Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the disenfranchising-ohio dept.


jZnat writes, "In June Rolling Stone ran an article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. delving into the statistical improbability that Bush won the 2004 election based on massive amounts of evidence that support a Republican-sponsored election fraud across the country, particularly in Ohio. The GOP used a number of tactics in its fraudulent campaign including ballot-stuffing, denying newly registered voters (particularly in urban and minority precincts) their voting privileges via illegal mailings known as caging lists, inane voter registration requirements, preventing thousands of voters from receiving provisional ballots, under-providing Democrat-majority precincts with voting machines thus creating enormous queues of voters, faulty machines (particularly from Diebold) that skewed results in the GOP's favor, mostly unnoticed ballot-stuffing and fraud in rural areas, and a fixed recount that was paid for by the Green and Libertarian parties that essentially supported the initial fraudulent numbers." From the article: "'Ohio was as dirty an election as America has ever seen,' Lou Harris, the father of modern political polling, told me."

cancel ×


Moo (0, Flamebait)

Chacham (981) | more than 7 years ago | (#16125226)

Quick look, wow lots of sources. So, i checked one. Number 6.

Um, this is a bogus story. Sorry.

Re:Moo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126259)

Hello Mr. Astroturf! Nice to meet you.

Re:Moo (2, Insightful)

kjart (941720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126278)

Um, this is a bogus story. Sorry.

So where is your fact checking? I followed reference number 6 and it appeared to be accurate.

Re:Moo (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126280)

So whats wrong with number 6 [] ? It's not a link to the onion or something inane like that, it looks like a real newspaper article about a Republican PR company sending out letters claiming that it's affiliated with America Votes, when America Votes has no knowledge of it, and as a non-partisian organization wouldn't have affiliated with a Republican firm or provided a phonenumber to a voice message asking people if they're interested in hitting the streets to get people to vote Republican.

Re:Moo (1, Interesting)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126373)

Oh, yes. Everyone knows Republicans aren't allowed to have voter registration drives. Republicans cheat, see, because they picked a name that some other obscure voter registration organization had already picked. That proves Bush stole the election. [/puke off]

The people here are lame and pathetic.

Re:Moo (-1, Offtopic)

gadzook33 (740455) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126296)

Uh, apparently your reply is bogus. Sorry.

Chacham (981) = NEOCON suck up stooge (-1, Offtopic)

cheekyboy (598084) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126305)

Get a clue, go read

NEOCONs are equal to the wraith and the ORI from stargate

Re:Moo (2, Insightful)

diablomonic (754193) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126324)

NOT BOGUS STORY. wake the hell up sheeple. You may not care that bush stole the election, but youd have to be a complete frickin idiot not to realise that he did steal it. Dodgy exit polls, mathematical impossibilities, thousands of accounts of one sided errors, the voting machines manufacturer CEO PROMISED BUSH VOTES in a memo!!! how much more fricken obvious does it have to be? (bush promised votes [] (first link in google, no idea the site but it was a fairly widely printed story) more dodginess [] .

You can whinge about sources if you want, I dont give a crap, most murdoch/GE/etc owned news companies lie through their teeth, so the only place you CAN go for some of this news is "less reputable" sites.... (eg look up "outfoxed" on google video, a doco by ex fox news reporters, describing how dodgy the station ewnt after murdoch took over)

Re:Moo (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126388)

Sorry, son. The Dems nominated a shit candidate who was EVEN LESS ATTRACTIVE THAN BUSH, as hard as that might be to believe.

And they lost.

Here's a hint: next time don't nominate a senile hippie with the worst record on defense in the entire Senate while the country is at war.

Here's another: admit that you lost and move on. Continuing to screech just makes you look like a pack of psychotics.

Why is this story even on Slashdot? If I wanted to read nutjob political ranting I'd check out freerepublic, democraticunderground, or digg.


Re:Moo (1)

HatchedEggs (1002127) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126441)

Are you saying that a few workers from Fox (that were probably fired or whose bosses made their life hell so they'd quit) made a documentary about the company they used to work for?

Now thats gotta be factual.

Re:Moo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126326)

Could you elaborate? #6 is "Librarian bares possible voter registration dodge" and I'm not seeing anything that indicates that the story is false.

Re:Moo (1, Insightful)

letxa2000 (215841) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126395)

Oh goodie, another opportunity for Democrats to bitch about losing in 2004 and blame anyone but themselves. Run a decent candidate (Kerry was not it) and you'll have better results.

The Kennedy article was a rehash of all the nonsense liberals have been spewing since 2004. So the article itself was redundant when Kennedy wrote it. And it's been months since it was published, so why exactly is it suddenly news now? Oh, that's right, because the elections are just over a month away and the Democrats are offering no clear and concise alternative to Republicans so all they can do is rehash the same assertions they've been making since 2004. Heck, let's be honest, since 2000. The close election of 2000 and the close election of 2004 gave them the idea that if they try to highlight how close the election was and try to make the case that they should've won, people won't realize they have no platform themselves.

Democrats, wake up! Come up with a real platform and stop bitching and moaning about past elections and start focusing on future elections and you'll do a lot better. Even on the off chance all your assertions about past fraud are right, what do you really expect to gain from from staying stuck in the past? GET A PLATFORM, PLEASE! GIVE US A REAL ALTERNATIVE!

It's a link to a Slashdot journal...WTF? (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126413)

Journal written by jZnat (793348) and posted by kdawson on Sunday September 17, @03:40PM

Uh...who is jZnat, who is kdawson, and why is Slashdot now posting journals to the front page? How does one get their journal posted? Does jZnat know kdawson in some way?

What's going on?

Yes/No/Maybe (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126234)

There has been fraud, corruption, and all manner of crap going on in elections in the US since the beginning of time. (And, might I add, consider the source.)

This hasn't change since Bush took office, and won't be any different in 2008. It's not just Republicans that do it, nor is is just Democrats. (Witness the decades-old joke from Democratic stronghold cities: "Why did the Democrat walk into the cemetery? To thank his voters.")

As dirty and reeking of conflict-of-interest as it is, when Diebold's CEO said he was committed to delivering Ohio's electoral votes to Bush, he meant it as a Republican corporate leader and campaigner; not in the context of "rigging" an election.

No, the disenfranchisement that happens now and will continue to happen is the same disenfranchisement and dirty tricks that always happens: the rise of the internet for the general population, particularly since the last pre-Bush presidential election, has enabled the kinds of incredible information exchange on all manner of topics that we've seen in the last two elections. That will only increase, and it cuts both ways: as much as it allows the exchange of legitimate information, it acts as a breeding ground for conspiracy theories, some wacky, some not-so-wacky, some with elements of truth, but still serving to subvert any faith we ever had in our system.

The worst part is so many people believe that not one, but two, elections were actively and intentionally "stolen"/rigged exclusively by Republicans, that anytime any Republican/conservative candidate ever wins an election from this point forward, it will always be doubted. Even recounts will be doubted. People want to believe, well, what they want to believe.

All of the political, governmental, financial, famous and otherwise, and other powerhouse figures in the United States on the anti-Republican/conservative side(s) didn't just stand idly by while not one, but *two* elections were stolen.

Nothing new has happened on either side in 2000 or 2004 that hasn't ever happened before. That's just a fact of life. These are the same county election entities that have run elections in locales for generations. Yes, things change a bit, especially with the introduction of electronic voting machines (which, ironically, were the result of various Democratic and bipartisan initiatives designed to allow more equal and consistent management of and access to polling places). But all e-voting vendors offer permament voter-verified receipt options on current and some previous models of machines - but these additions cost even more money; money that many municipalities weren't willing to spend.

Worse still, we're talking about it two (or six, depending) years later. Not only do we have people who believe firmly that both elections were stolen, but we have people who literally believe something will cause a suspension of the 2008 elections, allowing Bush to remain in power. To me, the growing ranks of people who believe that with all their heart - growing mostly because of the internet, and sources of information that reinforce what they want to believe - are actually more of a threat to our system of government than anything else.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126279)

How could you have posted that so fast? It smells ready-written. Especially the last paragraph where you blame the disenfranchised voters for being a bigger threat to the system than Bush.

I'm real sorry, but turning in ballots and counting them does not have to be shady, it's arithmetic. The mentality you present is one where the simplest, smallest thing is the least trustable. Coincedentally (for the GOP), the largest, most complicated things are the best.

The ameoba outlives the tiger, my friend.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (2, Informative)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126309)

He possibly has a subscription so he sees it early, or most likly he has debated this subject before so used his previously canned responce. It doesn't nessesarily make it wrong (though I admit I didn't read it all :)

Either way, the humor of Ohio and Floridas minority district problems are that they were mostly run by Democrats. Sure these minorities might have been disenfranchised, but it was out of incompitance and not nessesarily some scheme.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (4, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126339)

Sorry to disappoint, but all of the words are my own, and were written in the 15 minutes or so before the story became public. Slashdot subscribers see stories a bit early.

No, counting ballots doesn't have to be hard. What's extremely hard is:

- Making sure everyone only votes once
- Keeping the entire process anonymous

If you only had to to either instead of both, it would be a piece of cake. Unfortunately, having to do both is hard, and with each and every county running their own elections for tens of millions of people, all with different aims, populations, budgets, and so on, it's a lot harder than you think.

This isn't even about paper versus electronic (because we can make 100% trusted electronic systems, with a permanent voter-verified audit trail being present - but even with a paper trail, a lot of people seriously believe there will still be ways to rig the elections...and beyond that, there will still be claims of long lines, voter threats, and so on). It's about the intrinsic difficulties in doing a one-vote election while maintaining anonymity, and disallowing any external entity to find out who any particular person voted for.

Remember, too, that the voting acts (e.g., HAVA) were designed to allow fair and uniform access to ballots and polling places, while taking advantage of streamlining things with technology - something we have done in every other sector of society. Unfortunately, any federal, state, or local initiatives recommending or mandating electronic voting machines are incomplete without a permanent voter-verified paper trail. With that piece, it doesn't matter how complex it is, whether or not the systems are open source or proprietary, or anything else. But even with a paper trail, there will still be the increasing calls of fraud and disenfranchisement, as people who want to believe that will continue to organize and reinforce each other via the internet. Yes, some of the fraud and disenfranchisement is real. But there are people, as I said, who will continue to believe that any Republican victory is stolen, as if Democrats can't game the system (and make no mistake, they do).

I also don't know what you're talking about when you say that the "GOP" wants a complicated system, when the voting initiatives that mandated and extended things like electronic voting were either solidly Democratic or bipartisan.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (2, Insightful)

koreth (409849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126306)

but we have people who literally believe something will cause a suspension of the 2008 elections, allowing Bush to remain in power.
To be fair, though, I've heard that about every president since I've been old enough to know what a presidential term was. At this point I'd be surprised if there weren't people thinking that toward the end of a given president's tenure. Happily, it's always a very small minority of extreme left-wingers (the Republican President is going to declare martial law or some national emergency) or right-wingers (the Democratic President is going to cede authority to the UN in exchange for being installed as a figurehead) and not something that most people really give any thought to.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126320)

Parent too long: didn't read.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (1)

Duhavid (677874) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126424)


Re:Yes/No/Maybe (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126345)

I agree, there is so much media that people just listen to the sources that say what they want to hear.

Elections are a process and there is a rate of error that occurs. The last couple elections have fallen within or dangerously close to the error.

More alarming, these people aren't acting like statespeople. You've got Rush Limbaugh and Air America (basically the same thing, they just support different parties) pushing forward all this hubris that attacks the very trust model that makes an election possible. Corruption and election theft are big claims without evidence. Huge claims.

Further, due to the 2000 election, everybody mandated "electronic" election equipment when there was very little actually wrong with the current equipment. You could listen to air america on a dialy basis suggest that ballots were stole and there were other things that electronic ballots would fix. Then when the next election went the same way, there are problems with the machines, the makers of the machines are corrupt.

My advice, stop paying attention to the spin doctors, vote for the best person that is running, regardless of if you agree or disagree with his idealogy, vote for the most honest person that is running in a particular race. We need good statespeople a lot more than we need different election hardware and we need to get rid of shit like Rush Limbaugh and Air America that will never ever act in the best interest of the country or unite anybody.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (3, Insightful)

theshibboleth (968645) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126367)

Yes there has always been corruption in American politics, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about it. The last couple of eletions have been extremely close. As far as people being paranoid about the next election being cancelled, it is disturbing when a sitting administration talks about postponing the election [] .

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (3, Insightful)

ptbarnett (159784) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126371)

Worse still, we're talking about it two (or six, depending) years later. Not only do we have people who believe firmly that both elections were stolen, but we have people who literally believe something will cause a suspension of the 2008 elections, allowing Bush to remain in power.

The right-wing believed Clinton would do the same thing in the late 1990's. Of course, it didn't happen. And it's about as likely to happen this time.

But, they viewed the 2000 fiasco in Florida through the same lens: for every person that believes that Bush stole that election, there is someone on the opposite side that believes that Gore was narrowly prevented from stealing the election. There is plenty of "evidence" for both, if you carefully choose what to believe.

To me, the growing ranks of people who believe that with all their heart - growing mostly because of the internet, and sources of information that reinforce what they want to believe - are actually more of a threat to our system of government than anything else.

I agree that the polarization is getting worse, but I don't think the Internet is to blame. I believe the traditional coalitions of "left" and "right" that once wanted similar things (and differed only on the details) are drifting further apart as the extremists take control of the respective major parties. In the past (past 30-40 years), it typically happened to only one party and the other captured the "center".

But now, the center is fed up and stays home, leaving the party faithful to battle it out. And the parties need something to motivate their followers, and aren't above stretching the truth a little to do it.

beginning of time?!!! (0, Offtopic)

celardore (844933) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126382)

there has been fraud, corruption, and all manner of crap going on in elections in the US since the beginning of time.

My, aren't we feeling patriotic today. Who cares that you failed history.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (2, Insightful)

Lonewolf666 (259450) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126386)

Nothing new has happened on either side in 2000 or 2004 that hasn't ever happened before. That's just a fact of life. These are the same county election entities that have run elections in locales for generations. Yes, things change a bit, especially with the introduction of electronic voting machines (which, ironically, were the result of various Democratic and bipartisan initiatives designed to allow more equal and consistent management of and access to polling places). But all e-voting vendors offer permament voter-verified receipt options on current and some previous models of machines - but these additions cost even more money; money that many municipalities weren't willing to spend.
In the meantime, it has become public knowledge how easy these machines can be manipulated. I do, however, not hear much about consequences. A few states or municipalities seem to take the problem seriously but they are a minority. That does not inspire much trust in future US elections.

Seems like it (1)

ZeroExistenZ (721849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126389)

At least it seems like it [] .

democracy (1)

gumbi west (610122) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126403)

I'm affraid I have to disagree with your point of view. In a democracy, accurate polls are essential and an ideal that always deserves effort. Specific controls to reduce fraud and disenfranchisement (denial of a vote) weather explicit or though increased opportinity costs is always a worthy cause. Because the very foundation of the law, of the constituion, of the form of government is that there is no method of keeping government honest and representative of the people than to allow them to pick their leaders in a fair and honest way.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (3, Insightful)

partisanX (1001690) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126406)

To me, the growing ranks of people who believe that with all their heart - growing mostly because of the internet, and sources of information that reinforce what they want to believe - are actually more of a threat to our system of government than anything else.

The question you have to ask is WHY? Why are people now so inclined to believe in "conspiracy theories" and distrust the government on this level now? Is it really just because of the internet? Could it have anything to do with the fact that this administration and its partisan drones have actively used conspiracy theories in pursuit of their political agenda? "Axis of Evil" conspiracy theory anyone? "Iraq has WMD and is going to use them against Americans" conspiracy theory anyone? "Liberals want to bring down america" conspiracy theory anyone?

When an administration rejects hard facts and logic and reason in its decisicion making process, that has an impact on the psyche of the nation. When an administration continues to lie and justify it's lies, why would any rational citizen in their right mind believe anything they say? They lied to us about wiretapping, secret prisons, and WMDs in Iraq. Why would I or anyone else logically trust what they say?

Indeed, their consistant violation of the trust of the American people is why these things persist. It isn't because of the internet boogeyman or those "whackey" conspiracy theorists. They have created an environment where secret plots and corruption on the level that is being alleged is not only not unthinkable, but seems plausible given their seeming dependency on deception.

Have politicians always lied? Damn straight. I wasn't born yesterday. But the severity of the lies have gotten worse in recent years. And the republicans planted a seed in the minds of the public that honesty and truthfulness was paramount, so much so that it was worth putting the country through an impeachment process because a man purjured himself trying to hide his humanity. Then the republicans get in office and tell lie after lie, which seems sinister in scale compared to what they impeached the previous president over.

Re:Yes/No/Maybe (1)

Dixie_Flatline (5077) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126434)

I would argue that a system that allows itself to be distrusted in this fashion, a system that doesn't command the highest level of confidence of its users -- that's what's really at fault. Conspiracy theorists abound, certainly, but one of the problems is that this conspiracy doesn't seem that far fetched. It's certainly within the realm of possibility. Many (all?) of the things that are claimed in the article are verifiable. Whether they add up to a stolen election may be something else, but that people can have a moment of doubt is at the core, here.

There's no perfect solution, but surely there's a better solution than this.

Slow news day indeed... (5, Informative)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126244)

Rehashing a Rolling Stone article from June, that was already covered on /. at the time? Running a dupe a few days or a week later is one thing, but it's been 3 months!

All I need to see.. (0, Troll)

Flounder (42112) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126245)

In June Rolling Stone ran an article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Yep, there's two bastions of unbiased opinion.

oxymoron (1)

cheekyboy (598084) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126357)

Well, really, is there ever any true unbiased opinion? by its nature, it has to be biased, even in subtle ways. Its impossible to approach
exactly 50%, because how do you measure bias truely accurately like electron charge?

Re:All I need to see.. (5, Insightful)

dangitman (862676) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126384)

Do you have anything to refute the content and the facts laid out in the article? It doesn't matter who the source is. It matters if it's true or not. Show me any human on this planet who is not biased.

Argue with the argument, not the arguer.

Re:All I need to see.. (3, Insightful)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126387)

Facts don't need bias. Whether something happened or not when evidence is available and verifiable makes the facts of the event immune from bias. The interpretation of those events "Bush won fair and square because of x" "Bush stole the election because of Y" is where the bias in this case comes in. You shouldn't dismiss something (well, something possible or probable) outright because you don't like the messenger or the possible implications.

there is a bias, you're right! (1, Funny)

User 956 (568564) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126431)

It's indisputable that reality has a well-known liberal bias.

Re:All I need to see.. (2, Insightful)

Michael_Burton (608237) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126451)

In June Rolling Stone ran an article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Yep, there's two bastions of unbiased opinion.

Oh, good. I was afraid there wouldn't be any ad hominem responses, without which we would have to judge on the basis of facts and reason. Who wants that?

such an intellectual source (3, Insightful)

dingDaShan (818817) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126246)

We are talking about a Rolling Stone article... a half-gossip magazine. The "entertainment industry's" take on politics... why is this even on Slashdot? Of course the election was rigged! This would explain why the disjointed, disorganized, and divided Democratic party lost an election to an incumbent. Lets just keep making excuses if it makes us feel better.

Re:such an intellectual source (2, Insightful)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126394)

Exactly. The article was written by ROBERT KENNEDY, JR. It's like trusting a reporting a global warming written by Dick Cheney.If there had been a massive voter fraud conspiracy in 2004, we'd have known about it by now. Articles like this love to paint the GOP as the bad guys and conveniently forget that Democrats were, for instance, slashing the tires of GOP voter vans on election morning and registering dead people to vote. A bunch of stuff happened from both sides, but for some reason, magaines and newspapers only remember one side doing it, as if the poor, innocent Democrats just never do anything wrong. If the GOP had been registering dead people and paying homeless folks with drugs to go into voting booths, it'd be in Rolling Stone, but because the magazine leans left (as does most of the media, proven by a UCLA-Standford study on the subject), we don't hear about it.

Washington State (2, Informative)

deanj (519759) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126247)

If you want to see what a real stolen election looks like, take a close look at what happened in Washingon State when they tried to elect the last governor. They kept recounting until they got the result they desired, and then told everyone to stop.

THAT'S a stolen election.

Re:Washington State (2, Interesting)

dingDaShan (818817) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126264)

I don't see a Kennedy writing an article on the .ooo45 percentage point margin of victory for the Democrat winner of the Gubernatorial election in Washington... hmmm

Re:Washington State (1)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126286)

That's also a Democrat win... so it's not important and/or that's just getting back at "the man".

Re:Washington State (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126312)

And the winning recount was paid for by the union that she forced most state employees to join

Re:Washington State (2, Insightful)

Vicissidude (878310) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126453)

Yeah, and Dino Rossi could have continued by contesting the last recount as well. But, he chose not to. His loss.

The Secretary of State for Washington is a Republican. If there were any problems with the election, he certainly would have said something.

KIcking up an ant's nest (4, Insightful)

rumblin'rabbit (711865) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126250)

Do you ever get the feeling that the people posting these stories do so just cause they like to rattle people's cages?

Democrats versus Republicans
Creationism versus evolution
Open software versus proprietary

These are all sure to create vicious back-and-forth arguments that'll put the responses over that magical 300 number.

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (5, Insightful)

Stonent1 (594886) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126256)

Maybe we should start moderating the stories? I give this one (-1 Flamebait)

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (3, Insightful)

deanj (519759) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126260)

Yep. That's exactly what they're doing.

It's a left-leaning site. I have NEVER seen a right-leaning article approved here. Ever.

It does drive traffic though, so they're still making money, which is why they do it in the first place.

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (-1, Troll)

hyperstation (185147) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126299)

left leaning as in "leaning towards the voice of open discussion and reason", then yes, i agree with you!

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (4, Insightful)

Flounder (42112) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126348)

Wow, if that article is your idea of "open discussion and reason"....

Or is it simply more Democratic "free speech and tolerance, unless you disagree with us, then it's theft/fraud/racist/sexist/facist"

Like the ABC movie "The Path To 9/11"?? Yeah, threatening to revoke a network's broadcast license because you disagree with the content of their programming isn't censorship.

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126370)

Out of curiosity, how are you defining left and right?

The way I see it, there are two major political axes currently in effect: social and economic. Slashdot tends towards being socially left, i.e. more towards secular humanism. However, when it comes to economics, I note a major trend towards being anti-regulation, which is typically considered to be an economically right-wing affectation.

The idea making the rounds of Slashdot appears to be maximizing liberty on all axes at any cost. This makes it hard to define the political boundaries when you're only using one axis.

However, if you can define Slashdot on a right vs. left spectrum, I'd be interested in hearing your arguments.

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126452)

Slashdot is heavily pro-regulation. "Network neutraility", which Slashdot supports (most posters and the editors themselves) is simply having the government regulate the Internet. The anti-Microsoft slant is also clearly a left-wing economic stance.

Not to mention "your rights online" which continually suggests that more regulation is required to ensure "your rights online". Which is ironic, if you think about it: regulation by definition is a set of restrictions on freedom, but Slashdot seems pro-regulation when it comes to the Internet.

Slashdot has a clear left-wing bias. Comments that even hint at a right-wing bias (for example, not instantly villifying George Bush) are instantly modded into oblivion.

It's a more libertarian left (in that most Slashdotters want less regulation on their lives), but still left leaning (but more regulation on everyone else's lives).

If Slashdot were really anti-regulation, network neutrality would be villified as the power-grab it is.

Re:KIcking up an ant's nest (1)

sheldon (2322) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126440)

/. is mostly Libertarian if you haven't realized that by now.

Lot's of articles here on cryptography, RFID, bills relating to regulating the internet, etc.

I do love how Republicans always play the martyr. Oh poor is me, nobody likes us. For some reason standing against liberty just doesn't win us any respect.

KIcking up a geek's nest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126405)

"Do you ever get the feeling that the people posting these stories do so just cause they like to rattle people's cages?"

Vi vs Emacs.

KDE vs Gnome.


Dupes vs no dupes.

Taco vs CowboyNeal (death match).

"These are all sure to create vicious back-and-forth arguments that'll put the responses over that magical 300 number."

Religion vs Atheists.

RK4prez (1, Insightful)

mcbenji (949156) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126254)

all i had to do was see the name Robert Kennedy and know this story wouldnt be biased AT ALL!

BFD (3, Insightful)

BCW2 (168187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126257)

Like this is different from any other election? Look up what happened in 1960 in Texas and Illinois if you think 2000 or 2006 were the most crooked. The only difference was that Nixon refused to demand a recout because it would hurt the country and the last two don't care how much damage they do!

Re:BFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126358)

Oh man, thats a new one! Forget gays and athiests, recounts caused 9/11! Making sure that the democratic process operates correctly in a country that prides itself on being the beacon of democracy for the world has crippled our country! Doublechecking to make sure that machines in Florida are submitting positive numbers of votes is like a great gaping wound in our country's psyche!

You can yap all you want about dead people voting Democratic, the Republicans got caught with their hand in the ballot box. Get over it.

Re:BFD (1, Interesting)

NoOneInParticular (221808) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126398)

It is telling that you assume that the 2006 election will be very crooked a few months before it happens. Time maybe to do something about it? The 2004 election however went largely uncontested; for the good of the country? Much good it did.

It is however very interesting that the US form of voting is so extremely sensitive to fraud and other irregularities. Nothing of this scale has, as far as I know, ever happened in any other country in the Western world. Are the American politicians that much more corrupt, or does the simple process of counting votes go beyond the capabilities of the American populace?

Maybe it is time to let this go. . . (0, Troll)

treak007 (985345) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126262)

Seriously, Let it go

Bush won the election. Get over it. I don't care how much you don't like him or how much you don't agree with him; that doesn't matter, but he won the election. Move on. Just because the person you voted for didn't win doesn't mean the whole thing is a sham.

Re:Maybe it is time to let this go. . . (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126315)

Nice straw man, idiot. Possible electoral fraud demands investigation, despite your cretinous opinion that it's all about pouting Bush-haters.

Re:Maybe it is time to let this go. . . (5, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126331)

If the election was in fact stolen, "moving on" is the worst thing you can do, since its a direct attack on both the constitution and the legitimacy of government - and through that, an attack on the US and its citizens. Finding the criminals who helped steal it would be the right thing.

Re:Maybe it is time to let this go. . . (1, Insightful)

treak007 (985345) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126359)

If there ever was any Proof that was valid, then yes, I would agree, but every couple days, I see the same kinda article with same laughable sources.

Re:Maybe it is time to let this go. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126417)

No, do not let it go.
If the elections were rigged, as is abundantly clear from various sources, then something MUST be done about it.
The callous attitude most of the posters here have so far shown towards this scandalous disregard towards american democracy is just a signal that there are republicans running rampant in Slashdot.
White nerds tend to be republican. The activism of the humanities never quite gets to the Engineering/Science end of the campus. Perhaps something can be said here about the half-assed education that a technical degree provides its holders.
The sources are meaningless. The content is meaningful. Attack the content, if you can, and forget the ad hominem directed at a 'Kennedy' or 'Rolling Stone,' and perhaps THEN you all will exist in an environment that is not as divided and embittered as it is now.

WTF is this garbage?!? (2, Insightful)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126266)

So now slashdot is reduced to pandering political gossip?

Any particular POLITICAL reason Slashdot waited until mid september to post a story about a JUNE Rolling Stone article?

Re:WTF is this garbage?!? (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126435)

Mod parent up.

A significant proportion of us want Slashdot to be... "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters," not "News for Politicos, Stuff that Doesn't Have a Thing to do with Science or Technology."

P.S. I know my children. You'll send me lots of replies yacking about how Slashdot has always had a political tone to some degree. This is true, but it used to at least be constrained to politics regarding technology.

P.P.S. Sorry Taco and eds. I appreciate the site... but this is just very very enabling of the sort of crowd that drives me away from Slashdot. Please don't take this the wrong way. I only bothered posting because I like Slashdot and want it to be as good as it once was.

I thought this was stuff that mattered... (2, Insightful)

hawks5999 (588198) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126269)

C'mon Slashdot. This isn't news relevant to nerds or stuff that matters.

Bush is... (-1, Flamebait)

abscissa (136568) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126270)

Bush is an illigitimate president who stole the election TWICE and maniulated the eleciton in Mexico so the Christian party would win. The people are catching on, George, and soon you pro-Creationism, anti-Science party will LOSE, and your NINE TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT -- which has never before been seen in history -- will be patched up through revocation of your pro-war, pro-Israel policies which led to war and distruction in the middle east.

Re:Bush is... (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126284)

Yeah, I heard Bush is in league with Robot Jesus too!

Ooh, a political flame war (4, Insightful)

loraksus (171574) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126271)

*grabs popcorn*

Seriously though, Diebold machines are a joke. What I don't understand is why widespread vandalism of these machines hasn't been done.
The exploits are, from what I understand, incredibly simple.
Unfortunately, I have a feeling that even if Osama bin Laden won the 2008 presidential election based on votes from machines, it would just be blamed on "terrorist hackers" and no actual accountability would be implemented.
Then, 2 years later, the American public would go back to voting on the same buggy machines, as oblivious as usual. Nothing would of have changed.

WAAAAAA!!!! (4, Insightful)

kaufmanmoore (930593) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126282)

If Bush couldn't be ousted in '04 and if the Dems can't take control of Congress maybe its something they're doing wrong, cause Bush isn't doing anything right.

Cry Cry Cry (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126287)

I am not a fan of our current president and I have never voted for him (but I did vote) But the democrats were stupid enough to put a Northern Liberal Democrat against a South Western Republican. So what it did was create a polarized nation during the election, it forced people to be deadly afraid of the other side. So they all voted for one side or the other. So being that bush won, all the people who got all hyped up the Bush will be the end of the world are now going on conspiracies and trying to find any thing to make them seem like they were cheated. While it was a fair fight and they lost. If the democrats were more willing to get a more middle of the road candidate they could have one. But they were betting on that GWB wouldn't win because he didn't win the last election with a majority vote so they were betting that if they get a Full to the left Democrat then they would win hands down. But guess what it didn't work. Next time I hope they get a more middle of the road democrat and perhaps I may vote for them.

the sad thing is that it will happen again (0, Troll)

MarkWatson (189759) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126291)

Sad, but I think that it will happen again.

To me, it seems inconceivable that very wealthy republicans would conspire to do such a thing - I can not even relate to that much greed.

And greed is what this is about: the super rich and multi-national corporations save so much money with Bush tax cuts - that is their motivation.

I call Bush's fiscal policies "cut and run economics" - give tax cuts to the super rich, run up the deficits, and run away like cowards letting future generations suffer (I am a grandpa of two young kids - this is something I really care about).

Snivelling cut and run fiscal cowards.

Re:the sad thing is that it will happen again (1)

MarkWatson (189759) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126363)

Hopefully it was obvious, but I am trying to mock the (Karl) Rovian technique of branding anyone who wants to discuss the invasion of Iraq as "cut and run" people.

This is a stupid story (2, Informative)

brennz (715237) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126300)

On top of it, they never mention how US military overseas from Florida specifically (that overwhelmingly vote republican) didn't get their absentee ballots CLE_ID=15597 [] [] [] 1/20/military.ballots/index.html [] [] [] []

Re:This is a stupid story (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126365)

Wasn't Jeb Bush's secretary of state responsible for running the election in 2004? Including things like Ballots, etc?

What we're talking about here is a case in Ohio where all erroneously reporting machines slanted towards Bush. We're talking about a case in Ohio where the manufacturer of these machines stated that he'll do everything in his power to get Bush elected...

Gee I wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126307)

You have the guy running Ohio's Bush campaign as the Secretary of State. This is the guy who make sure the election is "fair and balanced".

Btw-- Salon had a guy write a rebuttle [] , which was in turn rebutted [] a few [] times [] .

Plagiarism (4, Informative)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126316)

Slashdot is now blatantly ripping off, which also had an article headline about Kennedy's Rolling Stone piece staring with Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" [] Too bad Slashdot, in its ridiculous slanting, removed the final word of Salon's headline: "No." Even Mother Jones and NPR repudiated Kennedy's claims. Mother Jones, fer Christ's sake! What's next, Slashdot? How about some articles about World Trade Center demolition conspiracies! And Was Paul Wellstone's Plane Shot Down?

How did Bush fool all those people? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126317)

He couldn't have fooled that many people! So the only way he could have won was with the help of the Republican dirty-tricksters, because no one who had any brain cells could vote for that idiot, right? Well, I hope you dem f-tard-hippies keep believing it because the longer you do, the longer we'll keep winning. Just keep spreading those lies if it makes you feel better, maybe one day you'll believe them.

ohio (0, Troll)

gadzook33 (740455) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126323)

There's nothing wrong with ohio...except the snow, rain, and fraudulent voting of course.

Bad excuses (5, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126327)

Because one or the other party did it in the distant past does not make it okay. Technology gave the current ruling party the ability to subvert our election process in a broad and coordinated fashion not available historically.

The bottom line is a lot of good people fought and died to uphold the ideal of one person, one vote and take pride that we run honest elections. The current administration tramples on the Constitution and stacks government agencies with unqualified partisans. They've looted our national treasury and gotten three thousand of our people killed in an ideological war in Iraq. Not only should they be impeached, but if evidence of rigging elections come to light it should undo all that Bush has done in office, including his Supreme Court appointments.

I think Bush lost 2000 and 2004 and that represents a greater threat to our country than terrorism. If the right wing wasn't so shamelessly hypocritical they'd be rioting in the streets for Bush's impeachment. The fact they're lending tacit support to this fraud only demonstrates their lack of character.

Gotta love a good conspiracy theory! (5, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126335)

"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence." - Robert Hanlon (disputed)

We had a fun 2004 election up here in Washington state. At the end of polling, the Republican Dino Rosse had defeated Democrat Gregoire by ~200 votes - so close that a recount was mandated. After one recount, Rossi was still ahead by about 60 votes. The Dems paid for a second recount, during which multiple small groups of uncounted ballots from highly-Democratic King County kept turning up. Gregoire won that recount, and is now our (rather uninspiring) governor.

Thing is, this really looked like a rigged election; and a lot of Republicans still think it was. But looking at the various pieces, my personal conclusion is just that the King County Elections department is largely incompetent, and has been for a while - it just hasn't come up because we've never had this close an election. Ballots left uncounted inside of voting machines; absentee ballots that get stored away, uncounted; ballots from overseas military people that were wrongly disqualified... it's all easily covered by incompetence.

I have no doubt that fraud occurs; but I also don't doubt it runs both ways.

Another other issue that everyone conveniently ignores, of course, is counting error. Simply put, the likely error in any given count of N random items (as long as N is sufficiently large) is 1/sqrt(N). With a really close election, you simply can't know who the true winner is.

Could it mean that... (1)

franois-do (547649) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126336)

... "democracy is too serious a thing to be left to people" ?

(Just my two cents)

Poor Losers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126347)

All I see is the whining of a poor loser. Get a backbone and vote to change things next election!

Sheesh... (1)

rdean400 (322321) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126368)

It seems kind of ironic that RFK Jr is talking about voting irregularities, considering that his uncle got into office under the same cloud of suspicion (precincts in Illinois and Texas where there were more votes for the candidate than there were registered voters).

Seriously, stop whining (1)

LearningHard (612455) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126369)

Excuses excuses excuses. We see smoke and mirrors from the democratic party that doesn't want to admit that they have been unable the last two presidential elections to present a legitimate contender for president. Trust me if the Democrats could put forward a candidate that was even halfway decent he would win the election in a landslide. Instead we get candidates that are wanted by the leftist fringe that has started to infest the democratic party. Just like the republicans have their anti-science, pro-war, pro-israel right wing idealogues. The democrats have their anti-religion, pro-appeasement, anti-israel etc left wing idealogues. Both of the parties are slowly starting to become controlled by these people. Hopefully it will result in a legitimate third political party with moderate policies (which is what I would like).

Fraud happens, there were several legitimate cases of Democrats committing election fraud such as the son of Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis. and some of his friends being arrested for slashing the tires of 25 cars and vans rented by republicans to help get people without transportation to voter sites ( res-slashed_x.htm [] ). Also as another voter said democrats nation wide are famous for having dead people vote for them.

It truly depresses me as I see politically becoming like [] when really you should be focusing on things besides crying about how the democrats lost the elections and republicans must be evil because (insert celebrity) said so.

Been doing the rounds for a long time... (-1, Flamebait)

petrus4 (213815) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126372)

This story has been kicked back and forth in a lot of different places ever since the events in question took place. But to answer some questions...

1. Were the 2000 and 2004 American elections both illegitimate? Completely.
2. Is Bush a fascist monster who took advantage not only of the above, but also of 9/11, and whose goal is the complete dismantling of the American system of government? Same answer.
3. Do Americans care? For the most part, not at all.

Bush *is* an illegitimately elected aspirant dictator, a large scale mass murderer, and a war criminal. I'm not trying to insist that anyone even care about that...but one thing I do wish people would stop doing is denying it.

yes libs, we stole the 2004 election (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126375)

Karl Rove teamed up with the Romulans from sector 7384.2 in the Omega quadrant to build a magical vote canceling machine. Using the same technology that Bush used to steet Katrina right into New Orleans and blow up the levvies to flood the black parts of town, the Republicans voided millions of Kerry votes using microwave PDA gamma rays. We were going to target Florida, but they were too busy canceling out their own votes because of their inability to punch holes in a ballot, so we just chose Ohio. This combined with our MS Word 1972 edition documents planted on Dan Blather secured a GOP victory.

Look, it doesn't matter. (1)

AriaStar (964558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126381)

It's not like we can get rid of the bastard anyway.

The problem runs deeper (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126391)

The US is in deep dung when it comes to its democratic system. The voting process itself is kinda questionable. It was fine and very understandable when it was created but, hell, 200 years have passed since! There are amendments to the constitution that don't even make sense anymore in a system where only two parties remain. I kinda doubt that this was what the founding fathers had in mind when they created it.

Of course it's prone to ballot stuffing and other dodgy tactics to "win" this or that state. It all starts that your vote only counts if you're in a certain state. You're in Alabama? You're a Democrat? Don't bother going to the booth, don't waste your time. Your vote is wasted! Move to Florida or Ohio!

I'm wondering why there ain't more people moving "officially" to another state.

I'd just like to issue kdawson (1, Informative)

HatchedEggs (1002127) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126402)

A big -5 flamebait for the rediculous article about a rediculous topic that a majority of the people in the US have moved past a rediculously long time ago.

Now theres redundant for you. Stop rehashing uninteresting garbage, and if you really want to go all out I hear there is a new "docu-drama" on a 9/11 conspiracy floating around.

The Daily Hate thread..... (1)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126411)

I know you guys have to be tossed your daily ration of red meat nowadays so you can all post about how evil Chimpy McBushHitler is and how cheating is the only way an idiot like Bush could have won.... but I got the karma to burn tossing a clue by four at yer heads once in awhile.

There really are millions of people who did indeed vote for Bush, twice. The first time the Bush didn't quite have the absolute numbers of popular votes to win, but they did win the electoral college. And yes this is a perfectly 'legitimate' way to win since our system of government is a representive republic instead of some daft direct democracy. In 2004 Bush won both the electoral college, and although not relevant, the popular vote as well. Deal with it and stop chasing black helecopters.

No, Florida was not 'stolen'. Bush was ELECTED, not SELECTED. The press did do their own recount.... and when they were finished announced that by the election laws in effect on election day 2000, Bush won. If enough rules are bent regarding counting misvotes in select counties when the totals are already known, it is possible to get totals that give FL to Gore, but that isn't the way the game is played. So shut the hell up about 2000, if you can't get the Miami Herald on your side you don't really have a case.

As for 2004, only crackpot conspiracy theorists think enough irregularities exist to shift any state from one side to the other. Were there some suspicious events? Yup, just like in every other election. Enough to tip the result? Nope.

If you ask me it sounds like projection anyway because the only cases of election fraud in the 20th century were all cases of Democratic machines stealing elections for their side. Kennedy's win over Tricky Dick is nwo widely thought to be due to the dead in Chicago voting early and often. I'm in Louisiana and I can't count the frauds committed, all by Democrats, most recently when the dead in New Orleans put Sen Landrieu into office. Personally I, and probably most Republicans, just assume at least 1% of any national election and 5% here in Louisiana will be Democratic machine generated phantom votes and we get on with winning anyway.

Try coming up with reasons for people to vote for you and ya might be able to win some elections fair and square, with enough margin you won't have to worry about irregularities.

No one will believe the it's unthinkable (5, Insightful)

Jimmy_B (129296) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126418)

So far, we've got posts bashing the slashdot article for not being current, bashing the Rolling Stone article for being by Rolling Stone, and a few posts of "it's not that bad, get over it". We remember the Florida 2000 fiasco, which was much ado about nothing, and assume this is the same.

It's not.

Seriously, read the article. This isn't just about a few dirty tricks, although there are plenty of those. It isn't about a few thousand votes, like Florida was. It's about outright, large-scale ballot stuffing, hundreds of thousands of votes, fraudulent manipulation of voter rolls, and deliberate sabotage by the Republican secretary of state (who was also the co-chair of President Bush's re-election committee).

It's an extraordinary claim, which does indeed require extraordinary evidence, but the evidence IS there. But no one's willing to look at the naked emperor. Everyone made up their mind about whether Bush was good or bad a long time ago, but now the Bush-supporters have no defense but to close their eyes and plug their ears. And for the most part, they're doing exactly that.

no liberal has EVER lost an election (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126421)

If a liberal "loses" it's ALWAYS because of voter fraud from Darth Rove and his cohorts.

This Affected me Locally (1)

nixmega (972206) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126422)

I live in Ohio, I voted, and I'm a member of the ohio green party and vote for the national party, I was also involved physically with overviewing the recount. It took me 12 hours to vote, I live in a small area with a very very LIBERAL college (Kenyon) in it. Which by the way if you've ever been here is hilleriously placed because it's surrounded by small farming communities of people who disagree with it. But that's beside the point, the point is that we do have evidence that the election was fraudulant. And who cares?? No one. Until private money is taken out of the electoral system, no one wins. Until the rules are changed from bi-partisian rule, no one wins. It's simple. No one listens until the people who are listening to us change.

Sadly, most Americans don't care (1)

Drakino (10965) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126430)

Sadly most Americans simply don't care. If we did, we would have been out in the streets like what is going on in Mexico, especially after 2000 when Gore won the popular vote, but lost the presidency because the supreme court said so.

Apparently Bush's administration isn't bad enough to get us off our couches in any significant numbers.


Dan Ferguson (691027) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126436)

Quit worrying about your political party affiliation and look at the damn information. YES the election results were ALL skewed for the GOP where it counted. That is why the bad-bush is in office. Quit bitching about the dems and the reps and go check out the damn facts. The voting system is a complete joke and if you think we are not getting screwed by it then you aren't paying attention or you're just ignorant about the facts. Maybe you just haven't noticed that the currnet administration transparently lies about shit all the time. The voting machines have been *simple* to tamper with and there wasn't a way to verify the votes from the e-voting either. If the system is tampered with they have NO LOG or AUDIT TRAIL on the machines either. Would you let you bank do this? Maybe they should just send you bills without a log and you can pay those as well. WAKE UP ALREADY! Diebold is a corrupt influence and is in the President's pocket. []

STATISTICS, not hypothesis (2, Interesting)

iendedi (687301) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126438)

There is one indusputable fact and that is that the statistical proabibility that the exit-polls could have contradicted the actual results by such a huge margin are vanishingly small (on the order of 1 in a million). And further, that specific contradictions have an even more impossible probability.

You can trash this article all you want, but if you are a math-fearing geek (as you should be to have a slashdot membership card), then you simply cannot argue with the conclusion of this article. Being a republican or a democrat does not allow you to magically modify mathematical certainties. Personally, I am appalled at the number of people trashing this article because it is written by JFK Jr or published in the Rolling Stones. Use your geek sense! Geeks dont think like that... So who are you guys?

Kennedy stole 1960 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16126444)

No serious discussion of "stolen elections" in the last 75 years would omit the quite apparent stealing of the 1960 election by John F. Kennedy, via the "Chicago machine" that turned the tide in Illinois and shifted the electoral college vote against Nixon.

Did the Big Dick "challenge the election" and insist we "count every vote" yada yada yada at the height of the Cold War, when indeed, the survival of the nation would be tested in less than two years with the Cuban Missile Crisis?

No, Nixon put the nation first. If only the Democrats would have done so since 2000.

Katherine Harris? (0, Offtopic)

daeg (828071) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126445)

No mention of Katherine Harris and the Great Florida Voter Purge of 2000?

Had those thousands of voters been able to vote in either election, the results may have been drastically different.

You know, the one in charge of elections in Florida. The same Katherine that believes that she can do whatever she wants in life because Jesus died for her sins so she is forgiven. The same Harris that believes God chooses our politicians.

Quickest solution to fix the US political system: Instant Runoff Voting.

Mentioning Diebold is like mentioning Hitler (3, Interesting)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 7 years ago | (#16126454)

You mention Hitler in your argument, you automatically lose. You mention Diebold in Ohio for 2004 and you also automatically lose.

Diebold machines were only used in two counties in Ohio - Hardin and Lucas - and in both counties, these were optical scan machines. The total population of these two counties is less than 500,000, or about 1.5x the vote margin in the entire state. Couple that with the fact that Lucas County went heavily in favor of Kerry in that election, and we see that implicating Diebold in improprieties in Ohio's 2004 election is a load of crap. Most left-wing noisemakers have the good sense not to implicate Diebold directly, instead trying to make a tenuous connection to the former Diebold CEO's comments about winning the election for Bush, and letting suspicion and paranoia take care of the rest. But never let the truth stand in the way of political propaganda on Slashdot!

Diebold machines were used in about half the state's counties in 2005, so if you want to rail about that, go right ahead.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account