John Kerry must be too busy counting his "excess campaign money" to help with the counting of Ohio ballots. He has been pretty much invisible since the election and therefore this and other actions prove him to be not trustworthy.

so for right now, he can just sit and count the cool 51 million along with Lockhart,Mccurry,Mcauliffe and all his other "gurly men".....but if he thinks he is running in 2008, guess what?


STORY:
http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=502

Interesting Story. It gives me more respect for Kerry that he did not get involved in that silly recount. Kerry lost, Kerry knows he lost and he isn't about to waste money finding out again what he already well knows.

Can't blame the guy considering the media is the ones that took him down with their fixing of the exit polls and they would only take him down again if he makes an appearance on a recount

... I offer for thought ...

====================
Screen captures of Exit polls on CNN.com show ...

AT 12.21 am
Sample size 1,963
Results ( Males )
Total Male 47% = 922.6 males
Total male for Bush 49% for Kerry 51% hence total male for Kerry 470.5

AT 1.41am
Sample size 2020 with (increase of 57 taken into consideration ... 1963+57... thats how sampling work)
Result Male
Total Males 47% = 949.4
Total Male for Bush 52% total male for Kerry 47% hence Kerry now has 446.2 vote

Logic: How can Kerry get 470 male respondents voting for him at sample 1963 and end up with 446 at sample 2020 with an additinal 57 more people being survey.

This prove there is a fix on Exit Poll Data between 12.21 am and 1.41 am. One of only many screen captures that are available showing how the media set the stage for the new machines to steal an election.

ROTFLMAO

Dop

yes dop this proves everything. maybe we should just appoint Kerry president tonight.

I see you still hate to deal with facts, trav.

Dop

sorry dop, screen captures from CNN dont prove anything. I have a feeling your still a bit upset that your boy lost. its OK, you always got hilda beast in '08

Originally posted by Travh20
yes dop this proves everything. maybe we should just appoint Kerry president tonight.

Yeah, i think Kerry should be appointed tonight, seeing Bush was already appointed in 2000.

Al Gore never won one of the 6 or 7 recounts. and he never would have if they were still counting to this day

Originally posted by Travh20
Al Gore never won one of the 6 or 7 recounts. and he never would have if they were still counting to this day

None of the recounts was finished. Pay attention. Each was blocked at some level of government. Florida state, florida supreme court and federal supreme court. Nobody will ever know who the true winner of that election was.

The big question is.....Why are the republicans so afraid of recounts? Could it be that they have been cheating? Could it be that they know something was crooked and don't want the rest of the country to find out? Innocent people have nothing to hide. If they were totally convinced that they had truly won they would have welcomed a recount to prove to the world that they had won.

because we may have a situation like we have in Washington, where democrats do the recount and declare themselves the winners. Why are we to assume republicans are the cheats and liars and democrats are cast in gold?

Recounts in Florida??? That wasn't the problem.

They were never counted the 1st time.

Geeesh ... learn something about the topic before jumping in with crap like "Al Gore never won one of the 6 or 7 recounts ... I'm getting tired of doing all the winger's homework.

The internet(s) are open to everyone -- yes, all the internets.

ROTF

Dop

Are you really that stupid or do you just twist the facts on purpose?

Washington State, democrates are PREDICTING they will win, not DECLARING themsleves winner. Get a dictionary for definitions of the two words.

Actions speak louder than words. Someone refusing to allow a recount to happen or finish is hiding something. LOGICALLY if they were sure they had won they would look forward to a recount to prove to all the naysayers that they had indeed won. Then they could flaunt it in our faces and say "we told you so". But instead, they run from recounts, don't allow them or don't allow them to be finished. Go balistic everytime someone suggests a recount and then deny that they have something to hide.

Doesn't take a lot of grey matter to figure this puzzle out.

take your argument and apply it to sadaam hussein and his actions leading up to the war echo, you may be able to figure something out for yourself for once instead of blindly believing anything anti bush in nature

Originally posted by Travh20
take your argument and apply it to sadaam hussein and his actions leading up to the war echo, you may be able to figure something out for yourself for once instead of blindly believing anything anti bush in nature

It's OK if you still don't "get" it. We understand that you are mentally challenged in the sequential thought and logic areas.

cut-n-paste from another forum that is following the Ohio recount quite closely

snip<-------------- cut here -------------->snip

(originally posted at the bottom of the Ohio 3% thread but got buried)
I may be W-A-A-Y off base here but did the Warren County re-counters get snookered?

According to http://votecobb.org/recount/ohio_reports/counties/warre...
"Four precincts were selected, with 3602 total votes, more than the required 3%. (3.8%)"

The counties were:
#21 Mason City East B (826 total votes)
#33 Clear Creek Twp East B (1,143 votes)
#150 Deerfield Twp West A (789 votes)
#151 Mason City NE B (844 votes)
but the number of votes doesn't match the number of votes reported for those precincts.
It matches the number of registered VOTERS but NOT the number of votes.

According to http://www.co.warren.oh.us/bdelec/search/votingresults/... the ACTUAL numbers for those precincts are:

#21 Mason City East B (565 total votes) MAS C EB AAV
#33 Clear Creek Twp East B (993 votes) CLC T EA ABJ
#150 Deerfield Twp West A (SPAMSPAMSPAM votes) DEF T W ACK
#151 Mason City NE B (664 votes) MAS C NEB AFU

for a total of 2848 actual ballots cast, which, based on the 95512 total ballots cast falls short of the 3% figure.

(Even IF the 3% number was to be based on the number of registered voters, the figure is STILL in error since there were 125165 registered voters.)

Again from the recount site:
"Eventually all precincts were reconciled with both the machine count taken today, and with the certified result reported to the State."

Well, if they reconciled with the 3602 number then something happened to those decks, 'cuz, as I see it, according to the final tallies, there were only 2848 actual ballots cast in those precincts.

This blogger says Kerry is going to unconcede ... yep he's turning his boat around and heading into the enemy

http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/KerryPreparingGroundsToUnconcede.htm

Dop

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1806520

Wendy Orange goes public .... says ESS planted illegal software in their machines...

Dop

The ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) issued a followup letter to the president of Triad Election Systems Thursday, noting that he had confirmed that Triad Election Systems had remote access to voting machines controlled by local Board of Elections, RAW STORY has learned. The letter follows below.

(Note: We take things out of pdf to have ads help pay for our bandwidth, and because some people don't like pdfs.)

Image of letter at Raw Story: http://rawstory.rawprint.com/1204/conyers_triadnew_122304.php

MORE: DEVELOPING: Sources on the Hill say there's more video of the Triad folks...MORE: Partial transcript of new video on the way, source says... http://rawstory.com

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
This blogger says Kerry is going to unconcede ... yep he's turning his boat around and heading into the enemy

http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/KerryPreparingGroundsToUnconcede.htm

Dop

that was corny dop. Of course, the idea of kerry "unconceding" sounds about right. I conceded, before I unconceded"

After reading this article ... there's not much room for doubt about the election in Ohio being fixed ...

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1032

Dop

It's interesting, but I wonder if it will become real news. The dems would not let this one slide by - so if it does not become high level news then the chances are that there is not much merit to it.

The one point that seems hard to explain is an almost 7% swing from exit polls to result in Ohio - the statistical likelyhood of that is incredibly small if the exit polls were done correctly.

The mathemeticians have put the odds at 11 billion to 1 for the exit polls to vary by 5 or more percentages as they did in nearly every battleground state.

People are well aware of what's going down drew only it doesn't seem that way because the main stream media (MSM) is trying to suppress it ... but be assured the people know.

Word is kerry will file tomorrow (Monday) and depending on what he files ... it could break out at that point.

Now, if kerry does file and ask for or be granted a total recount in OH, look for an immediate smokescreen ... to get the average american's mind off the recount ...

1) OBL captured or one of his sidekicks
2) Massive bombing of Mosul
3) Code orange or higher (red?)
4) Robert Blake books for Mexico and we have a OJ style chase live on TV
5) Rush comes out of the closet (finally)
6) OBL releases another tape or better yet ... his greatest hits in a boxed set.

Dop

The Florida Election thing. Sorry guys, I'm going back to an earlier posting to show a few Democrat irregularities.

First off, Florida law state that if a recount is automatically done if the vote comes to within a certain percentage. The whole state had to be recounted. The problem was that the Democrats wanted only Broward and Palm Beach county recounted. Which started the whole recount business. Then there was this butterfly ballot thing that became an issue. A democrat operative got a hold of a bank of phones and called up a bunch of dems to convince them that while they may have voted for Nader, they really wanted to vote for Gore, they were just confused by the ballot. So the dems who did vote for Nader decided that the ballot was too confusing so the country got into this business of the "hanging chad" thing. Then there was the attempt to block absentee voting by the military, which would've gone overwhelmingly toward Bush.

Is it really any wonder that the Supreme Court had to step in and stop the shenanigans?

Also, the votes were re-counted. After all the officials stopped counting ballots. the news media stepped and did their own count. Bush still won. But it's good propoganda to say "Bush stole the election" do the libs hang on to that little tag line of theirs. Dammit.

This will be huge news if it breaks. Bush won Ohio by what 136,000 votes - therefore Kerry would only need just under 70,000 votes to switch to have become president - not really a lot of votes.

It appears a Ohio recount is nearly impossible seeing that some counties have already destroyed all their data which is against federal election law and other counties have no data to count cause the voting took place on machines that leave no paper trail.

I would tend to think that kerry would ask for a totally new election rather than a recount or possibly ask for neither and only pursue sending a few Ohio election officials to prison on federal charges of election fraud -- including Blackwell.

Dop

maybe in the future we shouldnt even count the votes, we should just use the exit polls.

and if kerry somehow gets a revote he will lose by a million votes. if you think people didnt like him before, wait until he and his party bitch their way to a rekick

Actually, I love the stories recounting how the makers of the voting booths were some republican operatives that gave Bush a 5000 vote head start. I've gotta find that somewhere.

70,000 votes isn't much.

I don't see how Kerry can really do anything at this stage, and the news stories of fraud are certainly less than fully believable, but as a voter I would like to see the issue investigated and closed.

It's certainly not un-feasable that fraud occured, when Power is at stake - anything is possible.

Nothing in the mainstream media today about this

This is where the neocons reasoning that the media is bias doesn't make sense. If it were bias it would be picking up on all these stories about election fraud and republican cheating. The reality is that the maintream media stays pretty much away from these stories.

Did someone claim that the media is 70% liberal bias? Sure doesn't seem that way when they don't report these types of fraud and cheating by the republicans.

the mainstream media knows if they start this up what little credibility they have will be complelty shot to hell. remember the dan rather fraud story?

you know echo, they could not be reporting because its completly unreliable and false, did that ever cross your thick skull? it could very well be you and all the other hysterical libs that keep it going convincing yourself more and more how right you are.

Originally posted by Echo2
This is where the neocons reasoning that the media is bias doesn't make sense. If it were bias it would be picking up on all these stories about election fraud and republican cheating. The reality is that the maintream media stays pretty much away from these stories.

Did someone claim that the media is 70% liberal bias? Sure doesn't seem that way when they don't report these types of fraud and cheating by the republicans.

Yes, but if Kerry was going to get involved, then they couldn't not report on it - regardless of any potential Bias.

I think the links were interesting and it certainly looks like some irregularities occured, but both democratic & republican watchdogs were all over that election. If there is a major issue then it will hit the news - until then I tend toward the view that its not really valid news.

This wouldn't be a hurt minority being ignored & glossed over. The democratic party would not take anything like that laying down if it was credible.

Bush has lowest approval rating or any re-selected president in history and yet they tell us he received more votes than any president in history...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=2026&e=5&u=/latimests/20041228/ts_latimes/reelectionhoneymoonwithvoterseludesbushpollssay

Anyone that can reconcile those 2 opposing thoughts is both a republican and dumb which is proof positive that republicans are not as smart as democrats.

ROTFLMAO

Dop

....or atleast Republicans who support Bush, lol.

Republicans that swang Blue....are true heroes in my book :D

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Bush has lowest approval rating or any re-selected president in history and yet they tell us he received more votes than any president in history...

Anyone that can reconcile those 2 opposing thoughts is both a republican and dumb which is proof positive that republicans are not as smart as democrats.


Why is that so hard to reconcile? He got more votes than any other president because more people voted in this election.

That's beside the point when you're talking strictly percentates.

If he's at 49% or less approval, why would he get more than that percentage at the polls? Do people vote for candidates of which they do not approve?

Dop

Originally posted by DrewM
The democratic party would not take anything like that laying down if it was credible.

I think the irregularites were MORE than credible enought to investigate, but the Democratic leadership is---

(a) gutless

(b) afraid of alienating possible future votes, and

(c) By a clever strategem on the part of those who had the machines set up to steal votes, it was rendered an impossibility to have any serious or competent investigation into Election 2004.

That is because the Dems are completely and thoroughly hamstrung by the fact that the RepubliThugs had previously set the table [i.e., laid the groundwork for the scam] so that WHEN the fraud became evident, any complaints by anyone in the US would immediately be charaterized by the ReThugs as simply a desperation ploy on the part of the Dems, and thus ---human nature being what it is-- automatically cementing it in the mind of the gullible John Q. Public as it being nothing more than a case of "sore loser" that the Dems would complain of unfairness in the voting process.