Report: 2004 Election Corrupted
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=130223
Printed Date: 21 December 2025 at 8:31am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Report: 2004 Election Corrupted
Posted By: goodsmitty
Subject: Report: 2004 Election Corrupted
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 10:48am
------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Replies:
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 10:53am
|
I guess it was that one-in-959,000 chance then....
He won, kerry lost, thats all there is to it, I'm sure there was some fraud on BOTH sides, there always is, but hey, unless there is proof that it would have changed the election one way or another, forget it **EDIT** haha, maybe april fools joke... look at date, maybe it's a 2-in-959,000!  ------------- 
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 10:53am
|
that doesnt mean the election is corrupted, just the predictions an exit poll merely takes a poll of people leaving the polling places to use in a formula to GUESS who they think is going to win. It has no actual affect on the outcome of the elections ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 10:54am
| We have learned from the election in 2000....it actually doesn't matter who wins, it's who gets inaugurated that matters. |
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 11:51am
 something we can agree on-------------
|
Posted By: rockerdoode
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 11:54am
|
'nuff said ------------- "According to Sue Johanson, theres nothing that can increase your manhood, trust me I've already looked into it for myself." -Zata |
Posted By: whoknowswho
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 11:58am
|
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:03pm
|
The report tells me that my vote really doesn't matter, so why vote? I am saving my vote for the local school levy from now on. The presidential election is so rigged it's pathetic. Pathetically obvious. ------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:07pm
|
get over it ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: PlentifulBalls
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:09pm
God, its friggin April. Kerry lost. Bush won. Who gives a damn? I'm not a Bush or Kerry supporter, they are both idiots. OGM TEH LECTION ESH RIGGEDF!!!!!!! OH NOEZ. Shut the hell up already. ------------- 
sporx wrote: well...ya i prolly will be a virgin till i'm at least 30. |
Posted By: Snipa69
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:28pm
|
Who honestly gives a shizzle anymore? We are well into the 05 year, and nobody cares. Bush is the president, this isn't going to cause any kind of impeachment or anything like that. So I have to ask, what is the purpose? Must have been a slow news day... ------------- http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://img456.imageshack.us/img456/857/sig9ac6cs1mj.jpg - |
Posted By: Cedric
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:30pm
|
I have an idea. Maybe if we complain and **edited** enough, Bush will
resign. **edited** off. No one gives a damn about your political threads
anymore.
------------- 
|
Posted By: :ShockeR_ratm:
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:36pm
|
holy crap just shut the hell up already
------------- 
Nobody ever suspects the fun police! 
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 12:40pm
|
Without reviewing the underlying study, I can state conclusively that if they merely applied probability analysis to the reported numbers from the exit polls versus the final vote (I don't know that this what they did, but it sounds a lot like it), then they did so in error, and their results are flawed. Simply put, with any collection of data you have to apply sampling error - the chance that your sample just randomly varied from the underlying population. This is a simple mathematical matter, and I am sure this group did that. That discounts your results to some degree. BUT - with a survey (such as an exit poll), you have to generally discount the results further. Any psychologist will tell you that surveys are among the least reliable forms of data collection. There are self-selection problems, recollection problems, honesty problems, misunderstanding problems, and generally a whole host of problems that make survey results more suspect. This discount, unfortunately, is not usually subject to mathematical analysis, due to lack of data. So it remains a guessing game. Mathematical analysis can reveal the relationship between the REPORTED survey results and the final vote - it alone cannot reveal the accuracy of those survey results. The fact that this group casually dismisses the very plausible explanation that Kerry voters may have been more likely to participate substantially diminishes their credibility. This is precisely the reason why we count the official results and not the unofficial results. Based on the article as written, I am not impressed. |
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:01pm
|
Y'all seem to care enough to curse your very best!
------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:47pm
|
Don't stop there, the more edited words you have in your post, the more you'll be respected. |
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:50pm
|
I guess the concensus is "Shut the hell up"....
We have the electoral college for a reason, and unless i'm wrong its congress that votes in it, so if you want a democrat for pres, get more democrats in congress.. and vice versa -------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:52pm
| I am not a fan of the electoral college, never have been, and I don't think I ever will be. |
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:53pm
|
Well thats fine, but we are a republic, not a democracy, we vote for people to vote for us... don't like it, make a real democracy, but there are NONE
The electoral college is there so some huge cult doesn't coerce people into a pres -------------
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:54pm
|
Oh my god... ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors"> 
|
Posted By: :ShockeR_ratm:
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:55pm
|
you don't realize...no one cares about political threads except for 5
people on this forum...you contribute nothing to this forum but anger
and politics...if you think we're too immature then find yourself a
different forum
-------------
Nobody ever suspects the fun police!
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 1:55pm
| We're not a democracy? Wow, something else I've been lied to about all my life. I know how the elections run, and it sucks. If a cult coerices the majority of people into voting, that's who should win. Majority rules, like with almost everything else. If a cult wins public opinion....that doesn't make them a cult. |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:05pm
|
While Bugg of course is wrong about almost everything he said about the electoral college, I agree with him that it is a good thing. In my view, the electoral college structure, along with US Senators elected at the state level and Reps elected at the district level (as opposed to at large) preserves variety of representation that I believe is important. Without the electoral college, for instance, I expect that 90% of presidential campaigning would be done in large cities, since any vote is as good as any other. No presidential nominee would visit Iowa or Wisconsin ever again. The US is a very wide and varied country. I believe these structures make sure that this variety is represented, at least to some extent, in our government. |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:07pm
| I completely understand your argument Clark. I just tend to feel less of my vote when I know it doesn't actually count for much, especially if I live in a rural area with little population. |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:10pm
|
Very true - a side effect of the electoral system is that some votes count more than others, and that can suck if you are in the "less" counted areas (which is most of the country). But, to offset that, you get the benefit of the two-party system: Even between elections, they are constantly readjusting to "fit" their constituency. So even though your official vote is deeply discounted, your unofficial counts as much as you are willing to yell and complain. I always figure that a letter to your congressman is worth hundreds of votes. |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:11pm
| Also very true. Good points. To each his own. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:18pm
|
technically, we are a democratic republic. China is a "Republic", Britain is a Democracy
------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:22pm
|
Britain is a representative democracy, just as the US is. They just have a parliamentary system instead of our republican system. I do not believe there has EVER been, in the history of EVER, a single democracy that was not a representative democracy of some kind. The first thing any democracy does is elect one or more leaders. In a "pure" direct democracy, every decision would be decided by vote. That is so silly as to defy logic. As soon as the voters delegate decision-making authority to elected officials, you have a representative democracy. |
Posted By: Cedric
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:33pm
I don't give a damn what you think. -------------
|
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:41pm
|
Gee your first strike is flaming, what a surprise there. I don't think I need to contribute to your teen angst, it is smoldering hot without my input.What else would you have to hate this afternoon, if it weren't one of my political threads. "I am the wellspring from which you flow" -Thulsa Doom ------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: bluemunky42
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:43pm
well said ------------- 
http://www.freewebs.com/hazedinsanity - http://www.freewebs.com/hazedinsanity |
Posted By: BlackDeath7
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:44pm
|
President George Bush won the election. Get over it. Senator
John Kerry lost the election. Get over it. All you are
doing GSmitty is bringing politics to the forum which turns into
personal attacks and then nobody is happy. There are many errors
with that article, you are just trying to find some excuse as to why
your favored candidate lost. It actually makes you look like a
two-year-old if you can't accept the fact that the leader of this
country won fairly. I wish you stop throwing your hissy fit
soon.
------------- 
Brett Favre gets sacked again. |
Posted By: Badsmitty
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:50pm
O.K. no politics. 1. I see that your barrel is as big as mine. 2. My gun shoots 30 balls a second. 3. I am a sniper with a ghillie suit (nuh uh, nuh uh!). 4. I am beginning to grow hair in strange places, do you think girls will like me? 5. I'm thinking of suicide because Menudo broke up.
|
Posted By: Panda Man
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 2:52pm
heh... Besides **edited** Chaney(sp) No president has even visited my State for Campaign's... ------------- 
|
Posted By: TheUnknown.
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 3:06pm
|
Amazing post. ------------- 
|
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 3:16pm
You forgot: 7. Do you liek me? 8. Who'se your faverite former? 9. Check out my pad (no 56kers) ------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: PlentifulBalls
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 3:35pm
|
I have no problem with political threads, but I can't stand to hear one
more liberal wine about Bush winning and proposing things like this. Whether he won or not, he is president. -------------
sporx wrote: well...ya i prolly will be a virgin till i'm at least 30. |
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 3:41pm
|
POst ur DEsktop #4-048]4-094. I changed 3 times in the past hour.... ------------- 
|
Posted By: hashi2008
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 4:04pm
|
OMG This should be #1 in the dumbest topic poll if we had a dumbest topic poll. I think most of the morons in the idea forum ave more sense than GS. ------------- Founder of the "Forumers Against the Ugly Woman Sigs" also known as FAUWS. |
Posted By: WUNgUN
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 5:56pm
Case Western Reserve University... not MIT, Harvard, or Brown though. I understand that an Associate Professor of Underwater Basket Weaving at the Community College of West Fargo concurs with his statistical findings. C-O-N~spiracy!!!!!!!  ------------- [IMG]http://hometown.aol.com/hlwrangler/myhomepage/revised5_copy.jpg"> ""...the Marines we have there now could crush the city and be done with business in four days."--LtGen Conway on Fallujah |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 5:59pm
|
HEY! Are you making fun of my school? WFCC has an outstanding basket weaving program... Grr. |
Posted By: Variable
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 6:01pm
|
The Electoral College was created by our founding fathers because they
thought the average citizen would be too stupid and gullible to make an
intelligent decision about who will run our country. Based on the
many idiotic people I have encountered in real life and seen on the
news; I have to say they made yet another wise decision. People
need to realize that they aren't voting for the president, they are
just voting to decide who will choose our next president. I could honestly care less about what amazing probability some college professor has come up with. Odds only show likelihood and should not be taken as a guarantee. ------------- 
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v113/colonelbob/faaaaall.gif - Fat girl falling. |
Posted By: Ejp414
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 6:06pm
|
Oh my God, you have to understand, whiney little liberal **edited**: I can't get off the computer ever. I have to stay inside twenty-four hours a day. So if I don't like the content of a thread that you create on my forum
(which I am confined to since I choose it in lieu of a social life),
then I'm going to **edited** and complain and assert that a good, fun
discussion doesn't matter. I for one would much rather read about important "What Music Are You Listening To?" threads—POTUS, politics, and etc. don't even matter, Christ. That was sarcasm. Give the guy a break, you tightassed kids. The thread is relevant because the report is recent. Now shut the hell up, and if you don't want to talk about an old election's results, then don't post. Better yet, honestly debate the report and not which candidate your parents like better. Trust me—I'm sure you won't mind the one thread sitting in T/O that you don't want to open. Sifting through that "oh, shut up—the election was forever ago lol!!!" trash is a lot more of a hassle than choosing not to type in this here box. ------------- __________________ __________________ |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 6:10pm
|
The report is based on exit poles. No everyone takes exit poles. 100% of people will not tell the truth or even sit there and take the stupid thing, they want to get back to work after sitting in a line, or go home after work. I wouldnt take too much stock in this report. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 6:33pm
|
Poll. Exit poll. Not sure I want to know what an "exit pole" is... :)
|
Posted By: untouchable555
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 6:46pm
|
<<cute filter dodge, welcome to strikeland>> ------------- Tippmann 98c 20 ounce Co2 tank |
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 7:18pm
|
I owe you one. Now that I have stirred up a hornet's nest, lets debate some of the fact(oid)s. 1. Many of the voting precincts have machines that leave no paper trail. 2. People are corrupt, or corruptable. 3. Big businesses have money, the common man does not. Which way are the results going to swing? My guess is for big business, which has the money. In Ohio there were 25 machines in Youngstown that were caught giving votes from the Kerry column to the Bush column. The machines were fixed, but how many other machines did like "mistakes." Just about two months ago Ukraine had a revolution based on rigged elections. Is it not possible here also? ------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 7:20pm
-------------
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 7:21pm
I knew that sounded funny. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 7:23pm
And 2) what am I wrong on so I am no longer wrong on it, be helpful not criticle -------------
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 8:53pm
|
Fair enough - my apologies for the unwarranted snipe.
The electoral college is entirely separate from Congress. The makeup of the electoral college is entirely dependant on the November presidential election, and has absolutely nothing to do with Congress. In most states, the elected electors HAVE to vote the appropriate party's nominee - in some states they can theoretically break ranks and vote for whomever they please, but that has only happened once or twice, I believe. At this point the electoral college is mostly theoretical, which is why they count the electoral votes on election day, even though the electors don't actually meet to "elect" the president until much later. |
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 8:56pm
|
But I do know that the amount of electoral votes corresponds with congress, and the "breaking of the ranks" actually happens quite often... atleast for what I've seen -------------
|
Posted By: Bunkered
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 9:03pm
|
That sounds like nothing more than some nutjob professor who just can't stand the fact that "his side" lost.
I have no problem with political discussions on the forums... What I do have a problem with is almost completely unfounded accusations being thrown around just to piss people off. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 9:07pm
Is election fraud possible? Sure - heck, it is a near-certainty. Up here in Wisconsin, people like to vote three or four times, especially when they get bribed with cigarettes. Is election fraud more likely with paperless machines? Uncertain. People have been rigging elections for centuries just fine without machines. It occurs to me that machines do not necessarily add or subtract risk, but merely changes the nature of the risk. Who are these "big businesses" of which you speak, and why do you appear to presume that they would swing to Bush? And who are these "common men"? I presume you are suggesting that Halliburton (or whatever) bribed a programmer to tweak the code in a machine, or something to that effect. I have a two-part comment - first, that is just bizarrely unlikely. The cost/benefit analysis doesn't even come close to panning out in their favor. Corporate decisions are made for profit. Moreover, I am sure you aren't suggesting that the Halliburton board actually had a vote on the subject, so it would really in the end be a rogue executive acting on his own, not really "big business". Businesses are ultimately made up of individuals, who make individual decisions. Blaming things on this vague "big business" is a bit of a bogeyman situation, once you start honing in on exactly what would have to happen on the corporate management level for this to happen. Second, why do you believe that "big business" would favor Bush? Sure, Halliburton would, but what about the entertainment business? Music, TV, video games, etc. And what about industry groups? The Teamsters (always a major player when corruption is involved), teachers' union, the ABA, the trial lawyers - lots of money and power, and almost universally Democratic-leaning. I could make an equal argument that Bush actually won Ohio MORE, but the Democrats just didn't cheat enough, and the fake exit polls were put out by cocky cheaters. Perhaps not surprisingly it is always the losers that complain of cheating, even though it is not always the winner that is the cheater. A quick reference for the video game generation... Anybody who has ever played a significant amount of multi-player online games knows what happens when somebody wins a lot. Within minutes the cries begin: "cheater", "aimbotter", "he's got radar", and other entirely unfounded crap, based solely on the simple fact that these can't admit to themselves that they are simply getting spanked by a superior player. Does cheating occur, both in online gaming and US elections? Absolutely. Does it happen as often or as pervasively as losers claim? Absolutely no way. |
Posted By: rockerdoode
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 9:20pm
------------- "According to Sue Johanson, theres nothing that can increase your manhood, trust me I've already looked into it for myself." -Zata |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 9:26pm
|
Well... Next time a Democrat wins... i know what i will be doing.. Yelling about taxes and complaining about how they STOLE the election. But only im going to do it in JUNE. Cuz im just that gangster. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: rancidpnk13
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 9:38pm
no, it's not. because there aren't enough people who would actually stand up and resist. ------------- 
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 April 2005 at 9:41pm
|
Yep. The constitution says its legal. But even if someone wanted to overthrow the government. Its too big, and its been tried. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 6:57am
So let me get this straight, you are a righest, yet you are disagreeing with me on everything... I'm confused-------------
|
Posted By: ScarFace22
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 7:15am
|
I read the first page then jumped the last because I was getting sick of hearing the liberals cry. Kerry lost get the
------------- 
Check my thread in the Great guns thread for Timmy tech help or PM me |
over it already. Its been 5 months already who cares. Kerry is a flip flopping fool who didn't deserve to win. 
Posted By: Bugg
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 7:25am
|
LOL -------------
|
Posted By: Cedric
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 10:08am
|
After seeing scarface's post, I feel ashamed to have posted in this thread.
-------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 10:17am
| When scarface posts it just makes me feel very scared that one day his generation will run the country. |
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 11:45am
|
Scarbrain gets the award for the obligatory flame without reading the topic. The sad thing is that I cannot laugh at his hardship when his generation suffers due to rigged elections and an out of control political system, because that would be evil. Kind of like Dune not being able to enjoy macing people in the face. ------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 11:47am
It's true, although I love the Asp, nothing like an extendable baton swung into the rib cage that says "halt, we need to speak with you." |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 12:00pm
|
I do love me an extendable baton. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Ejp414
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 1:22pm
Why is there confusion? A good half of the liberals I know are nuts. If you have little to no idea about what you're arguing, then it shouldn't matter if your parents like Republicans better or not. ------------- __________________ __________________ |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 2:24pm
Im not a rightist! Im very republican, but i know when enough is enough. Everyone knows if you lean too far to the right or to the left, you will fall over.. IE faciest Italy. Comunist Russia. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 6:03pm
|
Yep and it took the Illegal Alien (Space Type) to bring the Ohio vote over to Bush, Just ask the National Inquirer....and they will have witnesses and pictures to prove it......(just as idiotic as the initial claim in this posting)
Get over it, try again in 08, and try to have a candidate with a little intestinal fortitude to stand on one side of an issue...it does help...... Hillary in 08, now there is a winner or whiner after the loss, but we again will blame us poor, uneducated, Red State Bible Thumpers............who are "smart" enough to rig an election that all those college edumacated Liberal Democrats can't seem to fix themselves, except for the Daley family in Chicago, maybe the DNC should take notes next time......... Permission from momma to post.... ------------- 
|
Posted By: The Crimson
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 6:59pm
|
^^^ You forever have my respect. ------------- To Become What I Became I've viewed the sun for the last time |
Posted By: Badsmitty
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 7:37pm
|
No one said that you poor, uneducated, Red State Bible Thumpers were smart enough to rig an election. The accusation is against your leaders. |
Posted By: Ejp414
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 7:45pm
Christ, there are only three periods in an ellipsis. ...you have no idea how much that bothers me. ------------------- Oh, that and the whole overly partisan thing—you really need to get over that. Maybe even talk to some Democrats or turn the dial from talk radio for once... You see, there are three kinds of people: those who argue by event, those who argue by ideology, and those who argue by party. For example, Clark Kent will argue by event. He is willing to examine the facts of a case every time to consider how he views it. He makes sure that the information he digests about the event is relatively unbiased and honest. Then you have people like me, who tend to not keep up with the specific events of politics as much. I develop my own ideology about what is right and wrong, and my opinion is formed accordingly. The reason I choose to think this way as opposed to how Clark thinks is that I do not know how to find enough truly honest information on many topics. Finally, there are those who pick a side and vacuously berate anyone who they consider not on that side. From reading your post, I can honestly claim to only see empty angst and potshots rather than any evaluation of events or ideology, and all of the tirade focuses not on what is right/wrong concerning the event but rather on the perceived faults of "them." Welcome to those who argue by party. And using the word "edumacated" doesn't sound witty at all. ------------- __________________ __________________ |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 8:04pm
|
Hey Badsmitty.....
If our "Leaders" are "smart" enough to "rig" an election, what does that say about the DNC leadership...guess they are not "smart" enough...even with all that education and all that Democratic money (ohh sorry only Republicans are rich, No Democrat can be rich by thier own admission only Republican money is evil) And good luck to the left with the soon to be launched "Huffington Report" should be some totally non-biased views there...again only conservatives are biased, so says the Blue Staters... And who really cares who wins elections when soon the non elected judiciary can rule by thier interptatation of the Constitution anyway, no elected leader or elected body can tell a Judge what the law is or what to do anyway .............................. Also seems like the locals are getting restless again... Have fun...me and momma are on the road having a blast...she is doing the bills, and I get to spout my biased conservative republican views to contaminate the masses...till she says she needs laptop... -------------
|
Posted By: The Guy
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 8:42pm
|
Hey OS, how are you hooking up to the internet? Do they have ethernet at truckstops?
------------- http://www.anomationanodizing.com - My Site 
|
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 9:12pm
|
Clark,
If you have not read "Confessions of an economic hit man", do so. Although I warn you it will make you physically ill the first day you read it.
As far as who is to gain from rigging the election, follow the money. Carlysle is benefitting from a pipeline across Afghanistan that they could never get the rights to prior to our invasion. GHW Bush gets paid stupid money as an adviser to Carlysle. Next are the big construction outfits, such as Halliburton, Bechtel, and Brown and Root. Not to mention the oil companies wanting to get rights to drill in Iraq. The above mentioned companies have had a former president or CEO in the very top levels of government for years. The consideration of rigged elections is not far-fetched, it is highly probable, given the payoff for these companies.
With that said, I don't believe that rigging the elections was necessary in '04. The Whitehouse used the "terror alert" system, small pox, and missing russian nukes to scare people near to death. Amazingly, all of those threats went away mid-November :O
*edit* and the "little guy" is me and 99.9999% of the population. We are powerless in the direction that our country is going. Guys like Cheney, GHW Bush, and George Shulz to name a few pull the big strings in this country. I think that they need to only be popular enough to cast a shadow of validity of any election; unless they are loathed by 75% of the population, they can get away with rigging the election.
After spending one third of my life serving my country as a soldier, I am now convinced that I am a bug to the men who really run this country, and the best I can hope for is to make it a peaceful retirement with what I can scratch together without being hauled off by the brownshirts. I could be in Guantanamo Bay tomorrow, and they would convince everyone that I was a terrorist by Friday. ------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: Badsmitty
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 9:21pm
| Let us not forget the Patriot Act that not one single terrorist has been prosecuted under, although American citizens have. And of course, same sex marriage which magically showed up on the ballots of 11 states. Lastly there was Iraq. No WMD's no terrorists on 9/11. Maybe O.S. is on to something when he commented about uneducated Red State Bible Thumpers. But, like Jesus said when being questioned by the first right-wing evangelicals "you have said it" (not me). |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 9:51pm
It's on my list - I'll get to it eventually... (I have a long list) :)
I am following the money, just in greater detail. Did a GW victory benefit some industry sectors? Clearly.
I am talking much more nitty-gritty. I can absolutely promise you that the board of directors at Halliburton did not have a discussion about rigging any elections. Those guys are mostly quasi-outsiders, and get paid relatively little, and certainly don't want to go to jail and get sued for a zillion dollars. There is absolutely no way there is an open discussion in the board room about paying off a programmer to tweak a voting machine. It just wouldn't happen. This is not shady accounting or a shady payment in a foreign country that may or may not be legal - this is outright election fraud, and no way around it. The guys on the Halliburton board just won't be talking about it.
So, without board approval, there is no corporate authorization, as such an illegal act is clearly outside of the authority of any officer or employee of the corporation. The corporation, therefore, had no intentional part in any fraud.
Now, could an enterprising senior officer at Halliburton have done this on his own? Much less unlikely. But again - why? If it is for personal political goals, that makes some sense (but again takes it out of the corporate arena). But otherwise? To benefit the shareholders of the corporation? That seems a bit too altruistic. To get a promotion? Unlikely, since he could never ever tell anybody about it.
Presumably, however, this officer is a significant shareholder of Halliburton stock, and might do so for personal economic gain. More possible. Although again this has little to do with the company, and is more of an individual thing - heck, this theory could apply equally to Warren Buffett, or any other non-employee shareholder. Why limit ourselves to shareholders who might be working at Halliburton? In fact, I am confident that the teachers' union retirement fund (one of the largest investment vehicles in the world) owns Halliburton stock. Wouldn't they also be motivated to commit this fraud for the benefit of the company?
Follow the money indeed - all the way. "The company" is ultimately made up of shareholders and employees, all of whom are ultimately people. There is no "company" that has an independent will. For most of the people who work for Halliburton, that only means a paycheck. Many of the people who benefit most from Halliburton's success have no direct association with the company.
(The argument gets a little more complicated with privately held companies like Bechtel, but the basics will apply even there)
But official corporate involvement? Absolutely not. Who benefits? The board certainly will not - not enough to offset the risks. There would be too many people involved in such a conspiracy - SOMEBODY would blow the whistle.
And then the logistics of implementation. This is a very delicate process - you have to somehow get the code in the machines changed (untraceably), and changed such that with no further involvement (once the machines are out you are done tweaking) they will delicately throw the election in Bush's direction - enough to make a difference, but not so much that anybody will notice. And, of course, you need the election to come down to the states/districts where you have tweaked the machines. Boy it would suck to go to all that trouble and still lose the election...
And there is the bottom line - you have an extremely risky ploy, involving WAY too many people, which might not even succeed, has limited payoff for the people involved if it DOES succeed, and will result in absolute personal and financial calamity for the people involved if discovered.
I just don't buy it.
Now, much more likely, IMO, is a sole programmer tweaking the code for giggles or political preference. Such a thing could easily happen, and might even impact an election. Hardly the same as this big conspiracy.
Again, the payoffs for "the companies" is a bit irrelevant. Companies are not people - companies don't have motives.
As to the CEO connection - that's just politics at work. Check any government, in any democratic country, for at least the last 50 years. Industry leaders and politicians exchange positions all the time. Who would you rather have as energy secretary than somebody who has worked the energy sector for 40 years? It is obvious that government officials are chummy with industry officials - those are the circles of power. It provides NO evidence of anything shady.
Seriously - check ANY recent government. Any administration benefits some companies and sectors more than others - that's a tautology. Every administration will also have members who were former industry leaders or personal friends, or both - that's just how power works. Clinton appointed childhood buddies to posts all over the world. He appointed school buddies to other posts. These are not bad things.
Does anybody doubt that D.Chaney is a qualified leader or manager? The man has loads of experience. So do our secretaries of defense and transportation, for instance. Wouldn't you want an airline guy to head up transportation?
Power is a small club. Overlap is inevitable.
There is no conspiracy. There just isn't.
|
Posted By: Shub
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 10:04pm
There were also reports on election day of machines that arrived in Philadephia with votes already registered for Sen. Kerry. |
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 06 April 2005 at 10:06pm
The elctoral college system is trash. |
Posted By: Badsmitty
Date Posted: 07 April 2005 at 4:04am
| Clark, I had heard that corporations can now claim 5th amendment protection. Is this true? If it is, are you so sure that corporation are not "people with motives?" |
Posted By: Homer J
Date Posted: 07 April 2005 at 4:18am
|
Wal-Mart Man for President 2008.
If I'm faced with a choice for president that sucks, and another choice that also sucks, I'll seriously write in Wal-Mart Man. I have no faith in the two-party system. |
Posted By: goodsmitty
Date Posted: 07 April 2005 at 4:07pm
I agree 100%-it would be held behind closed doors, or at a golf course, with no "official" ties to the the company.
You are splitting hairs. An agent acting on behalf of the company is culpable.
This is the reason middle level executives and managers exist. They want to get to the top, and supply plausible deniability for those that are calling the shots. The people who know about their clandestine work reward them handsomely, not publicly.
I can agree with that.
You know that we are taking, essentially, each other's position from the ID debate. I'm saying that the proof justifies the existence, and you are saying that it is too complex to happen. I must go to work now, so I will try to post my next argument in the next couple days.
------------- "Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status." -Zesty |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 08 April 2005 at 9:24am
Proof that you have never played golf with CEOs... :)
Seriously, though, while there certainly may a criminal or two in high corporate office, this type of thing just doesn't happen in America's business world. This type of conversation just doesn't happen. The corporate leaders of America just aren't a bunch of criminals. That idea is just false.
Aggressive accounting? Yes. Questionable payments to foreign governments? Yes. The occasional price-fixing? VERY rarely, but yes. A little inside information shared among friends? Yes, but only among the stupid. But rigging an election? It's just the wrong kind of crime. This is not what American corporate leaders do. Yes, it is possible that a board member would do such a thing, but it is no more likely than a random other person doing such a thing - probably, IMO, much less so.
The agent, yes, the company, no - because the employee was NOT acting on behalf of the company. It is just an individual who happens to be associated with a company. If you commit a murder that happens to benefit your boss, is your employer somehow liable? Even if you did it to impress your boss? Of course not - that just makes you a regular murderer.
Not splitting hairs at all. People today are very happy to casually blame "the corporations", which is essentially a meaningless phrase. There is always a person at the end. If that person acted as if the corporation was backing him, then the corporation may be culpable - but if an individual rigs an election without the knowledge of anybody else - how then is the employer liable?
Again, you are just wrong about corporate culture. This comment simply makes no sense in the American business world. This just isn't how it works.
Actually, the opposite is true.
In the evolution discussion, my point was that when choosing between two options, both of which are a priori improbable, one should choose the one that is LESS improbable.
I am making a similar point here, except that we have one explanation that is a priori improbable (cheating), and another explanation which is not improbable at all (that Bush was simply elected).
When choosing between a probable explanation and an improbable explanation (for which there is absolutely no evidence), we should choose the probable explanation.
Is it possible that the Ohio machines were rigged? Sure - but we have no actual reason to believe so. Most of the "evidence" relies on silly conspiracy theories straight out of Fahrenheit 9/11, such as what you posted, and these theories, frankly, show a complete ignorance of the daily functionings of corporate America.
Heck, I'm just trying to imagine pushing through the reimbursement request for "$500,000 cash to bribe programmer to fix Ohio voting machines".
:)
|