"Was the 2004 Election Stolen?"

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Judah

War Child
Joined
Aug 1, 2000
Messages
760
Location
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Got this link from huffpost (it's not a new story...but maybe it'll get more play by being in RS):

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen


Was the 2004 Election Stolen?
Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House. BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.
 
May 22, 2006 · Marc Rosenbaum, a senior editor at NPR and one of the guys who pays lots of attention to polls, just got back into town from a conference on polling and sent this in:

One last thing: There also was a session called, "Who Really Won the Election 2004?" This was an opportunity for the cyber-active bloggers who think the Ohio vote was somehow fraudulent to present their best case. They didn't. Their presentations were confusing, if not incoherent to this listener, and they all seemed to boil down to one complaint: namely, that the vote totals didn't match the exit polls. The problem with that argument is that if you can give good reasons why the exit polls were wrong in Ohio (and there are many), their entire complaint disappears.

I have to say, though, that I did see the respondent in that panel, who gave a thoughtful and coherent critique of the vote-fraud proponents, chatting for hours one evening with one of the presenters. It's the good thing about a conference like this, even when it rains.
link
 
nbcrusader said:
It was stolen by the same people who orchestrated 9/11 and faked the whole moon landing.

You mean the government?:wink:



It's an argument that can go on forever, but honestly it doesn't matter.

The truth is, and I'm being completely honest here, he isn't worthy of running a Subway shop, he has THE pourest record of any president...

He's a man of great strings...and I think the Republican voters are coming around to realize this...he catered and that's the only reason he got "voted" in...
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Yes, but it's old news. Let's move on...

:eyebrow: like an "old crime"....too "old" to solve?

i think not.

:tsk:Sorry, if the shoe had been on the other foot we NEVER would have heard the end of it from the Neo-cons & Christian Super-fundalmentalists.

WE would NOT be IN some of the Hells we are in today, IF this truth had hit hard back then and something had been done.
 
dazzledbylight said:


:eyebrow: like an "old crime"....too "old" to solve?

i think not.

:tsk:Sorry, if the shoe had been on the other foot we NEVER would have heard the end of it from the Neo-cons & Christian Super-fundalmentalists.

WE would NOT be IN some of the Hells we are in today, IF this truth had hit hard back then and something had been done.

Yes, but what can we do? Let's focus on the next election. We need to form a unified front and move this country on...
 
Revenge for 1960.

Isn't Ohio the state where illegal alien Nuradin Abdi was registered to vote? Yeah, he's the suspected shopping mall bomb plotter from Somalia

And wasn't convicted al Qaeda agent Iyman Faris also a registered voter in Ohio? He was the guy who planned to sabotage the Brooklyn Bridge and had entered the country fraudulently from Pakistan on a student visa.

I wonder who those guys voted for.

It's amazing to me that no one ever asks for my ID whenever I vote in person.

Someone should make a documentary showing how to vote 25 times in the same election. The Ohioans have vote fraud down to a science, even their own newspapers and lawyers couldn't do anything about it, very impressive.
 
A_Wanderer said:
Do you have any particular evidence for this?

We had at least 2 threads in here discussing the "press releases" from terrorists organizations supporting Bush.

It only makes sense.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
We had at least 2 threads in here discussing the "press releases" from terrorists organizations supporting Bush.

Why would terrorist organizations issue press releases supporting Bush, knowing that anyone who reads it would be unlikely to follow its advice?

That makes no sense.

Obviously, these groups wanted everyone to vote for Kerry.

Why would they want that?
 
Or having Bin Laden statements ripping off Michael Moore they were bashing Bush to make people vote for Bush - those tricky bastards :wink:
 
4U2Play said:


Why would terrorist organizations issue press releases supporting Bush, knowing that anyone who reads it would be unlikely to follow its advice?

That makes no sense.

Obviously, these groups wanted everyone to vote for Kerry.

Why would they want that?

What?:huh:

Come on, painting an American president as a religious zealot who's invading Iraq on purely vengeful reasons fuels a terrorist community.

Where are you losing the logic?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


What?:huh:

Come on, painting an American president as a religious zealot who's invading Iraq on purely vengeful reasons fuels a terrorist community.

Where are you losing the logic?
Somewhere where that is considered an endorsement; unless you elect a leader that submits to their particularly vile sect of Islam you are never going to get any endorsement.
 
A_Wanderer said:
Somewhere where that is considered an endorsement; unless you elect a leader that submits to their particularly vile sect of Islam you are never going to get any endorsement.

Never did I say I endorsed their endorsement...

But it makes sense they would endorse Bush, it gives them recruitment power.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Come on, painting an American president as a religious zealot who's invading Iraq on purely vengeful reasons fuels a terrorist community. Where are you losing the logic?


:lol:

Wow, talk about losing the logic.

Bin Laden endorsing Bush is supposed to get US voters to vote Republican?

Try again, bud.
 
4U2Play said:



:lol:

Wow, talk about losing the logic.

Bin Laden endorsing Bush is supposed to get US voters to vote Republican?

Try again, bud.

I never fucking said that...

You may want to look back at my posts.

You asked who certain people voted for...
 
What painting?

All im seeing is a terrorist putting out a tape threatening attacks and calling Bush a stupid crusader under the sway of the Zionists, I do not see endorsements for any candidate.
 
A_Wanderer said:
What painting?

All im seeing is a terrorist putting out a tape threatening attacks and calling Bush a stupid crusader under the sway of the Zionists, I do not see endorsements for any candidate.

Well then you've missed the whole point, which is terrorist would rather see Bush stay in because it helps their recruiting...
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I never fucking said that...

BVS, you must refrain from such vile responses, you won't get very far if you spazz out in chat rooms.

Once again:

The only people that can influence a US election are US voters (and Diebold).

Bin Laden presumably knows this.

Bin Laden issued a "press release", you claimed, "supporting Bush". Go back and read your own posts.

By issuing a press release supporting Bush, you think this will help get Bush elected, which is what you think Bin Laden wants.

By issuing a press release supporting Bush, I think this will help get Kerry elected, which is what I think Bin Laden really wants.

You think a bin Laden endorsement is good for Bush. I don't.
 
4U2Play said:


Bin Laden issued a "press release", you claimed, "supporting Bush". Go back and read your own posts.

By issuing a press release supporting Bush, you think this will help get Bush elected, which is what you think Bin Laden wants.

By issuing a press release supporting Bush, I think this will help get Kerry elected, which is what I think Bin Laden really wants.

You think a bin Laden endorsement is good for Bush. I don't.

No, I never said any of this. Bin Laden never released anything...

Certain "terrorist related" factions released support for Bush. It only makes sense. Bush right now is the pinnacle for "the West enemy".

Never did I say these releases made an impact on US soil.

Look at the origin of the response.

Otherwise you're speaking nonsense.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Well then you've missed the whole point, which is terrorist would rather see Bush stay in because it helps their recruiting...
From the intercepts from Zarqawi it seems that they have been having trouble recruiting as of late - this talking point is very difficult to prove one way or another.
 
A_Wanderer said:
From the intercepts from Zarqawi it seems that they have been having trouble recruiting as of late - this talking point is very difficult to prove one way or another.

Well hopefully the future will tell us this true globally...
 
Was the 2004 election stolen? No.

In Rolling Stone, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argues that new evidence proves that Bush stole the election. But the evidence he cites isn't new and his argument is filled with distortions and blatant omissions.

"After carefully examining the evidence, I've become convinced that the president's party mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people in 2004," Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declares in the latest issue of Rolling Stone. And so, 19 months after the election, let us head once again into this breach.

To date, dozens of experts, both independently and as part of several research panels, have spent countless hours examining 2004's presidential election, especially the race in Ohio. Many of them have concluded that the election there strains conventional notions of what a democracy ought to look like; very little about that race was fair, clean or competent. Way back in January 2005, a panel headed by Democratic Rep. John Conyers of Michigan reported that it had found enough irregularities in Ohio to call into question the state election results and the entire presidential vote. A report by the Democratic Party released last year found "evidence of voter confusion, voter suppression, and negligence and incompetence of election officials." Then there are the legions of activists, academics, bloggers and others who've devoted their post-Nov. 2 lives to unearthing every morsel of data that might suggest the vote was rigged; their theories, factoids, and mountains of purportedly conclusive data likely take up several buildings' worth of hard-drive space in Google's server farms.

One has to wonder what, after all of this, Kennedy might have brought to the debate. There could have been an earnest exploration of the issues in order to finally shed some light on the problems we face in elections, and a call to urgently begin repairing our electoral machinery. Voting reforms are forever on the backburner in Congress; even the 2000 election did little to prompt improvements. If only someone with Kennedy's stature would outline this need.

If only. Whatever his aim, RFK Jr. does not appear intent on fixing the problem. He's more content to take us through a hit parade of the most popular, and the most dismissible, theories purporting to show that John Kerry won Ohio, theories that have been swirling about the blogosphere ever since the race was called. I scoured his Rolling Stone article for some novel story or statistic or theory that would prove, finally, that George W. Bush was not the true victor. But nothing here is new. If you've spent time on Democratic Underground or have read Mark Crispin Miller's "Fooled Again," you're already familiar with everything Kennedy has to say.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/index.html
 
Back
Top Bottom