The Nightstar Zoo

Nightstar IRC Network - irc.nightstar.net
It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:04 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: How the GOP took Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 5:04 am 
Dirty tricks


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 6:36 am 
Unless it can be demonstrated that those tricks managed to pust Bush ahead by 130000+ votes in Ohio there's no proof that the election was stolen.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 1:45 am 
In the world according to BBlalock, playing with a marked deck isn't cheating till you prove he wouldn't have won anyway.


Last edited by Anh Minh on Tue Nov 09, 2004 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:39 am 
Offline
Janitor
Janitor
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:15 pm
Posts: 2388
Location: In the middle of the Pacific Ocean, somewhere.
What I'm still trying to figure out is how Bush could have an approval rating that's <a href="http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm">diving for the floor</a>, and still win by 5 million votes.

But then, his approval rating is 51 percent, and his percentage of the votes of the people who went to the polls is 51 percent. I guess I could see that.

Note how 9/11/01 saved his ass...he HAD an approval rating of in the 50th percentile prior to then, and was well on his way to being screwed, when all of a sudden he became the War President. And his approval ratings shot up.

And now he's slipping again. Back down to the 50s...but not quite low enough yet for people to call for his resignation.

I blame lack of focus. Some people may ask themselves, "Why are we even hearing about Fallujah insurgents when OBL is still out there and shaking his dick at us?" At least, I do. I don't sit in fear of him, I wonder, "Why isn't he dead yet?". I think I'd approve of him if he had gotten OBL's head on a platter FIRST, then said "Okay. Unfinished business, now. Who else wanted some?" And don't give me that shit about "Oh, you'd rather Saddam still be in power, then?"

I'm trying to mellow out about all this, I really am...but the fact is that America has gone from the most united it has been in half a century to ALMOST the most divided. (last I checked, no Iraq war veterans are spit on and called baby-killers by throngs of tie-dyed unkempt weed-smokers, and while there were some that called for internment of people of Arabic descent in the few months following 9/11, that kind of bullshit didn't happen.)

Anh Minh, it's not a marked deck. A marked deck is used to be able to tell what cards are in your opponent's hand, in order to tell whether or not that hand really is better than yours.

These were loaded dice.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 5:16 am 
Anh Minh wrote:
In the word according to BBlalock, playing with a marked deck isn't cheating till you prove he wouldn't have won anyway.


You seem to be reading some other post and attributing it to me. B^)

I didn't say it wasn't cheating, nor did I deny that any of that was real.

Unless we know that it changed the election results there's no reason to overturn the election results.

Of course if the rule is that cheating all by itself is enough to disqualify a candidate then we'll have to throw out 90+% of all the Republicans and Democrats. That'd be OK by me.

IIRC Nader barely beat Badnarik, but either one of those would stimulate a nice "WTFudge are those Americans doing?!?!?" reaction from the international community. It'd be a nice change.

Ishidan, thanks for the loaded dice analogy.

Both parties are playing with loaded dice, and those dice have many decades of wear-and-tear on them.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:27 pm 
BBlalock: my point is this: Gwalla presented us some arguably unethical ways the Republicans used to get votes. What was your reaction? Not outrage. Not apathy because all politicians are crooks anyway. You didn't try to make a case that all those tricks were actually legal and moral.

No. You said that unless it can be proven those trick gained him 130 000 votes, it's ok. It just doesn't matter.


Want a loaded dice analogy instead? Fine. Well, you can win with normal dice. But if you use loaded ones, you're a cheat regardless of what would hypothetically have happened with regular dice.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 5:22 pm 
No one is saying it didn't matter, any more than anyone is saying that Democrats paying people for registrations in crack doesn't matter. I believe the statement was that it wasn't likely to effect the outcome.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 6:46 pm 
Anh Minh wrote:
BBlalock: my point is this: Gwalla presented us some arguably unethical ways the Republicans used to get votes. What was your reaction? Not outrage.


I've run out of outrage.

Anh Minh wrote:
Not apathy because all politicians are crooks anyway.


My reaction was a justification of apathy. Unless there's some proof that the election was stolen why bother?

I'm willing to let the folks whose jobs are investigating this sort of thing do thier job. If they find that it was stolen I'll have to replenish my stock of outrage.

Anh Minh wrote:
You didn't try to make a case that all those tricks were actually legal and moral.


True. That would be a descent into absurdity that even I couldn't accomplish.

Anh Minh wrote:
No. You said that unless it can be proven those trick gained him 130 000 votes, it's ok. It just doesn't matter.


I didn't say it was OK. I did say that it doesn't matter.

Anh Minh wrote:
Want a loaded dice analogy instead? Fine. Well, you can win with normal dice. But if you use loaded ones, you're a cheat regardless of what would hypothetically have happened with regular dice.


Of course it was cheating. Both of our major parties are cheats.

Bush and Kerry deserved one vote each. Everyone else wasted thier votes on crooks. (Voting for yourself isn't wasting your vote, it's direct self interest.)

Gah. I promised myself I wouldn't do the thing where I spend way too much time responding to every point that someone else made. What's the world coming to when one can't even trust himself to keep a promise?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:30 pm 
BBlalock wrote:
Bush and Kerry deserved one vote each. Everyone else wasted thier votes on crooks. (Voting for yourself isn't wasting your vote, it's direct self interest.)


For those keeping score, that means 115 million wasted votes. plus or minus 4-5 million. Depending on how many dead people voted, how many people voted in multiple precincts, and how many precincts had Mary Poppins voting. Oh, and how many e-voting machines switched votes for Badnarik to Bush. (Who cares about Kerry to Bush or Bush to Kerry. Wasted vote either way.)

The jury is still out on if voting for Nader is as wasteful as for Bush and Kerry.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 2:55 am 
Offline
Janitor
Janitor
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:15 pm
Posts: 2388
Location: In the middle of the Pacific Ocean, somewhere.
BBlalock wrote:
Gah. I promised myself I wouldn't do the thing where I spend way too much time responding to every point that someone else made. What's the world coming to when one can't even trust himself to keep a promise?


Bblalock for President in 2008!

When he finds himself making a lie of a promise, at least he admits it!

Bring back some semblance of integrity to the White House!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:05 pm 
boy, you guys throw civility right out the window here, don't you?


Now while I could get myself banned or admonished for language usage in describing my opinion of what that entire artile is a load of, I think it better to just let it speak for itself.

Quote:
* Even if they are counted, Franklin County's absentee ballot forms are rigged in ways strikingly reminiscent of those in Florida 2000. On many absentee forms, Kerry is listed third on the list of presidential candidates. But the actual number you punch for Kerry is "4." If you punch "3" you've just voted for Bush. Sound familiar?

so, where's Bush list on the ballot? And do we really want people unable to complete a very simple matching game to be voting in the first place? If they're already registered, I guess they've demonstrated enough competance for that.

Odd that the article failed to mention that flyers sent to several thousand registered democrats came back as "Deceased", or wrong addresses. Anyone who attacks legitimate efforts to investigate such things is clearly biased beyond any hope of reasoning with.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:00 pm 
Travellar wrote:
boy, you guys throw civility right out the window here, don't you?

Actually, the really rude commentators have moved on to other venues because we're too boring for them. Overall, we're much saner here then, say, a typical episode of O'Reilly or Savage.

Travellar wrote:
Odd that the article failed to mention that flyers sent to several thousand registered democrats came back as "Deceased", or wrong addresses. Anyone who attacks legitimate efforts to investigate such things is clearly biased beyond any hope of reasoning with.

I'm in favor of investigating any plausible charges of corruption by anyone. I expect that, since Bush won the election, his people just aren't as motivated to complain.

As to your specific point, I should point out that any good-sized mailing list is going to contain bogus names, duplicate names under different addresses, names duplicated due to mispellings, and even the names of dead people. This is because it usually isn't cost-effective to try to "scrub" a list of its useless information; it is far cheaper to spend the money on copying and postage and accept the wastage.

States and counties don't try to manually verify the names on their voter lists, either, so it is not unusual for a person who has moved seveal times to be on a voter list under every one of the addresses. Again, they feel that this sort of thing isn't going to have enough of a effect on the electoral process for them to waste their time trying to create a perfect list. The enforcement people are more interested in cheaters who might be affecting enough votes to actually influence an election.

So, did the fact you are sharing with us come from the Democrats who were sending out that flyer? It seems unlikely, as experienced Democratic and Republican campaign workers would routinely expect a small percentage of errors on their mailings. You may have been the victim of rumor-mongering. The people who do try to practice voter fraud on any kind of a scale are the sort who'd tell stories like that as a diversion. It keeps the reporters occupied and gives their supporters a "You're just as bad!" rock to lob back at people making legitimate charges.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 12:45 am 
Berken wrote:
So, did the fact you are sharing with us come from the Democrats who were sending out that flyer? It seems unlikely, as experienced Democratic and Republican campaign workers would routinely expect a small percentage of errors on their mailings. You may have been the victim of rumor-mongering. The people who do try to practice voter fraud on any kind of a scale are the sort who'd tell stories like that as a diversion. It keeps the reporters occupied and gives their supporters a "You're just as bad!" rock to lob back at people making legitimate charges.


Actually, That mailing was done before the election and was originally the basis for the republicans to put challengers at the poll with that list. They were basically watching anyone who came in claiming a name on that list with the same address and ask them why their mail came back deceased/etc. Unfortunately they weren't allowed to take the list of 22k names to the polls with them for crossreferencing. They weren't claiming that there was any sort of voter fraud, but that there was a need to guard against such fraud.

Honestly, my county does scrub the voter lists on a regular basis. Because of Clinton's motor voter bill, I ended up getting registered twice under slightly different names (first initial-middle name vs. full name). When they discovered that one went unused for several elections they sent me a letter saying that they were removing it.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:30 am 
Honestly, I doubt either side could've really gained from some large scale voter fraud, especially in this election. If you REALLY tried, and were willing to be fairly blatent in the attempt, One person could have made mabey... 4, maybe 5 votes, total. 1 Absentee, plus one absentee in another state/district, and if they went to the polls early enough, I figure they could've moved through the line 3 times, tops.

Now assuming less than 1% of the population is willing to go that far, and risk that many charges of voter fraud, I don't think there are likely to be enough fraudulant votes out there to offset the work of fanatics fraudulently voting the other way. not by more than a few hundred nation-wide anyhow.

The comment I made before about mailings coming back was about Republican mailings to Democratic voters. But you are correct, it's the result of an unscrubbed list, not some massive failed conspiracy.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:05 am 
Travellar wrote:
The comment I made before about mailings coming back was about Republican mailings to Democratic voters. But you are correct, it's the result of an unscrubbed list, not some massive failed conspiracy.

There are many classic conspiracy schemes for padding vote totals, but doing so on a non-trivial scale requires an infrastructure of corruption. I've lived around Chicago for a long time, where the city Democratic machine had a number of methods for doing so. I'm not that familiar with the process but a couple of simple examples:
--- Ward Heeler enters booth with wino, walking past intimidated/bribed/non-existant opposition workers; pulls lever for wino to vote the slate; gives wino dollar bill, leads him away. Have small army of ward bosses and ward heelers repeat as necessary.
--- The same as above, but let sober people from ward do the voting themselves.
--- Corrupt county officials get possession of ballot boxes before election day; add several hundred filled-out ballots with dead people's names on them to each of hundreds of boxes; bring out on election day and not let opposition judges see them until end of voting.
--- The same as above, but do it after the end of voting. Bully or bribe anyone who wants to follow the boxes around until the count.

With both parties growing more sophisticated over the last decades, harassment tactics work better:
--- Arrange for election judges to "challenge" as many voters as they care to, slowing down process until some people in line give up and leave.
--- As above, but use "challengers" who look like police detectives or government agents. Particularly in poor and/or minority neighborhoods, this gives the potential voters that "we-know-where-you-live" feeling.
--- Arrange for polling places to be shuffled around and materials to be lost. Anything to try the patience of voters. Works better in poorer neighborhoods, where voters risk their jobs or the anger of their bosses if they take time off, even if they have a legal right to do so.
--- Demand ID from voters even if that isn't a legal requirement. Works better in poor urban neighborhoods where not everyone has a driver's license.
--- Demand two forms of ID. Even better, but you have to do so selectively to avoid slowing process down a little too much.
--- Require ID, poll tax, or literacy test only from impoverished minorities. This was standard practice in southern US up until the 1960s. It was less conspicuous that threatening to assault or kill any Black or Hispanic person coming near the voting stations.

Of course, using hackable electronic voting machines allows the benefits of the older methods of cheating without all the manual labor.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group