Democracy At Risk

[Ladyjen]

I have just finished watching Lou Dobbs on another of the "Broken Government" series. This one focused on the insane voting process. The question I have is: Why have you waited so long Lou? I'll tell you why! Because up until the last six months, CNN was on board with every other media outlet in the U.S. in supporting the right wing. Lou and his staff raised some very disturbing issues with the "machines" used to record, or should I say not record, the votes. For instance, poll employees taking the machines home prior to the election and storing them outside in their garages because the State have no provisions in place to store them properly or safely. They said that these machines must be kept at a certain temperature to remain operational. They demonstrated how a hacker can program or virus the machine within seconds by intserting a memory card. AND they have no security in place to prevent this. No paper trail as well as the fact that one of the manufacturers of these machines is Venezuelan based. The other pumps money into the Republican campaign.

It has been a well known fact, since the year 2000, that there has been huge problems with the voting system in America but the media pooed pooed it all as conspiracy theorists etc., etc. Now there is a collective move to oust Bush and they jump all over it, one week before the election. I don't blame Dobbs for this as its the big cats at the top of the media conglomerate who decide who is going to win. Fat lot of good it will do now. Too little too late.

[ft.niagara]

Why are you so upset? You are a Canadian.

[Riverwind]

Why are you so upset? You are a Canadian.

For the same reason we care when China throws democracy activists in prison.

[ft.niagara]

For the same reason we care when China throws democracy activists in prison.

More likely, the reason is IF you WERE an American, you would vote Democrat.

[Riverwind]

More likely, the reason is IF you WERE an American, you would vote Democrat.

Does that mean you are perfectly happy with an unreliable voting system because you believe that your party would benefit? That is a strange attitude. The article said some of the machines were made in Venezuela - if I was a Republican supporter I would be extremely concerned (and angry since the sitting Republican politicians did nothing to fix the system even though the problems have been discussed for years).

[gc1765]

More likely, the reason is IF you WERE an American, you would vote Democrat.

Fraud could go either way. So why would it matter which party a person votes for when it comes to eliminating fraud? Unless you think only republicans are capable of fraud?

[B. Max]

It's Dems that have been caught on many many occasions trying to rig elections. Now we are suppose to believe that the elections are all in hands of the Rep.

[gc1765]

It's Dems that have been caught on many many occasions trying to rig elections. Now we are suppose to believe that the elections are all in hands of the Rep.

Do you have any links to support that?

[B. Max]

It's Dems that have been caught on many many occasions trying to rig elections. Now we are suppose to believe that the elections are all in hands of the Rep.

Do you have any links to support that?

No but I listen to a lot of American politics.

[gc1765]

No but I listen to a lot of American politics.

Then can you give us an example you've heard of? I can only imagine that if its an issue, it's probably on the internet somewhere and that way I can get more information (just give me some keywords and I'll look it up..."democrats rig election" didn't give me any interesting results). The internet is probably the best way to share information on a forum like this.

[B. Max]

Then can you give us an example you've heard of? I can only imagine that if its an issue, it's probably on the internet somewhere and that way I can get more information (just give me some keywords and I'll look it up..."democrats rig election" didn't give me any interesting results). The internet is probably the best way to share information on a forum like this.

The most charges seem to be signing up the same voters in such a way as to able to vote more than once in the same election. Signing up voters who are not citizens.

[Riverwind]

The most charges seem to be signing up the same voters in such a way as to able to vote more than once in the same election. Signing up voters who are not citizens.

Republicans, OTOH, manipulate voters lists to remove as many minority voters as possible before election day.

[B. Max]

Republicans, OTOH, manipulate voters lists to remove as many minority voters as possible before election day.

I've heard that before, but I also heard it was the names of convicted felons they removed.

[Riverwind]

I've heard that before, but I also heard it was the names of convicted felons they removed.

That is just one of the tricks that Republican party uses to keep minority voters away from the polls. When you heard that statement you probably assumed it meant that people currently in jail could not vote (which is reasonable in my opinion). What it actually means is that anyone with a criminal record is banned from voting for life even if they have been a law abiding citizen for years (which is completely unreasonable).

In addition, the Republicans have used the no-felon-laws to scratch many black voters off the list who have not been convicted of anything because of 'mistaken identity'. Anyone who cares about democracy should be very concerned about these slimy tactics.

That said, the democrats are not completely clean because they are fighting measures which force people to show id at the polling booth. OTOH, the Republicans are pushing for a type of ID that most poor people would not have the money to acquire. There is a compromise possible on the ID issue but I think both sides are guilty of using it for partisan purposes.

[geoffrey]

I've heard that before, but I also heard it was the names of convicted felons they removed.

That is just one of the tricks that Republican party uses to keep minority voters away from the polls. When you heard that statement you probably assumed it meant that people currently in jail could not vote (which is reasonable in my opinion). What it actually means is that anyone with a criminal record is banned from voting for life even if they have been a law abiding citizen for years (which is completely unreasonable).

In addition, the Republicans have used the no-felon-laws to scratch many black voters off the list who have not been convicted of anything because of 'mistaken identity'. Anyone who cares about democracy should be very concerned about these slimy tactics.

That said, the democrats are not completely clean because they are fighting measures which force people to show id at the polling booth. OTOH, the Republicans are pushing for a type of ID that most poor people would not have the money to acquire. There is a compromise possible on the ID issue but I think both sides are guilty of using it for partisan purposes.

If there is a "no felons law", what's the issue. The law is the law. If you don't like it, challenge it. If the Republicans are removing people on a dirty, but legal, premise, it's a problem... but within the rules. It's tough to say someone is destroying democracy when just enforcing a democratically passed law.

[Ladyjen]

Why are you so upset? You are a Canadian.

I am concerned because I believe, as do many others, that the last 2 elections were rigged. Just think, if Gore had become President, there would have been no Iraq war, no Katrina, no nuke threats from North Korea, a stable American economy, no war on the middle class and a greater effort to save the environment. I am concerned because what happens in the USA affects the entire world doesn't it? Especially now with our current Prime Minister who is so anxious to jump into bed with Bush. The world is at risk with this regime.

[KrustyKidd]

I am concerned because I believe, as do many others, that the last 2 elections were rigged. Just think, if Gore had become President, there would have been no Iraq war, no Katrina, no nuke threats from North Korea, a stable American economy, no war on the middle class and a greater effort to save the environment. I am concerned because what happens in the USA affects the entire world doesn't it? Especially now with our current Prime Minister who is so anxious to jump into bed with Bush. The world is at risk with this regime.

So Gore would have called it quits after invading Afganistan? Nothing to quell Jihadism? And no pressure on Saddam other than what had been done for a decade? Katrina would have been a no sweat operation with the elite FEMA that was in place? Kim Jong with suddenly no nuclear aspirations? Wow. Where on earth did this internet inventor have all these plans hidden?

[Shady]

Lawmaker's son, 4 others charged in tire slashing

MILWAUKEE (AP) — The sons of a first-term congresswoman and Milwaukee's former acting mayor were among five Democratic activists charged Monday with slashing the tires of vans rented by Republicans to drive voters and monitors to the polls on Election Day

USAToday

If anyone wishes to read up on traditional Democratic creative accounting on election day, read about the 1960 Nixon/Kennedy election.

Was Nixon Robbed?

On the other hand, some fraud clearly occurred in Cook County. At least three people were sent to jail for election-related crimes, and 677 others were indicted before being acquitted by Judge John M. Karns, a Daley crony.

[Riverwind]

So Gore would have called it quits after invading Afganistan?

Most likely.

Nothing to quell Jihadism?

Gore would have likely realized that invading Iraq to quell Jihadism is an oxymoron.

Katrina would have been a no sweat operation with the elite FEMA that was in place?

I don't think Gore would have handled Katrina any better.

Kim Jong with suddenly no nuclear aspirations? Wow. Where on earth did this internet inventor have all these plans hidden?

NK started developing nukes because the Bush regime refused to talk. You can argue til blue in the face about giving in to petty extortion but it will not chnage the fact that NK would not have nukes today it Bush had actually tried to negotiate with the Kim. Clinton did negotiate and bought Kim for a few years and he probably knew that the guy would have to be re-bought in a few years.

This last point pisses me off the most - any idiot with half a brain can connect the dots between NK nuke program and Bush policies but the right wing in the US are in complete denial. Instead they try to blame Clinton and use NK to justify even more gunboat diplomacy which has been proved to not work in the NK case.

[Shady]

NK started developing nukes because the Bush regime refused to talk

That's a lie. North Korea was developing nukes long before George W Bush was ever in office. Stop lying.

[Riverwind]

If there is a "no felons law", what's the issue. The law is the law. If you don't like it, challenge it. If the Republicans are removing people on a dirty, but legal, premise, it's a problem... but within the rules. It's tough to say someone is destroying democracy when just enforcing a democratically passed law.

Most dictators in the world run 'democracies' (i.e. the Democratic Republic of Korea ring a bell). They just use their power over the law to ensure that voting produces the outcome that they desire. The Republican dirty tricks cannot be justified simply because it is 'the law'.

[Riverwind]

NK started developing nukes because the Bush regime refused to talk

That's a lie. North Korea was developing nukes long before George W Bush was ever in office. Stop lying.

No you stop lying:

Concerns that North Korea had non-civilian nuclear ambitions were first raised in the late 1980s and almost resulted in their withdrawal from the NPT in 1994. However, the Agreed Framework and KEDO temporarily resolved this crisis by having the US and several other countries agree that in exchange for dismantling its nuclear weapons program, two light-water reactors (LWRs) would be provided.

This agreement broke down in 2001 as relations with the US soured. It then announced it would withdraw from the NPT in 2003 after the US accused North Korea in late 2002 of continuing its nuclear weapons program in contravention of the NPT North Korea at the time denied these allegations and insisted upon its right to produce nuclear energy for civilian purposes, as allowed by Article X of the NPT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relat..._of_North_Korea

NK restarted it nuke program after Bush refused to talk. The connection is obvious to everyone but commited Bushies who refuse to admit their dear leader screwed up.

[B. Max]

I've heard that before, but I also heard it was the names of convicted felons they removed.

That is just one of the tricks that Republican party uses to keep minority voters away from the polls. When you heard that statement you probably assumed it meant that people currently in jail could not vote (which is reasonable in my opinion). What it actually means is that anyone with a criminal record is banned from voting for life even if they have been a law abiding citizen for years (which is completely unreasonable).

In addition, the Republicans have used the no-felon-laws to scratch many black voters off the list who have not been convicted of anything because of 'mistaken identity'. Anyone who cares about democracy should be very concerned about these slimy tactics.

That said, the democrats are not completely clean because they are fighting measures which force people to show id at the polling booth. OTOH, the Republicans are pushing for a type of ID that most poor people would not have the money to acquire. There is a compromise possible on the ID issue but I think both sides are guilty of using it for partisan purposes.

As I understand it if you are a convicted felon you can't vote for five years from whatever time I don't know.

The voter ID cards from I hear are free so that's no argument. It all says more about the Dems rather than the Rep. If their voters are cons and illegals.

[America1]

It has been a well known fact, since the year 2000, that there has been huge problems with the voting system in America but the media pooed pooed it all as conspiracy theorists etc., et

HAHAHAHAHAH - ok buddy, "well known facts" - what a joke! There are NO "facts" about voting irregularities of any substance and to say otherwise is a flat out lie. If the Dems had any real evidence they would have made as brought it to court and WON. Instead, both Gore and Kerry admitted defeat b/c they had no leg to stand on and were beaten out right.

It is standard liberal strategy to call voting fraud if the you lose. It happened with Gore, Kerry, even in Mexico with Obrador and they Dems have already started to float the "rumors" out about it now.

Also note, that IF the Repubs lose either the house (possible) or the Senate (doubtful), you will not see this pathetic tactic used.

[Shady]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- North Korea has revealed to the United States that it has a secret and active nuclear weapons program begun years after it promised to never again to pursue such a course, the White House said late Wednesday

The intelligence, the official said, indicated the program was launched in the late 1990s -- several years after North Korea signed the agreement with the United States, Japan and South Korea

CNN

I'm not sure why the Bush-haters have to try and re-write history. It's not difficult to prove you liars wrong.