What Happened on Election Night, November 2-3, 2004?

[Time for change]

It was well known in the days prior to the 2004 Presidential election that a Bush victory was highly unlikely without Bush carrying both Ohio and Florida. As Election Day unfolded, spirits in the Kerry camp were running high, as it became evident that Ohio’s 20 electoral votes would determine the victor, and there was widespread belief that Kerry was on track to win Ohio.

Much anecdotal evidence suggests that the Kerry/Edwards ticket was on track to win Ohio, when rather suddenly its fortunes went south. Kerry had a very comfortable lead in the Ohio exit poll. Even CNN’s right wing hack, Robert Novak, seemed to acknowledge on live TV that things looked very bad for Bush. Reports of exceptionally high turnout in highly Democratic Cleveland provided much cause for optimism. A Kerry campaign worker later told me that he and his fellow campaign workers went to bed Election Night certain that Kerry had won. Yet by noon the next day John Kerry conceded the election, which he officially lost by about 119 thousand votes.

There is a great deal of evidence of foul play in the 2004 election in Ohio. In addition to exit polls showing a 4.2% Kerry win, there was: massive purging of voter rolls targeted at Democratic voters; absurdly low official voter turnout in Cleveland, despite the widespread long voting lines that suggested otherwise; insufficient allocation of voting machines in Democratic areas, especially in Franklin County; numerous reports of touch screen voting machines in Mahoning County switching votes from Kerry to Bush right before the voters’ eyes; widespread evidence of voter intimidation and dirty tricks, as detailed in John Conyers’ excellent report, Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio; the finding in Clermont County of oval stickers covering the Kerry/Edwards place on the ballot so that votes for Kerry couldn’t be read by the optical scan machine; the fake terrorist threat in Warren County that provided the excuse for county election officials to count their votes in secret, and; the corrupted Ohio recount, which removed the last chance to ascertain evidence of election fraud.

But why did Kerry’s chances of winning the 2004 Presidential election appear to disappear so suddenly, late on Election Night? Some of the above incidents could have provided at least a partial explanation for that. But perhaps the best explanation was provided by Stephen Spoonamore, a Republican and a computer expert who provided an affidavit on the subject shortly before the 2008 Presidential election. But before addressing Spoonamore’s affidavit we need to consider the man who probably knew a lot more than Spoonamore about what happened on Election Night 2008, though he died prior to his scheduled testimony on the subject.


Michael Connell

Michael Connell was a high level Republican operative and IT consultant. He was the founder of New Media Communications, which provided web site services for the Bush-Cheney 2004 presidential campaign, The Republican National Committee, and many other Republican candidates. At the time of the 2004 national election he was president of GovTech solutions, which was hired by Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell to set up an election website for the Ohio presidential 2004 elections. This clearly presented a conflict of interests, in the same way that Secretary Blackwell’s dual role as Ohio Secretary of State (in charge of Ohio elections) and campaign chairman for the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio created a serious conflict of interests.

Given the exit poll discrepancy in the Ohio 2004 presidential election of 6.7%, the numerous irregularities surrounding that election, and the fact that the awarding of Ohio to Bush was responsible for his reelection, numerous lawsuits were brought in Ohio to challenge the election results. Given Connell’s close connections with Karl Rove and the Bush campaign, in combination with his official duties with respect to the presidential election in Ohio, he was sought to provide testimony in connection with a case that alleged tampering with the 2004 election. It was alleged in the case that Connell participated in vote tampering. On September 22, 2008, Connell was subpoenaed to testify in the case. Connell initially sought to avoid testifying, and even put forth a motion to quash his subpoena. But that motion was denied.


The Testimony of Stephen Spoonamore

On September 17, 2008, Stephen Spoonamore provided an affidavit in connection with ongoing investigations into election fraud involving the 2004 Presidential election. The first parts of his affidavit related to his qualifications for the opinions he provided, and included the following:

Because of my interest in data security and in democracy, I have followed with interest the security issues involved with electronic voting in United States. My understanding of the vulnerabilities of American elections to fraudulent manipulation is based upon conversations with professionals in election administration working within state governmental structures as well as information technology specialists working in private industry on a contract basis for state governments.

He then went on to describe the vote counting system in play on Election Day 2004 in Ohio:

The vote tabulation and reporting system, as modified at the direction of [Ohio Secretary of State] Blackwell, allowed the introduction of a single computer in the middle of the pathway. This computer located at a company principally managing IT Systems for GOP campaign and political operations (Computer C) received all information from each county computer (Computer A) BEFORE it was sent onward to Computer B. This centralized collection of all incoming statewide tabulations would make it extremely easy for a single operator, or a preprogrammed single "force balancing computer" to change the results in any way desired by the team controlling Computer C. In this case GOP partisan operatives…

Lastly he described his view of the how Michael Connell fit into the picture:

Mr. Connell and I share a mutual interest in democracy building… Mike and I briefly discussed voting security…. He further made a statement that he is afraid that some of the more ruthless partisans of the GOP may have exploited systems he in part worked on for [election theft]... Knowing his team and their skills I find it unlikely they would be the vote thieves directly. I believe however he knows who is doing that work, and has likely turned a blind eye to this activity. Mr. Connell is a devout Catholic. He has admitted to me that in his zeal to 'save the unborn' he may have helped others who have compromised elections. He was clearly uncomfortable when I asked directly about Ohio 2004.

An article posted in Velvet Revolutions relates what happened next. Later on the same day that Spoonamore provided his affidavit:

Ohio attorney Cliff Arnebeck asked the federal court in Columbus to allow him to place Bush IT guru Michael Connell under oath to ask him about his 20 year work for the Bush family, including his work for Jeb Bush in Florida 2000 and for Ken Blackwell in Ohio 2004. “The public has a need and right to know, before the next presidential election, that the top Republican IT expert shares a concern about the vulnerability of electronic voting systems to fraudulent manipulation, and that this is not just “conspiracy theory,” Arnebeck wrote.

On September 22, Connell was subpoenaed to testify about the matters that Spoonamore raised. Connell did everything he could to avoid testifying. Spoonamore provided another affidavit on October 26, going into more detail than his September 17 affidavit on how he saw the 2004 Presidential election being stolen:

During the evening and early morning on the 2004 General Election in Ohio, on my own computer I was watching the results of incoming counties and precincts. I believed there was a more than likely chance County Tabulators had been programmed to manipulate votes…. As early results showed Kerry ahead, I noticed a trend in a very few counties (I believe I noted 8 counties on election night) that at about 11 p.m. suddenly began reporting radically different ratios of Kerry to Bush votes. All in favor of Mr. Bush. This sudden rate of change… resembled a fraud technique called an Intelligent Man In the Middle, or KingPin Attack. This type of attack requires a computer to be inserted into the communications flow of an IT system…

Other experts found additional data indicating Bush's increase in votes from these counties, and Kerry's decrease in votes… When information about the SmartTech IT routing switch became public, and recalling that staff of Triad were reported to have removed hard drives from County Tabulators in advance of the recount, I again stated that we now have confirmation a KingPin, or Intelligent Man in the Middle position had been created… The SmartTech system was set up precisely as a KingPin computer used in criminal acts against banking or credit card processes and had the needed level of access to both county tabulators and Secretary of States computers to allow whoever was running SmartTech's computers to decide the output of the county tabulators under it's
control…The SmartTech computer would as the results of the evening proceeded be able to know how many votes Bush needed to steal from Kerry, and flip enough votes on the desired county tabulators to reverse the outcome of the election…

The only way this could have been detected on election night would be complete monitoring… or by conducting a forensic analysis of the complete county tabulator computer, especially the hard drives of these computers. These hard drives were apparently removed by Triad employees before the Green Party Recount, in what appears to be a concerted effort to destroy evidence…

A couple words of explanation are in order at this point: The SmartTech system that Spoonamore referred to was operated by Michael Connell; the references to the hard drives removed by Triad employees before the recount relate back to the corrupted Ohio recount, which I described here. The removal of those hard drives constituted destruction of evidence of the true vote count, thus making it impossible to conduct an accurate recount.

Note that by this time Spoonamore seems to have lost confidence in the innocence of Michael Connell that he exhibited in his September 17 affidavit. This is suggested by Spoonamore’s comment on Connell’s continued efforts to avoid providing relevant information, with the excuse that he was trying to protect trade secrets. Spoonamore said that that excuse was absurd, and he went into much detail to explain why it was absurd.

On October 28, attorneys filed a motion to compel testimony of Connell regarding his knowledge of the workings of the GOP computer systems. On October 31 a federal judge ordered Connell to submit to a deposition on possible election manipulation. Connell gave the deposition on November 4, providing as little information as possible, but eventually he was forced to admit that “he brought Triad and SmartTech into the Ohio election game”. Velvet Revolution noted:

Of course, these are the two companies identified by Spoonamore as rigging the election, Triad by pulling hard drives prior to the recount and SmartTech by running the election results through its GOP servers in Chattanooga before they got to the Ohio election computers.

The Death of Michael Connell

When it became apparent that Connell would testify in the case, according to news reporter Blake Renault, Connell was warned not to fly his plane:

Connell...was apparently told by a close friend not to fly his plane because his plane might be sabotaged… And twice in the last two months Connell, who is an experienced pilot, cancelled two flights because of suspicious problems with his plane.

Cliff Arnebeck, the Ohio lawyer who brought the suit and subpoenaed Connell, warned the U.S. Justice Department that Connell’s life might be in danger, and requested witness protection. Arnebeck wrote:

I have informed court chambers and am in the process of informing the Ohio Attorney General's and US Attorney's offices in Columbus for the purpose, among other things, of seeking protection for Mr. Connell and his family from this reported attempt to intimidate a witness…

Unfortunately, in an event reminiscent of the death of Raymond Lemme, who had apparently collected incriminating evidence bearing on the same subject that was at the core of the Connell subpoena, Connell never did get to testify. On December 19, he died in a plane crash, presumably caused by his plane running out of gas.


Unsolved mysteries

I don’t know what ever became of Spoonamore’s testimony. Perhaps any chance the American people had to get to the bottom of this matter was buried along with Michael Conner. In a just world, Spoonamore’s allegations would have been thoroughly investigated in an attempt to find out what really happened. So would the great amount of other evidence of election fraud in Ohio and elsewhere on Election Day 2004.

It is also difficult for me to understand how Spoonamore obtained the information he discussed in his affidavit. Being an expert on the subject was not enough. Clearly he seemed to have inside information. How did he obtain that information? It seems that he obtained much of it from Connor himself – but why did Connor trust him with that information?

In any case, if nothing else we should take very seriously Stephen Spoonamore's central message: Electronic voting machines are a national security threat. They have no legitimate place whatsoever in a democracy.

[begin_within]

1. So, what has changed in the last 8 years? Will they have a paper trail this time?

[Time for change]

8. It is worse than in 2004, but improving over the peak in 2006

2000: 22% used electronic machines
2004: 29%
2006: 38%
2008: 33%
2012: 33%

Of the 33% of voters using electronic machines in 2012, 25% came with no paper trail at all. The other 8% came with voter verified paper trails, but there are a lot of problems with those.

[regnaD kciN]

25. So, this November, one out of every four votes...

...will be electronic with no paper trail.

And how many crucial swing states have Republican officials running the voting, including determining who gets to record those votes?

[INdemo]

63. Yes agreed its much worse and the difference this time is

they arent trying to hide it..But let s go back to 2004 a second..Why did the Kerry campaign give up without a fight over election fraud?
Answer: Terry McAuliffe.the then DNC chairman waived the white flag within hours of the controverstial vote count. Why?
Because he immediately saw the opening for Hillary in 2008 so he did not push it..In so many words he's slipped up a couple times and pretty much admitted that he knew it put Hillary in favorite status for Democratic nominee for 2008..
Kerry won..Bush,if the truth was know has never won an election in his life..He had KKKKkarl Rove even as the governors race there were some quetionable vote counts but it was so far out didnt matter..

[Time for change]

65. It's also possible that Kerry had very little understanding of the extent of the GOP capabilities

for cheating.

He lost the official vote count by 119 thousand votes. It is far from standard practice to contest elections with that much of a difference in the official vote count.

I suspect that as time went on and so much of the cheating was uncovered, Kerry came to a better understanding of what happened. He may have regretted his decision to concede, but it was too late. I'm sure also that he feared (correctly) that he would be portrayed by the corporate media as a "poor loser" if he challenged the results -- then or now.

Praise for Senator Barbara Boxer for challenging the election results and at least forcing some public exposure of the fraud.

[INdemo]

68. Yes but I think McAuliffe had a very big role in convincing Kerry to

concede..119.000 votes would not have been hard to uncover in the Rpuke Sec of States scheme.

[roody]

2. Knr

[valerief]

3. Thanks for posting! nt

[bahrbearian]

4. K&R

[annabanana]

5. I remember following ALL that mess on election night in '04.

We got it as it happened here on DU, blow by blow... pretty much live-blogged. We howled bloody murder as we watched the election stolen in real time.

Anyone else remember this shot?

[silvershadow]

17. I remember that shot. And how sickened I was. I'm pretty sure I was posting here

under a different name (long story, but Skinner had me make a new one). I was sickened, just as I was the previous election. After that election, I volunteered in '06, took a class, and was a trainer for poll workers. On election day, I was a troubleshooter, but really was just one of a team of people that showed up if there were problems. Only problem I knew of was one precinct had for a short time an incorrect or incomplete ballot, where one race wasn't included. Corrected, but you know, I don't remember how. Besides, that's just the stuff that can be caught. What about the nefarious stuff? I also was determined to see the whole operation, or as much as I could, so at the end of the night when it came time to transport everything to the courthouse where the central tabulating was done, I got in as absolutely close to the action as I was allowed, which is to say I managed to get in the room a couple of times, but was shoo'd out by the PTB to keep it from being crowded. I stuck right around the hall looking in, so it's not like I couldn't see, and didn't know what was going on. I was asked a couple of different things, and had *many duties that day and night, so it's not like I/they didn't have plenty to do. I did what was asked of me, learned as much as I could, and went away feeling like I had done the best I could but that I didn't like this one bit. The Help America Vote Act to me was a euphemism for Democracy is Dead. I hope I am wrong, but I really won't rest easy until something better comes along.

[alp227]

29. link to the story:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2004/11/14/a-sweet-victory-and-a-tough-loss.html

Or the version with photos:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070416102958/www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6400874/site/newsweek/

[diane in sf]

73. I remember vividly.

[undeterred]

6. shit happened

[malaise]

7. Excellent post

as usual

[cilla4progress]

9. I have no doubt

that election was stolen. I remember when all that was going down. It's when I started on DU.

I just hope history will disclose the truth, some day.

[Mnemosyne]

10. Thank you for this OP, Time. It was more devastating to me than the theft of 2000. So many worked so

so very hard because of the 2000 theft. So many first time voters came out, only to be cheated out of even casting their votes that day.

[JohnnyRingo]

11. One thing I remember on the eve of the election.

I'm from Ohio and I recall the local news reporting that Air Force One left DC and made a landing in Columbus on the way to Crawford Texas. I remember seeing AF1 taxiing on the tarmac on local TV.

All that was reported was that Bush and his election team met briefly with Republican governor Taft and Sec State Ken Blackwell. Ohio barely eked out a win for Bush the next day. What could Bush and his band of vote thieves need to do in person that day that couldn't be handled on the phone?

Between Diebold and the Republicans in Ohio, that election stunk as much as the 2000 election theft in Florida, it was just a lot quieter.

On edit:
Did AF1 drop someone off in Columbus or pick them up for the trip to Texas? It always sounded suspicious.

[OnyxCollie]

12. After the tequila shots, bong hits, and pain killers,

I ingested on that eve, I'm not really sure what happened on Election Night, November 2-3, 2004.

I do know that I was setting up my brand new Mac (upon which I am currently typing) while democracy was being stolen (again.)

Thanks for the post, Time for change. K&R.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. I was FURIOUS at the Dems for conceding without a fight

I wasn't a big Kerry fan (I was for Kucinich), but I was a good sport and walked my feet off door knocking both before and during Election Day. I was on the street from 10:00AM to 8:00PM, when the polls closed.

My feet were still sore--and more importantly, people were still standing in line to vote--when Kerry conceded.

To their everlasting shame, the Dems did not join in the lawsuits started by the Greens and Libertarians.

I felt that Kerry didn't care about the election as much as the thousands of Minnesota volunteers did.

[Time for change]

14. I surely would have liked to see Kerry and Edwards contest the election

I think that Edwards was ready to try.

But you're mistaken about people standing in line to vote when Kerry conceded. He didn't concede until the next day:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/2004-11-03-kerry-concession-speech_x.htm

[regnaD kciN]

27. They were originally determined to do so...

...but then their legal staff recognized that they had no recourse, since Ohio law pretty much gives the SoS absolute authority to control the vote -- and there was no way to guarantee an untampered recount. The Ohio courts wouldn't help them, and their only recourses would have been with the same SCOTUS that had ruled in Bush v. Gore, or in convincing the Bush "Justice" Department to take legal action to have their boss lose the election.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

30. Well, they could have at least said what you said

Instead, they just quietly disappeared, leaving the minor parties to expose the cheating.

[USMCMustang]

16. Both

Kerry and Bush are Skulls and Bones. Kerry could not challenge him.

[regnaD kciN]

28. B.S.

Kerry was a member of Scroll & Key at Yale, not S&B. This has been gone over time and again here.

[grasswire]

56. please provide a link for your assertion

I have never seen anything saying that Kerry was Scroll and Key.

Here's a good source focused on his S&B membership.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0122-10.htm

[USMCMustang]

15. Ana Is Missing

http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/#!/entry/central-figure-in-electionrigging-scandal-goes-missing-as-fbi-probes,504e454c444f67894755ff0d

Any news?

[sabrina 1]

34. Interesting, she describes herself as a 'Conservative Bad Girl'.

A political strategist is thought to be on the lam after she failed to show up for an interview with prosecutors about a campaign scandal involving Rep. David Rivera (R-FL).

Authorities last week raided Ana Alliegro’s apartment and seized her computer and cell phone. She was scheduled to speak to prosecutors on Thursday, but now not even her lawyer knows where she is, according to The Miami Herald.

Prosecutors believe that Alliegro may be involved in shadow campaign, in which Justin Lamar Sternad ran as a Democrat “ringer” in the 26th District primary in order to help defeat fellow Democrat Joe Garcia. Authorities are probing Rivera, the Republican incumbent, to find out if he was behind the scheme as effort to weaken or defeat Garcia before they faced off in the general election.


Campaign sources and finance records indicated that Rivera may have funneled $46,000 in secret money to Sternad’s campaign — often in cash-filled envelopes. Both Rivera and Sternad have denied working together.

No missing persons report has been filed. I hope she's okay, and just 'on the lam'.

And this Rivera character, he was accused of domestic violence and a few other crimes. How sad that these people can even run for office, then bully anyone who gets in their way. It's like reading about a third world dictatorship.

[Bainbridge Bear]

18. I have to correct one thing

George Bush was not "re-elected". His operatives and the Supreme Court stole the 2000 election from the American people as well. As Obama appears to be slowly widening his lead over RMoney I believe that we can expect the same from these contemptible Rethug traitors. They call themselves "Republicans" and then do everything they can to subvert our republic when things don't go their way.

[BlueinOhio]

19. Troubling

The GOP is talking that it is alright that Obama leads in the polls because they know they are going to win. The voting machines are a big problem. The machines have been proved to be able to be hacked or "force the vote".

[StatGirl]

20. While all eyes were on Ohio, Florida was stolen without a fight

That was the other state whose exit polls were seriously different from the reported votes.

(I think Kerry was threatened, by the way. He backed down way too quickly.)

[Dustlawyer]

21. K & R! Spoonamore's video explanation is a MUST SEE!

Obama be warned! Repugs cheat!

[Poiuyt]

22. There was an excellent article in Rolling Stone written by Robert Kennedy Jr covering this

It was a long, very well documented and footnoted article that left little doubt that the election had been stolen

[eridani]

23. Dems have been very remiss in not following up on the SAME DAMNED THING in Nov 2008

Because the margin of victory was enough to overcome hankypanky meant that people who should have been paying attention let the cheating slide. People interested in election integrity MUST drop thiis "no harm, no foul" attitude.

[ANOIS]

24. I remember it well, too, & am so glad it is being recorded here.

I also worked very hard on that election, & remember Bush's smirk on his face prior to E-Day, when someone asked him about Ohio. He just said "We aren't going to lose Ohio." Of course, he wasn't to be trusted, & I don't think I'll ever forget that look. Very sure of his privileged status.

I also thought Kerry conceded too soon, but how to prove all those situations?

I remember the situation with Michael Connell's plane. almost from when it happened. His computer network was linked thru Chattanooga, the hub of the Repubs' network, at least for that project.

His wife was his business partner, & didn't believe that anything suspicious had happened. I wonder if she still feels that way.

[sabrina 1]

36. Maybe she was afraid. According to Connell's Wiki page there was a threat to have her prosecuted

if Connell did anything they did not want him to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Connell

In July 2008, the lead attorney in the King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell case, Cliff Arnebeck, sent a letter [3] to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey seeking protection for Connell as a witness in the case, saying he had been threatened. Arnebeck wrote, “We have been confidentially informed by a source we believe to be credible that Karl Rove has threatened Michael Connell, a principal witness we have identified in our King Lincoln case in federal court in Columbus, Ohio, that if he does not agree to 'take the fall' for election fraud in Ohio, his wife Heather will be prosecuted for supposed lobby law violations." [4] Arnebeck claims that months later, his source called back and warned that Connell's life was in danger

Karl Rove was involved again also. Typical Rovian tactics too, just as happened in the Don Siegelman case, political prosecutions for anyone who goes against him and his bosses.

[mountain grammy]

26. And where was our illustrious mainstream media when the story of the century was happening?

Having their hair and nails done?

[Time for change]

48. The corporate owned "mainstream" media doesnn't like this kind of thing to get out

They can call us "conspiracy theorists" all they want. It doesn't change the fact that conspiracies to commit crimes or other evil acts have been a part of human history since the dawn of human civilization. The American oligarchy brands with the term "conspiracy theorist" anyone who deviates too far from their party line as to what is true and what constitutes acceptable conversation. If most Americans understood better how they are habitually scammed by the American oligarchy, they might do something about it.

Perhaps the ultimate "conspiracy theory" of all is that the ultra-rich in this country systematically buy political candidates and elected officials to pass legislation that benefits them at the expense of every one else. We all know it happens every day, but how often do you hear it discussed on TV?

[Flatulo]

69. Interesting point you raise - why bother to steal an election when you can

simply buy the best legislation to suit your interests?

We have to ban all forms of lobbying, if you ask me.

[NCcoast]

31. I can't remember when I didn't know most of this

And nothing was ever done about it. I was so mad at Kerry for letting them get away with it. Gore I could forgive, because he was trying not to drag the country true a protracted mess. He was caught flat footed. But in 2004, Ray Charles could have seen it coming. Kerry should have had an army of lawyers on the ground in Ohio. He should have jacked them up for every abuse and the whole criminal enterprise would have been laid bare. Computers, Diebold, voter suppression, uneven distribution of voting machines the whole ball of wax would have been exposed. All of the rats would have turned on each other. But instead Kerry folded like a wet paper bag. That's why the media selected him for us with their 'he's electable' whispering campaign and while torpedoing Howard Dean. That man knows how to fight, and they knew it. But I digress.

Democrats have become so compromised, cowed or 'concerned about the good of the nation', scared in other words, that they let Republicans get away with every conceivable dirty trick, both legal and illegal. Letting them get away with criminality only emboldens them. Someone has got to figure out that they're going to keep doing these things until we start throwing their sorry asses in jail. Kenneth Blackwell should still be doing time, not Don Siegleman Gawdamnit!

[mountain grammy]

38. Yes, is it any wonder Democrats have lost elections.

We are learning to fight back, but it may already be too late. "For the good of the country" we need to raise holy hell about this, part of that backbone thing!

[Drunken Irishman]

32. I am in the slim minority here, but Kerry lost...

He lost. It was a bad election night and hopes were dashed. I don't believe Ohio was stolen or votes were manipulated. I'm sorry, I just don't. And I know I'll get ripped to shreds for it, and that's all right, this is just my opinion.

I'll tell you what MY election night was...

It started on election day. Waking up and going over the polls - which almost all universally showed Kerry losing. There was only one or two polls, oddly FOX being one, that had Kerry up. The rest either had it tied or Bush up - with most of the polls cementing around the idea Bush held a very narrow 1.5 point lead. You can see this in RCP's list of polls:

So, right off the bat, I was nervous. Everything we had heard about that election dealt with some form of hypothetical. Because Bush, in a great deal of polls, was not over 50% in approval, or in overall support (and the average poll put him at 47.4), he was bound to lose - since an incumbent could only win if he was at 50% or above in the polls. We also heard that undecideds almost always break for the challenger because the common perception out there is that if a voter hasn't decided to vote for an incumbent that late in the game, they won't.

None of this materialized. We based a lot of our hope here on DU and other liberal blogs on the assumption Bush could not win because he was below 50% and that even though Kerry trailed in most polls, all he had to do was be in striking distance, gobble up most the undecideds and that would be enough. Then there was a group of supporters who refused to believe the polls that showed Bush up and only focused on the polls that had him down. This was common and I saw it a lot ... many liberals tricked themselves into believing the few polls that had Kerry up were actually the accurate ones. Unfortunately, if you look at the data from that RCP link, you'll see that Kerry led in two polls (+2 in the FOX, +1 in the Marist) and Bush led in 10 polls during the final week ... two were ties. That right there was a big red flag for me ... the fact, even going back through October and September, you could barely find any polls that showed Kerry leading. And while I understood that the national vote was irrelevant to the electoral college, it did show that Bush was pulling in more support than most on the left gave him credit. In fact, many dismissed that support because, well, Kerry didn't need to win the national vote! And they were right ... we saw it four years prior. The focus wasn't national, it was in two states: Ohio & Florida.

So, after going over the national polls, being disappointed by the national polls, I checked the state polls, namely three states: Ohio, Florida & Wisconsin. Wisconsin was an important state for Kerry and one he barely led in. Had he won Ohio and lost Wisconsin, which he won by .4%, he still loses the election 276-262. So, while all eyes were on Ohio and Florida ... I realized Kerry still needed to win Wisconsin!

The numbers in Wisconsin were tight. Really tight. So tight, in fact, Bush held a narrow .9% lead on Kerry in the average - with both candidates ahead in three polls each. Oddly, no poll got the number right. Zogby had Kerry winning by 6, which grossly overestimated his value there, while CNN had Bush winning by 8 - which was even worse. In the end, turnout was proven key and Kerry knew this, which is why he held a massive rally in Madison with Bruce Springsteen the weekend before (I think) the election. Had he not held that rally and he very well loses Wisconsin, making what happened in Ohio moot.

But he did win Wisconsin and that made Ohio the decider. So, Kerry lost Ohio by roughly two-percentage points. On election day, early morning anyway, I was nervous about Ohio because the polls all showed Bush leading. Unlike Wisconsin, a state Kerry won, he wasn't running 50/50 in the polls like Bush - he led in one poll, from CNN, while every other poll, from local newspapers, to colleges to national outlets, had Bush winning - from a margin as slim as .9% to as big as 6% (by Zogby). Bottom line, based on polls, I wasn't confident about Ohio. The average of polls, which has been eerily accurate the past two elections, had Bush beating Kerry by 2.1% - which is almost identical to his actual outcome.

So, I left my house for school that morning underwhelmed and nervous that Kerry would lose. I just didn't like the polls and I'll be honest, I had been burned before by people telling me not to believe the polls. In the primary season, I had supported Howard Dean, even though I couldn't vote, and all the Deaniacs told me to ignore the Iowa polls ... that Dean's ground game would get it done. I believed 'em and when the results came in, and he not only failed to win ... but failed to finish second ... I was devastated. So, I took that to heart and started buying the polls. I wasn't going to lean on this idea that Kerry's ground game would make up for the deficit or that the undecideds would break for the challenger or that Bush needed to be at, or above, 50% either nationally, or locally, to win each election. I was very cautious.

Well, after school, I came home and of course the first thing I see is the leaked exit polls that show Kerry doing well in all these swing states.

Of course, right off the bat, I was nervous about the initial exit polls. You can see this DU thread here. Those exit polls:

Ohio 52-48
Florida 52-48
Pennsylvania 60-40
New Hampshire 58-41
Arizona 44-55
Wisconsin 52-47
Minnesota 58-40
Michigan 51-48
New Mexico 50-49
Iowa 49-49
New Jersey 56-43
Virginia 49-50
Arizona 45-55
Colorado 41-58
Missouri 45-55
West Virginia 40-54
North Carolina 47-52
Louisiana 42-57

A great deal of those numbers to me, even back then, looked suspicious. The fact Kerry was leading in PA by 20 points, even when neither Al Gore or Bill Clinton could get anywhere near that number (and in retrospect, neither did Obama in a much larger mandate than Kerry was looking at in '04), made me think that maybe these numbers were slanted toward Democrats. Let's be honest, Kerry leading by 18 in Minnesota? 17 in New Hampshire? They didn't look real.

But I believed. I started to, anyway, and I definitely went into the opening of election night coverage feeling good. Still, I wasn't totally sold on the idea the exit polls were accurate ... especially when the numbers seemed so off in some instances. Moreover, I knew exit polls weren't an exact science. In the end, they're still polls and they rely on honesty from the person taking the survey and more importantly, a mixed demographic of voters taking 'em.

I remember reading, years after this had happened, that during the '92 Republican Primary, Pat Buchanan was consistently out-performing in the exit polls compared to the overall results. This fascinated, and often confused, the media as they went to report on the results - specifically in New Hampshire, a vital state in that year's primary, that showed Buchanan doing very well (he did do well, winning 37%, but not nearly as well as originally thought). The consensus formed that Buchanan was performing well in the exit polls because his supporters were more energetic and perceptive to taking the survey.

I think that's what happened in 2004. Voters, Democratic voters, were so fired up about taking out Bush that they were happy to take the exit polls, while Bush supporters, though many fired up to vote for their guy, maybe looked at it as a business transaction ... so, that's how I see it. I think the exit polls were generally off across the board because the company that did 'em failed to account for this potential enthusiasm gap and that became clear, across the board - from Wisconsin to Pennsylvania, that Kerry might not be doing as well as he was in their initial exit polls.

So, that takes us to election night. I remember it well. A lot of people on DU were not convinced exit polls should be taken seriously ... because they can be flawed, and have been flawed in the past. They're not perfect. They're not always right. In 1976, I believe the exit polls showed Carter winning Illinois when, in the end, Ford carried it narrowly. It didn't impact the overall results (as Carter won by 297 electoral votes even without Illinois), but it allowed ABC, I believe, to call the election before they would have had they kept Illinois as too close to call.

Anyway, I think exit polls came into play in 2000 & 2004 because we were dealing with tight elections. You've got to remember, 1980, '84, '88, '92 and '96 were all comfortably won by the winner ... they were not very close races. That meant the margin for the exit polls to be wrong, or off, weren't in play - and we're talking about a stretch of 24 years. So, even on DU that day, there was caution. Don't get too excited because we don't know how the exit polls are breaking down ... what part of the state they're coming from ... who's taking the surveys ... whatever.

On election night, I remember writing down the final exit poll numbers that were leaked on the internet and decided to compare them to the totals. With Kerry leading by such a wide margin in New Hampshire, it became apparent that if he won NH early, similar to how Obama won it four years later, that the exit polls would be correct. New Hampshire was never called on election night. It was only later, after Kerry conceded, that Kerry officially won it. The longer that state stayed 'too close to call' the more I realized the exit polls were off. This was confirmed, to me, when Pennsylvania, a state Kerry led by 20 points in early exit polls, wasn't called until 10:49 EST - almost three hours after polls closed there.

Bottom line is that I wasn't confident heading into the election and by around 9:00 EST, it became clearer the exit polls were wrong. Not just in Ohio - but in Wisconsin, PA, New Hampshire and Virginia.

The thing is, the same things I hear about why Romney should win is what I heard about Kerry. Romney should win because Obama can't consistently poll higher than 50%. Romney should win because the undecideds will break for him. Don't trust the polls ... they're wrong.

Well...

From my POV, '04 was an election lost in August and the polls back that up. Now like I said, I'm guessing a lot will disagree with me ... maybe even angrily ... but that's just how I see it.

[Time for change]

37. Two points about the exit polls

It wasn't just the early exit polls that had Kerry up. The final exit polls in Ohio had him up by 4.5%. He also led in the final national exit polls. The exit poll discrepancies were large in very many states, all in favor of Kerry compared to the "official" vote.

Second, though it is true that exit polls aren't always spot on, the discrepancy in the 2004 presidential exit polls (compared to official vote count) were larger than for any other presidential election in which they were recorded (which was from 1988 onwards).

[mountain grammy]

39. What can I say when for the longest time I believed the same...

But time and events have changed my mind. I also never believed the JKF assassination conspiracy theories until time and events changed my mind. I hate being an old lady who sees conspiracies everywhere, it goes against my upbringing and my faith in the basic honesty of most people. I still believe most people are good, but, IMO, religious fundamentalism is behind much of the complicity of ordinary people who think anything done in the "name of Jesus" is ok, and it's their leaders who are greedy and evil. Religion is behind a lot of the shenanigans that have been going on in America as the lines separating Church and State are constantly being blurred. "Americans United for Separation of Church and State" is the best source for watching the religious right; Barry Lynn will always have my gratitude and support.

[Coyotl]

41. How Kerry Votes Were Switched To Bush Votes

The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched To Bush Votes
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html

[Time for change]

84. Basically, what you're saying is that you think Kerry lost this election legitimately because

1) The pre-election polls were slightly tilting to Bush
2) The exit polls were off

But you have no evidence that the exit polls were off other than the fact that they deviated significantly from the official vote count. You note an "enthusiasm gap" as an explanation for the exit polls being off. But an enthusiasm gap can't explain an inaccuracy in the exit polls. Unlike the pre-election polls, exit polls measure who the voters actually voted for, not who they intend to vote for. A lack of enthusiasm doesn't mean you're going to vote Republican and say you voted Democratic.

An analysis of the precincts that were sampled showed an over-sampling of the precincts that were more likely to go for Bush, which tends to indicate an exit poll bias in favor of Bush, not Kerry. Other analyses likewise suggested no bias in the exit polls.

On the other hand, there was a great amount of evidence of election fraud, as I note early in the OP. The belief that the election was stolen rests not on optimism prior to the election, but the great amount of evidence of election fraud that turned up afterwards.

[Jazzy_Obama]

33. The thought of them stealing this election...

Makes my blood boil! 😡😡😡😡 Rethugs Can't win the vote fairly so they "steal the election" I hope the Obama Campaign & Democrats fight like hell to prevent that from happening! But I believe they will & this Campaign knows what there up against & is ready for every trick & ploy from the Rethugs! He's got this!

[Samantha]

35. There has never been any doubt the 2004 election could easily have been stolen

Even the Governor admitted in 2007 that the election could have easily been stolen:

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2920

"Ohio Secretary of State confirms 2004 election could have been stolen
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
December 14, 2007

"Ohio's Secretary of State announced this morning that a $1.9 million official study shows that "critical security failures" are embedded throughout the voting systems in the state that decided the 2004 election. Those failures, she says, "could impact the integrity of elections in the Buckeye State." They have rendered Ohio's vote counts "vulnerable" to manipulation and theft by "fairly simple techniques."

"Indeed, she says, "the tools needed to compromise an accurate vote count could be as simple as tampering with the paper audit trail connector or using a magnet and a personal digital assistant."

"In other words, Ohio's top election official has finally confirmed that the 2004 election could have been easily stolen."

People were convicted:

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2379

"First criminal convictions from Ohio's stolen 2004 election confirm recount was rigged
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
January 27, 2007

"The first felony convictions of two Cleveland poll workers stemming from Ohio's stolen 2004 election confirm that the official recount in that contested vote was, in the words of county prosecutors, "rigged." The question now is whether further prosecutions will reach higher up in the ranks of officials who may have been involved in illegalities throughout the rest of the state.

"The convictions have come down in Cuyahoga County, where Democratic candidates traditionally run up huge majorities. Suspicious vote counts and other irregularities cut deeply into John Kerry's margins in 2004. Official vote counts gave the state---and thus the presidency---to George W. Bush by about 118,000 votes out of 5.5 million counted."

Here is the link to Conyers full report "Preserving Democracy What Went Wrong in Ohio":

http://www.iwantmyvote.com/lib/downloads/references/house_judiciary/final_status_report.pdf

Blackwell made it happen for the GOP:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/04/ken-blackwell-ohio-brown-senate

"Blackwell made Katherine Harris look like a cupcake," Conyers told me. "He saw his role as limiting the participation of Democratic voters. We had hearings in Columbus for two days. We could have stayed two weeks, the level of fury was so high. Thousands of people wanted to testify. Nothing like this had ever happened to them before."

There is no logical reason to believe techniques used to manipulate the vote in Ohio will not again be deployed in 2012. Some of these techniques were obviously used in 2000 to skew the vote in favor of Bush*, some of the techniques were used again in 2004, to why, given the level of hate generated by the right-wing would anyone be naive enough to believe 2012 will be different from 2000 or 2004?

Here's the problem. Should anomalies throw the election to the Republicans, concrete evidence must be presented before the counting of the electoral slate by the Electoral College. That opens up the possibility that any state caught could have its slate discarded and not included in the final Electoral College official count. Should evidence be found subsequent to that but after the inauguration, it is a moot point. Once a President takes office, he can only be removed through Constitutional remedies which include being guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors committed while serving as President.

So the question before us all is just how vigilant and accurate the monitoring of this election will be, not just in Florida or Ohio, but in all states where unexpectedly the theft of say two of them could put Romney over the top.

Sam

[Coyotl]

40. Parts of this seem bogus

Where you go off the track is in an assumption that reported votes can be changed. Once the votes are reported by a county to "the system" that sets the tally in stone. The number is known to the county election workers. Then, additionally, there is a county reported official vote tally later when all absentee ballots and other issues are finally firmly resolved.

There is NO WAY and never has been any way for one person involved in the process of displaying the election results online to alter the vote tallies of the counties. You are working in the wrong direction. You have not shown that the county tabulators were under outside control or even networked. Besides, there was an easy way to steal Ohio elections, the same one that had been in place over a decade and since Ohio was dominated by Democrats, the punch card system.

Votes were altered BEFORE they were counted, and that is why the recount produced the same results. And, the method of altering the votes is simplistic in the extreme. Punch cards were just switched from one precinct where the punched hole counted for Kerry to the next precinct where the same punched hole counted for Bush. In Cleveland, 12% of the Dem votes in Ohio were being counted by the "Chairman of the Ohio Republican Party" Election Board President! Do the math!!

[Ellipsis]

42. It's sometimes referred to as "caterpillar ballot crawl"

If one were to secure an election one would most likely use several methods to accomplish the task. The facts are well in place that on county tabulators.

[Time for change]

47. Where did I say that the vote count was officially reported by a county and then changed?

I think you're misinterpreting what I wrote.

[BlueinOhio]

59. Triad

On December 13, 2004 Sharole Eaton, the Hocking County Board of Elections Deputy Director, swore out an affidavit that read “ the realization that this company (Triad) and staff would do anything to dishonor or disrupt the voting process is distressing to me and hard to believe. I’m being completely objective about the above statements and the reason I’m bringing this forward is to hopefully, rule out any wrongdoing.” (45) Triad Governmental Systems, Inc., based in Xenia, OH, is a national corporation that sold computer-based systems for vote tabulation to about half of the counties in the state. Todd Rapp, President of Triad has been a consistent contributor to Republican causes. In addition, a Triad affiliate, Psephos Corporation, supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the 2000 presidential election. After 9 years of fighting the FEC, Carol S Malenick’s Triad Management Services Inc., under court order to complete a comprehensive disclosure report, filed a registration statement as a political committee and a report indicating it raised $3.86 million from 1996 through 2000. However, the submitted forms were not signed and the reports did not disclose any donor names or addresses. The report lists only dates and amounts for 179 contributions. There were 9 contributions of $100,000 or more, and one as high as $300,000. Since there are no names or aggregate totals of donors, many of the contributions may have been from the same person. Litigation records indicate that Robert Cone was the primary source of funds in 1996. Triad indicated they paid Citizens for the Republic Education Fund $505,853 from 1996-2000. Triad paid Baker and Hostetler $455,175 for legal fees. The accounting firm was Gilbert and Wolfand. (46)

Michael Barbian, Jr., a technician from Triad showed up on December 10, 2004 before the recount and made several adjustments to the tabular and computer before the recount and that Hocking County was the subject of the initial Ohio test recount. He told the election officials Lisa Schwartze and Sherole Eaton how to manipulate voting machinery to ensure that a preliminary hand recount matched the machine count. The cheat sheets told them how many votes they should find for each candidate, and how many over and under votes they should calculate to match the machine count. In that way, they could avoid doing a full countywide hand recount mandated by state law. If true, this would frustrate the entire purpose of the recount law – to randomly ascertain if the vote counting apparatus is operating fairly and effectively, and if not to conduct a full hand recount. By ensuring that election boards are in a position to conform their test recount results with the election night results, Triad’s actions may well have prevented scores of counties from conducting a full and fair recount in compliance with equal protection, due process, and the first amendment Several times during his interaction with Hocking County voting machines, Mr. Barbian telephoned into Triad’s offices to obtain programming information relating to the machinery and the precinct in question. It is now known that Triad officials have intervened in other counties in Ohio - Greene and Monroe, and others. Mr. Barbian himself has admitted to altering tabulating software in Hocking, Lorain, Muskingum, Clark, Harrison and Guernsey counties. Todd Rapp, President of Triad, also has confirmed that these sorts of changes are standard procedure for his company. Mr. Barbian’s activities were official policy of Triad. Rapp explained during a Hocking County Board of Elections meeting: “The purpose was to train people on how to conduct their jobs and to help them identify problems when they conducted the recount. If they could not hand count the ballots correctly, they would know what they needed to look for in that hand count. Barbian noted that he had “provided reports so they could review the information on their own. In addition, Douglas W. Jones, a computer election expert from the University of Iowa, reviewed the Eaton Affidavit and concluded that it described behavior that was dangerous and unnecessary:” I have reviewed the Affidavit of Sherole L. Eaton (“the Eaton Affidavit”), the Deputy Director of the Hocking County Board of Election, as well as the letter of Congressman John Conyers to Kevin Brock, Special Agent in Charge with the FBI in Cincinnati, Ohio. In light of this information, and given my expertise and research on voting technology issues and the integrity of ballot counting systems, it is my professional opinion that the incident in Hocking County, Ohio, threatens the ability of the presidential candidates, their witnesses, and the counter-plaintiffs in the above-captioned action, to properly analyze, inspect, and assess the ballots and the related voting data from the 2004 presidential election in Ohio. It is my understanding that 41 of Ohio’s 88 counties use Triad voting machines. As a result, the incident in Hocking County could compromise the statewide recount, and undermine the public’s trust in the credibility and accuracy of the recount. We have received several additional reports of machine irregularities involving several other counties serviced by Triad, including a report that Triad was able to alter election software by remote access:”

[Time for change]

61. Yes, that was a prime example of the corrupted Ohio recount that Spoonamore talked about

[BlueinOhio]

75. Gag order

I believe this is the case that went to court and Bush right before he left office put a gag order on the judges decision.

[Ellipsis]

76. I don't remember that one. Is there a case number?

[Time for change]

81. I don't recall that, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if Bush tried to do that

But I don't think that a president has any legal right to put a gag order on a judge's decision.

[Generic Other]

43. I recall many boots on the ground after the fact

This year Democrats need to have volunteers manning polling places AND polling the voters as they leave. We need to try not to give them the chance to cheat it.

How many DUers can commit to monitoring elections in Florida and Ohio? It is sickening that we have to do this, but what alternative is there?
The Feds monitored primary elections in Florida, Wisconsin, Arizona and Ohio this year. One hopes they do so again.

I find it highly upsetting that this is even necessary. Corrupt elections officials need to go to jail. That is the only way to stop this sort of behavior. Oh and paper ballots.

[porphyrian]

44. . n/t

[Blue Owl]

49. Karl Rove just may be public enemy #1

It is downright painful to think of all the consequences brought about by his illegal, criminal bullshit.

It's like he has a free pass to stab this country in the back whenever he pleases.

[wakemewhenitsover]

50. Thank you for the excellent post.

Another enduring mystery is how this story was suppressed so effectively. Well, maybe that's not such a mystery, considering what happened to Connell.

[Time for change]

54. And let's not forget what happened to Raymond Lemme, with regard to the same general subject

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4712367

[liberal N proud]

51. K&R

[polichick]

52. Excellent post! One of the biggest problems I have with the Dem Party is...

...that they have done nothing to ensure that we have a better, verifiable, voting system - you have to wonder why. This year there will be more corruption, more stolen votes, perhaps even another stolen election.

[Time for change]

53. I feel the same way

I think it's related to the fact that so much of the Democratic Party has been bought out by the same oligarchy that has bought out virtually the entire Republican Party. They must feel that it's easier and preferably to please their big donors than to do what's best for the vast majority of their constituents.

I guess that this is what must happen when a country has a system where money trumps democracy. I doubt it will change until we somehow find a way to get money out of politics.

[Overseas]

85. I feel the same way. Once again we need overwhelming numbers to vote Democratic to overcome

the old fashioned voter suppression and the 24/7 Citizens' United ads and the continuing electronic vote flipping in close races.

The Citizens United decision provides the cover this time. "Look at all the billions being poured into ads. Advertising is powerful stuff." etc etc

And the disgraceful voter suppression efforts that were practiced in previous elections on a smaller scale and included uneven distribution of voting machines and partisan voter challenges at polling places.

We need Democrats to push for non-partisan voting processes and paper ballots. Not Republican Secretaries of State deciding how many voting machines go to each district, but population data determining that.

We have enough human resources to count all the votes. We were supposed to get turned off by vote counting through the Florida 2000 proceedings. Yet if we had let the counting proceed, we would have gotten the president we voted for, instead of the judicial activists' choice.

Just as we were supposed to get turned off from impeachment by the attempt to get Clinton. "Oh, such proceedings can become such a witch hunt. We don't want our poor citizens suffering through such trauma again." I remember thinking that during the Clinton proceedings-- the Republicans must have someone really horrible in the wings, so they want to sour the country on impeachment. Then I decided I was being too wildly speculative.

[Drahthaardogs]

55. I was on DU that night, up in Alaska.

I do not WANT to relive that terrible terrible evening.

[Aldo Leopold]

57. That was the day before I became

a daily reader of DU. Have been ever since. This site has helped me through many a rough spot since, in the years that followed under the continuation of Sh(it)rub's rule.

Anyway, hi everybody. Looong-time silent reader, first-time poster! This place is awesome. Thanks for all your hard work and attention to fact and detail.

[Time for change]

58. That's about when I started reading (and posting on) DU avidly

Since DU was born as a result of one stolen presidential election (2000), another one was bound to stir up a hornet's nest of anger -- and it sure did, as I'm sure you recall.

[DemReadingDU]

83. Me too

[annabanana]

66. Welcome to The Conversation!

DU is how a small voice in the wilderness became a roar!

[Ellipsis]

77. "Aldo Leopold and the Sand County Almanac... next to the bible this is the book."

Complete with beaver on the hood of the lecturers pick up truck. 8th grade field trip experience... had to be there.


Welcome.

[lindysalsagal]

60. Am I the only one who saw the live feed of Shrub around 11:00 in the white house?

I'm watching his smug face while he's losing, and wondering, "why is he smiling?"

I believe that was the secret national gunshot to pull the trigger on the computer fixing plan. I really do.

[Doctor_J]

62. This needs to be treated with sentences in Federal prisons

real prisons, where the treatment would serve as a grave deterrent to others who might break the laws. Put Ken Blackwell in Marion for two years and have him keep a diary

[Gus2525]

64. After the election, I would like to see President Obama grant a full pardon to Don Siegelman,

and an investigation launched into the death of Mike Connell. Too late to affect the election. Not too late for Rove to go to jail for conspiracy to commit murder. I can wish can't I?

[Liberal_Dog]

67. K & R

Thanks for the reminder that we must remain vigilant.

[UTUSN]

70. R#131 & K for, totally excellent work in this O.P. n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

71. K&R. Looking Forward isn't the best strategy when you have a 25 ton truck coming

up on your ass at 80 mph. I've said it before, If the President loses this election, he has no one to blame but the man in the mirror.

Allowing blatant criminality to go unanswered results in widespread disregard for the law in general.

[SunDrop23]

72. Interesting post.

[McCamy Taylor]

74. Don't forget that Rove scared Kerry out of challenging the result.

How? I think he threatened to do a Martha Stewart on Kerry's wife. While Stewart went to jail for manipulating her own stock (by lying to investigators, supposedly to keep her own stock prices up), the press reported she went to jail for insider trading. With AT&T's domestic spying program, the Bush administration had records of every American who ever got a stock tip that paid off. Any one of those could be called "insider trading" if the feds could prove that the adviser got his info from someone within the industry. Of course, getting a tip from your stockbroker or friend or brother-in-law is not insider trading. But the press would have dubbed it that if the Bush administration told them to. The same way they convicted Eliot Spitzer in the press though he was never charged with a crime.

I think Rove threatened a malicious prosecution of Kerry's wife, and he conceded rather than risk hurting her. I think Kerry ought to come clean. If my suspicions are correct, they reflect badly on Rove, not him. At that time, the Bush DOJ was willing to do anything to further Karl Rove's agenda, and there was no check on its power.

[LongTomH]

78. Teresa Heinz Kerry: Hacking the Mother Machine

A few months after the election, Thom Hartmann posted an article at Common Dreams: Teresa Heinz Kerry: Hacking the Mother Machine. Mrs. Kerry maintained that the 'fix' was in at the level of the 'central tabulator' machines used to accumulate precinct level vote totals:

"Two brothers own 80 percent of the [voting] machines used in the United States," Teresa Heinz Kerry told a group of Seattle guests at a March 7, 2005 lunch for Representative Adam Smith, according to reporter Joel Connelly in an article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Connelly noted Heinz Kerry added that it is "very easy to hack into the mother machines."

The two brothers Mrs. Kerry is referencing are, according to voting machine expert (and founder of www.BanVotingMachines.org) Lynn Landes, in an article for the Online Journal, Bob Urosevich, president of Diebold Election Systems, and Todd Urosevich, who was vice president for customer support of Chuck Hagel's old company, now known as ES&S.

Presumably the "mother machines" Teresa was talking about are the "central tabulator" computers, like the Windows-based Diebold central tabulator PC that Howard Dean hacked into and untraceably changed an election on - in 90 seconds - live on the "Topic A With Tina Brown" CNBC TV show late last year.

Edited to add: The morning after the election, I sent out an email with the title line: "The bastards stole another one!" I knew right away.

[graham4anything]

79. Forward...

I know on this thread, this won't be a popular response, however I do believe that it is
time to move forward and f-k the conspiracy theories

one thing about ct's-and it took me awhile to figure it out
the way I see it, one can follow breadcrumbs
and waste alot of time ending up right where the person laying the breadcrumbs wants you to end up at

Another thing about conspiracy theories- try this out
if you believe in ct-s then...
2000 and 2004 were pulled off by the Bush family inc.
2012- Bush's ain't running

if you believe the all powerful Bush family controls things, then you gotta believe that they will NOT steal this election in 2012, because JEB is going to run in 2016 and no way in hell could that happen if Mittens wins.

therefore, they are like Jeb sitting 2012 out. NO THEFT is going to occur.

Again, move forward not backward. And be happy that the repubs picked a candidate who is so bad with the public and has changed his answers so much that he out Kerry's Kerry.

Too bad Kerry didn't give the speech he gave at the DNC last week, back in 2004. That would have gone a long long way to winning.

Too bad Kerry picked the single WORST vice presidential pick of all time (yes, worse than Palin)
when he picked Edwards. One look at Kerry's face after he picked Edwards showed he knew he was going to lose. Edwards is the lesson to remember going forward. Never forget how bad a vp choice he was. And how Bob Graham, Dick Gephardt, or any of the other choices would have been so much better.

2000 was a bad call by the US Supreme Court's SECOND opinion 5 to 4 saying time ran out suckers. Had the Supreme Court just used their first opinion 7 to 2 to send it back to Florida for final decision by the state, Bush wouldn't have even been running for reelection.

And blame Ralph Nader and the lies which still led to idiots saying in 2004 that Kerry and Bush were one and the same, like they said about Gore and Bush.

of course, Al Gore never would have picked the 5 Supreme Court Justices that voted him not president. Neither would Kerry have picked Roberts and Alito or the others.

And remember, Obama won a landslide in 2008 and will do so again in 2012. With landslides, theft is not possible.
And without a Bush running, the Bush theft machine is not active in 2012.

and CT's end up being a waste of time and energy. Which is why I am done with CTs after realizing the people proporting them never had my interests in the first place and only wanted to get people out of the system and not voting, saying voting is meaningless it will just be stolen.
I get the impression now that alot of the CT articles about 2004 could have been written by Karl Rove to disillusion a generation into not voting. Which as 2010 proved, is fatal for good people who then don't win enough votes.And ct's can be addictive and filthy, like cigarettes, best to kick the habit.


forward to the election 2012 night celebration when President Obama is reelected.

[Time for change]

82. I really object to categorizing all "conspiracy theories" as the same thing

To say that all "conspiracy theories" are wrong is tantamount to saying that conspiracies don't exist in this world. And anyone who believes that needs to open their eyes.

The reason for being concerned about crimes that happened in the past is that if they happened in the past they can happen in the future. If consideration of all unsolved crimes is abandoned on the belief that it doesn't do any good to "dwell" on them, then they will remain unsolved, and they are more likely to happen again. We can't afford to take that chance with our democracy.

[dougolat]

80. It's frustrating, Brad Friedman has been on this for decade...

...warning people what to watch out for, how to try to keep things honest and above-board, and to insist on an accurate, complete count before conceding, etc. -- to no avail: time after time, questionable returns get quickly and meekly accepted!
Success at vote manipulation breeds more of the same, how could it not?
Remember that book, "Votescam"? It goes back to the '70's.