Has Kerry taken a dive?

from freepress.org


Also, here's a link to some programming analysis of how hackers may have screwed up in their attempt to skew the vote to Bush. You know, for kicks.

All the more reason for those 68-odd voting machines to be taken out of the warehouse and used. Obviously more people voting is going to cause delays, but this merely makes the withholding of these machines all the more unusual. Everyone knew beforehand this was going to be a big-turnout election, what reason is there for not even taking these extra machines out of the warehouse? Didn't want to hurt the resale value?



From the article, the secretary of the state is Republican, and "A right-wing Republican was in charge of the Franklin County Board of Elections." Are you suggesting it was due to the janitor putting his back out? Maybe there is no official reason why these machines were left in a warehouse, but we know those in positions of authority for the state election said things went 'smoothly'.


It's been shown in the past that the more people vote, the more the vote goes to the democrats. Furthermore, most of the precincts referred in this article were predominantly democratic.


Sorry? 700 people have gone to the effort to give evidence of voter intimidation and manipulation and you're dismissing it because it's only 700 people?



Hence the ultimate point of this thread. Did Kerry take a dive, throw the election either due to a) being too tired to fight any longer, b) not wanting prolong the wait (and the hostility) any longer, c) didn't really want to be president that badly, or d) was paid off or intimidated out of contesting the vote counts in the battleground states.



There are none so blind as those who will not see.

No, not at all. We know who was in charge of the state elections, and we know that many machines were not made available for voting, despite being needed. I personally have not yet found a concrete connection between the two points. But as time goes on I expect more people will ask questions of those who were in charge, to find out who made the decision to not use these extra machines. Looking at it from another perspective, what other reason could there be, other than gross incompetence or malfeasance?


Fair enough, the point here isn't that concrete proof exists that shows a conspiracy occured, my point is to (continue to) draw attention to suspicious bits and peices of information that is slowing dripping out of the battleground states in the aftermath of this surprising election result. Ultimately, there is stuff here that does not add up, and I would like an explanation as to what was going on.


Yup, and that's the thing. To continue the analogy - the exit polls that pointed to Kerry, and statistical analysis that shows some very strange trends, have boarded up the damaged section, keeping the ship afloat so far.


Wait, is testimony suddenly irrelevant now? Here, check out this article containing actual quotes from actual people, who talk about some of the suspicious and troubling things happening in Ohio on election day.

That article also contains a quote from the Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell who, in a November 17 Washington Post op-ed stated “Every eligible voter who wanted to vote had the opportunity to vote." I say that's a lie, but more importantly, voters in Ohio say that that is a lie, based on their eyewitness accounts of people who didn't want to (or couldn't) stand in hour-long queues, and inadequate numbers of machines.


You're in this thread, aren't you? Did you know Kerry ended his campaign with $15 million still in his campaign fund, an amount democrats are now starting to pressure him over? Why didn't he use it in Ohio and Florida? Will he keep it or some of it for himself? Is that why he didn't spend it on advertising? Can running for President (and losing) be a profitable exercise?

Well, since so far no main news television show seems to be interested in looking into all this, I'd say the author would probably have to wait a long-ass time if he were to wait for an explanation before printing anything.


Exit polls are not as dubious as you would imply, and since there seems to be a uniform 'slide' to Bush when comparing exit polls to actual polls, (rather than a more random variance), it seems somewhat fishy.

I am aware of the Hawthorne effect. What I don't see is how the Hawthorne effect relates to an exit poll. Please elaborate.



Obviously it has to do with the nature of the flaw, who allowed it, and how that flaw affected the elligible voters.



Is it possible some of them turned up too late? Sure. Is it likely the majority of them turned up too late? No, it is not. Not when everyone knew how important this election was - again proven by the record numbers of people voting.

Check this out:

Erin Deignan, Columbus:
“I was an official poll worker judge in precinct Columbus 25 F, at the East Linden School. We had between 1100 and 1200 people on the voter registry there. We had three voting machines. We did the math. I am sure lots of other people did too. With the five-minute limit, 13 hours the polls were open, three machines, that is 468 voters, that is less than half of the people we had on the registry."


What I expected was for Kerry to use all the funds that had been donated to him for the purpose of winning the election. Apparently he did not, by quite a large margin. I find that suspicious, too.

That, frankly, is ridiculous. Neither the Bush supporters nor the Kerry supoorters ever struck me as being the type who would just lie to an exit poller - it makes no sense at all. People who voted for Bush are proud of that fact. People who voted for Kerry are proud of that fact. The country is divided right down the middle, there are no shrinking violets who would 'give in' (to who?) and lie to an exit poller.


What are you talking about? What difference does the 'tightness' of the race make to the accuracy of the exit poll?




Would like a signed confession? Or perhaps just some infra-red camera footage? As I've said before, there is a slow steady drip over the last days and weeks, of various stories from various people who are talking about some pretty troubling things in rgards to this election. I'm not about to post every one of them on Chud, but this one caught my eye.



I don't care. I just simply do not care. Kerry had X amount of dollars that was given to him from people all over the country, to spend in order to try and win the presidency. Given how close he came to that goal, the revelation that he still has millions in his account is surprising and disappointing, and perhaps even a little suspicious. Did he take a dive? Who knows?