And seriously, I'd love to see vast improvement in elections in this country.

First, there should be ONE national primary day, or at the most 3 - 4 dates. The current system puts far too much power into the hands of the few people in the early states, establishing front runners before the country really gets to know these candidates. All states should be treated equally, should get equal visits and equal attention.

There should be an audit trail for voters. Voters should get a barcoded or similar receipt that can not be read by human eyes, but can be decoded back into a confirmation of the vote that was cast. That would insure tha tthe vote was still secure, but could be verified.

Voters should be required to show ID to vote. Photo id. They should be able to show residence in the area where they are voting. It should take just a few moments, but is a necessary step to show that voters aren't voting where they should not be, and that only the real registered voter placed the vote.

There are other areas where things should be improved, but everyone should remember that in many places, the problems that are so loudly decried about were really the fault of local election officials -- in many cases themselves Democrats. Blaming some vast right wing conspiracy for these problems, or saying that Pres. Bush is the beneficiary of the problems is ignoring the will of 63+ million voters that did vote for him.

Isn't it ironic that, with all our technological advances, we haven't progressed beyond a simple "X" on a piece of paper, when it comes to voting. ;~D

Messy, you're right. It is the democrats who have been screaming foul, and the conflict is of course present. If the tables were turned, we'd be hearing it from the republicans. But, because the republicans in Congress are content and complacent in their victory, they choose to leave well enough alone. For now. But, I would think that even republicans would have problems with the amounts of voter and election issues that have surfaced since 2000.

I was listening to the radio last night, and one caller suggested that voting should be tied to our social security numbers. In addition, like credit cards, every ss# should also have a PIN number to go with it. Assuming that voting machines are "fixed" and are uniform throughout the country, a person would go to their assigned polling place, or any polling place, for that matter, enter his/her ss#, followed by the PIN, and vote. One person. One vote. And, even though voting should be, and always has been anonymous, only the voter would be able to retrieve his/her vote after the fact, and only if there were some kind of voting discrepancy being investigated. At least, there would be a voting trail to verify an election. There may be problems with this suggestion, but I haven't really thought it through, but it seems like a good idea. Of course, the initial expense and development of the system would be huge, but certainly a good investment. No matter what is finally done to fix this system we have now would be a good use of taxpayer money.

Thoughts?

Dabe - I have to ask you, is what happened in Washington state not something that needs to be addressed? Did the Republican Candidate there get hosed, and were not shennanigans played to turn over the results of that election? Should not a new election be held there to determine the real winner?

In Pennsylvania, especially in the Philadelphia area, where more votes than registered voters were counted (at least back in the 2000 election) (also, btw, a problem that has been found to exist in King County, Washington state), are the problems not worth looking into?

In Baltimore, Maryland, where multiple problems existed in Gubernatorial elections back in the 90's, are the problems with dead people voting not worth resolving?

In all of these cases, there was no crying from Democrats. In fact, just the opposite. There was minor outcry among the Republicans (actually perhaps major out-cry about the Washington State hose job of Dino Rossi), but not a peep out of Democrats as long as they achieved the end goal of win at all costs.

All of these problems should be resolved, but the point is that it's so completely hypocritical and just plain grandstanding for any Democrat to point to Ohio and complain about the system.

And again, in most of these cases, it was Democrats in charge at the local levels that are responsible for the problems that have occured and disenfranchised their constituents.

I'm very much reminded me of the cries among Democrats that Bush was going to bring back the draft -- even though it was people like John Conyers and Charlie Rangell (sp?) that were sponsoring the bills to re-instate the draft -- all prominent Democrats. Not a single supporter among Republicans, and not a single vote in favor by even these under-handed sponsors when the bill was put to a vote (there was at least one yes vote, which I believe did come from a Democrat).

Messy, you're right. It is the democrats who have been screaming foul, and the conflict is of course present. If the tables were turned, we'd be hearing it from the republicans. But, because the republicans in Congress are content and complacent in their victory, they choose to leave well enough alone. For now. But, I would think that even republicans would have problems with the amounts of voter and election issues that have surfaced since 2000.

Perhaps they would be screaming foul, and perhaps they would be pretending that they're fighting in the interests of the people while they refuse to demand multiple recounts in districts they've won, but that doesn't change the fact that it's the Democrats who are doing it now. If the Democrats are serious about wanting to fix elections and not just bitter about losing, then they will demand recounts and the like in places they've won as well, but I doubt they will and I doubt that any Democrat here wants it either. Hell, I remember posting an article asking if Democrats would demand multiple recounts if Kerry won, but only by a very slight margin a la 2000, and no Democrat said they'd support such a thing.