The Ohio Legend

I think this is a grand idea.

And while we're at it, let's restart the dormant investigation over the hundreds and hundreds of "Mail In Registrations" made out in one of four or five different and distinct handwritings and run through a postage meter at a Cleveland Union Hall.

And then let's go back and look at ALL the people involved in the Toledo area "Crack for Registrations" incident. Does someone honestly believe this is an isolated case?

Then let's check into the motives of Jesse Jackson, who sat on the sidelines this year and campaigned for nobody at all until, in mid-September, he was "hired" as a "consultant" for the Kerry campaign. I think the public has a right to know how many hundreds of thousands of dollars this guy was paid, and then I'd like just one honest decent Democrat to ask how, after every election where he brutally assaults the Republican candidate for a fat fee (see also: Gore, Albert) and then the day after the election, comes around posing as an honest broker.

Does this guy simply have no shame at all, or are blacks and Democrats so besotten with thier own rightness that they honestly think he's something other than a higly paid shill available to the highest bidder?

Then let's look at all the "disputed" areas where blacks and Democrats were "disenfranchised". It amounts to Columbus and Cleveland, both of whose Boards of Election and polling places are staffed exclusively by Democratic Party hacks and Union toadies.

Are THESE the people the DUers are claiming "stole" the election?

Or were they cleverly hypnotized by Karl Rove during UPN sitcoms?

Finally, if Jesse and the Dems want a recount, then they have to say so. Quietly funnelling money to the Libertarians and the Greens, who now have raised more money AFTER the election IN OHIO ALONE than they did nationally during the entire election cycle is lovely, but neither party has STANDING under the law here, since neither is likely to win in a recount.

Kerry and the Democrats want an extralegal procedure consucted but they don't want to be seen asking for it since they know how ridiculous it is. The last thing they actually WANT is a recount. It would prove they lost and they know it.

What they WANT is something to keep the moonbats percolating.

 

Wisconsin was even closer. Just shy of 12,000 votes.

 

Bill Clinton proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that having a sense of shame is not required in politics.

 

The intent of the voter is not as important as the perception of the intent of the voter. Therefore, if x number of votes can be manipulated to obtain a victory, yet have this avoid wide perception, then the manipulation is successful.

Almost every election is subject to abuse. In the communist countries, a vote is rigged and it might be widely percieved as such, yet it won't matter because popular assent was never a principle for the maintenance of power, and everybody knew that too.

Ukraine is an interesting lesson. A vote is manipulated as a matter of long-standing Kremlin tradition. The silly thing is that the citizens of the Ukraine actually percieve that popular assent is neccessary for legitimate rule. The options available to that country almost all argue that in the future popular assent will become a sham. One option proposed by the Ukrainian candidate is that the Supreme Court declare him a winner, which takes the decision away from the electorate. Another option proposed by the Russian candidate is that the Ukrainian candidate play a role in his government, which does the same to the electorate.

It makes an interesting comparison to the 2000 election in the U.S.

 

Oh. So the basic point is that you must shift perceptions. It should become a common perception that the Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Saint Louis vote counts are approximate at best and most likely skewed.

The value of this perception is that it puts your political opposition on their heels. The possible downside is that there is so much popular perception of poorly counted ballots that the elections loose legitimacy, which would very bad for our democracy. But hopefully the parties of the government will percieve the threat to their legitimacy that they will articulate consistent principles that govern elections that cannot be manipulated so easily.

PS - the parties of the government may not act if one or both parties percieve that they can take advantage of a failure-of-government type situation to seize control in the aftermath. Interesting times we live in.

 

You could add pretty much any major city in the US to that list, but I'd say that northeastern/Great Lakes cities with long histories of political corruption are all the more susceptible. When you're talking Philly and Cleveland, you're talking cities that can swing the Presidential race.

 

Since I can't get the right mouse button to work correctly at the moment due to Firefox, I can't post anything new in this Forum.

That aside, I'm glad this came up because I've been hearing such crap lately on this topic.

The biggest electoral swindle in US history was Da Boss, Richard J. Daley, Mayor of Chicago, stole the 1960 election for Jack Kennedy.

He and his polical machine had such complete control that he simply sat on all of Chicago's votes all night long. Nothing was reported out. Nothing at all. Then, come morning, when the results from downstate were completely in, Chicago reported the votes to swing Illinois, and the election, to Kennedy.

It was blatent thuggery and theft, and there wasn't a politician in America who didn't know it. Richard Nixon never said a word.

Lately, with the resignation of John Ashcroft, I've heard the surly, churlish lefties again mentioning, in their typical distorted fashion, that Ashcroft "lost to a dead man" in Missouri in 2000. They love lies like this.

First, when Carnahan died during the campaign, he suspended his own campaign for the duration. Nobody asked him to, he just did it because it seemed right.

Secondly, he was leading in all the polls at the time Carnahan died.

Third, Carnahan's widow was immediately named as his replacement as the candidate.

Fourth, there was so much vote fraud in St Louis that one non-partisan academic observer called it an election "that would embarass Robert Mugabe"

Ashcroft said nothing, graciously conceded and refused to file the complaint that his supporters were desperate to file on his behalf.

As a typically classy Democrat thank you for his gentlemanly behavior both during and after the election, Jean Carnahan voted against Ashcroft's confirmation to be AG.

Churlish nastiness has become the order of the day for the whole party.

As for the "Ashcroft ordered a statue's breats covered up HAHAHAHAHAHAHA" bullsh!t which the lefties bring up every chane they get, it's just another one of the complete fabrications and myths which substitute for actual thought and argument with that crowd. File it under "absurd myths the left wholeheartedly believes" along with :Bush 41 was shocked to see a Grocery store scanner" and "GWB got preferential treament from political freinds to get into the Texas ANG"

The left just doesn't let facts get in the way of perfectly good lies.