I’ll give Byron York this much- he is tenacious. He continues to provide facts, evidence, and reason in the idiotic debate about the outcome of the 2004 election, not recognizing that folks like lampley and Conyers are unmoved by reality and prefer to breathe the ether of self-delusion.
It simply amazes me that people want to rely on flawed exit polls and the words of known political hacks over the actual vote count.
rilkefan
I wish you were talking about the actual number of votes, not “the actual vote count”, and about the actual number of votes eligible voters tried to cast. I suggest you read the Mystery Pollster – the exit poll issue is extremely complex.
Birkel
Couldn’t agree more with rilkefan.
It is complex. And if the votes in Milwaukee had been counted appropriately Bush would’ve won Wisconsin, arguably.
But hey, they used “the actual vote count” there to cheat in favor of Kerry instead of the more appropriate “actual number of votes”.
What to do?
rilkefan
Careful, Birkel, they’ll be calling you a conspiracy-theorist any second now, despite your “arguably”.
Birkel
Yeah, those FBI findings are just crazy talk.
pleasewakeupy'all
C’mon John, this is beyond just some sour grapes and loser’s straw-grasping. And I hope you’re not merely dismissing voting irregularities with an end-justifies-the-means perspective. Forget the results and focus on the process. Isn’t the most fair and accurate voting system an end we should demand? Is there anything partisan about that sentiment? Regardless of the outcome, shouldn’t ALL Americans DEMAND an investigation of suspicious results within something as important as the electoral process? I certainly don’t lend any credence to Lampley’s shallow analysis, but I can’t as easily dismiss the implications of Christopher Hitchens’ piece in Vanity Fair. Gary Farber linked it in an earlier posts’ comments–it’s worth a read.
I’m as far from a conspiracy theorist as anyone you’re likely to meet but given the obvious conflicts of interest, the degree of unaccountability designed into the system, and the subsequent results, I don’t see how you can’t be at least a little queasy.
Unless you’re just an end-justifies-the means kinda guy.
Stormy70
I thought Democrats ran those precincts. Aren’t they responsible for screwing it up? I don’t feel sorry for people who had to wait in line to vote. They would wait in long lines to go see their favorite entertainer for hours, yet they can’t stand in line to vote once every four years? Give me a break.
ketel
There have been a couple recent interesting posts at Atrios and Digby that discuss the weird confidence with which Republicans are trying to (and aometimes succeeding – see Real ID) pass that remove limits on majority power. It’s not some far out question to ask why they seem so confident that they won’t be in the minority again. It’s not like the country is overwhelmingly Republican.
I’m still interested in what John thinks of the Real ID Act that was snuck through Congress without debate yesterday.
ketel
Sorry, I meant to give a link to the Digby post. Here you go.
Christie S.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but even if there were proven cases of voter fraud/disenfranchisement/machine-corruption…isn’t it a done deal?
Kerry conceded. After this long, can he un-concede? In some alternate HGG universe, that might prove amusing but not in this one.
I wish we could just simply put this past election to rest and concentrate on someone writing the idiots at Diebold a patch for their software that would allow them to print their receipts. If my local grocery store can do it, why can’t they?
AWJ
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but even if there were proven cases of voter fraud/disenfranchisement/machine-corruption…isn’t it a done deal? Kerry conceded.
We can’t bring the dead back to life, but we still investigate and prosecute homicides.
Kimmitt
There is no reason whatsoever to have voting machines which do not have paper trails other than to facilitate fraud.
Ben Regenspan
More or less agreed (although laziness/cheapness on the part of Diebold, etc. probably plays a much stronger role), but the case for the elimination of voting machines without paper trails is best made without tying it into the 2004 election or to specific instances of unverified, perceived fraud. That way the issue can really get bipartisan support (whatever you think about the Republican or Democratic party elite, it’s safe to say that the majority of Americans, whatever their party, are firmly against vote fraud or manipulation) and maybe this could trigger actual political action.
Kimmitt
That way the issue can really get bipartisan support
Um, no.