Something is Wrong with our Electoral Process

Im still here

blackredyellow wrote:

And neither is any other presidential candidate, so what is your point?

Barack HUSSEIN Obama

blackredyellow

Im still here wrote:

Barack HUSSEIN Obama

I think that you have a serious comprehension problem... someone's middle name has no correlation to either their religion, political views, or really anything else.

Ron Ernest Paul's middle name is very close to Che Guevara's first name... does that make him a communist or a murderer?

ledvedderman

If you really believe that, than you're as big of a moron as you sound.

blackredyellow

ledvedderman wrote:

If you really believe that, than you're as big of a moron as you sound.

And what is funny, is that he thinks having the middle name of Hussein makes him an "Islamic fascist", but in reality, Saddam Hussein wasn't even an Islamic fascist.

These kinds of debates humor me, but at the same time scare me a little bit, because it means that there truly are people out there who believe this kind of crap and those bogus e-mail forwards that are going around.

ledvedderman

blackredyellow wrote:

And what is funny, is that he thinks having the middle name of Hussein makes him an "Islamic fascist", but in reality, Saddam Hussein wasn't even an Islamic fascist.

These kinds of debates humor me, but at the same time scare me a little bit, because it means that there truly are people out there who believe this kind of crap and those bogus e-mail forwards that are going around.

What's even worse is when it is someone in your family. I had to e-mail my aunt yesterday to call her out on being a moron for believing this shit. She doesn't think anyone with a Muslim background would be the right thing in the White House now.

People are fucking crazy.

Hinny

ledvedderman wrote:

You don't see Putin taking the country on a communist route?

The man has been eliminating the powers of their democracy pretty hardcore, especially in the last couple of years.

Authoritarianism = communism?

chipboy

Our election process is fine as long it is a landslide. Not so good if it's close. It's like a boxing match. Better knock the guy/girl out and not put it in the hands of the judges.

ledvedderman

Hinny wrote:

Authoritarianism = communism?

I would think he's gone a little past authoritarianism

ndv180

ledvedderman wrote:

1) Many counties and states are in the process to comply with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Errors like this do happen.

quote]

The HAVA law came about as a result of the false felon purge list that Kathryn Harris' office put together with the aid of ChoicePoint (of Georgia) for the 2000 presidential election in FLA. The list was roughly 95% innacurate and resulted in tens of thousands of legal voters being denied a ballot because they were erroneously listed as felons. The fact that the significant majority of those denied ballots were African-American and Afican-American voters were voting against George W Bush at a 9 to 1 rate would lead anyone with half a brain to conclude that it was intentional. The story was exposed by Greg Palast, an american working for the BBC and was unreported by the U.S. press at the time (Dec 2000).

The congressional black caucus, after becoming aware of this demanded a remedy so that such a thing couldn't happen again. In 2002, George W Bush signed the HAVA law. Within the law it states that if you aren't on the voter rolls when you go to vote, you shall receive a "provisional" ballot. In addition, if your are "challenged", you also receive a "provisional" ballot. Although the HAVA law says you get a provisional ballot, it makes no mention that your ballot has to be added to the count.

With these rules in place, Karl Rove and his crew proceded to complete pervert the process. In 2004, there was a mass "challenge" of voters nationwide by republican operatives, but particularly in swing states and particularly amongst African-Americans. In all there were over 3 million chalenges resulting in "provisional" ballots. Of these "provisional" ballots, over 1 million were disqualified and usually on the flimsiest of technicalities. In the event that these "provisional" ballots were being examined by a Secretary of State that was a Bush supporter, they usually would get denied and not counted.

The lists of voters to challenge were generated by something called "caging" lists. In most cases these lists were in violation of election and voting rights laws and a felony. Rove and his crew were exchanging all of their email via the RNC HQ computers to avoid detection (everything on the White House computers is saved). When the various committees supoenaed the emails, they were told that they had been "accidentally" deleted.

Not all of the emails disappeared. 500 or so were misaddressed and ended up in the possession of the worlds greatest investigative journalist. He wrote about this in his 2006 book and also detailed a number of other methods used to uncount votes and steal the election. However, since the Democrats regained control of the House and John Conyers became chairman of the House Judiciary committee, the evidence has been turned over to them. When it was announced that the committee had the evidence, interim US attorney Tim Griffin resigned. To find out why, go to the thread I started and check out some of the links to the various stories and videos.

Here's the thread

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=271695

ledvedderman

ndv180 wrote:

ledvedderman wrote:

1) Many counties and states are in the process to comply with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Errors like this do happen.

quote]

The HAVA law came about as a result of the false felon purge list that Kathryn Harris' office put together with the aid of ChoicePoint (of Georgia) for the 2000 presidential election in FLA. The list was roughly 95% innacurate and resulted in tens of thousands of legal voters being denied a ballot because they were erroneously listed as felons. The fact that the significant majority of those denied ballots were African-American and Afican-American voters were voting against George W Bush at a 9 to 1 rate would lead anyone with half a brain to conclude that it was intentional. The story was exposed by Greg Palast, an american working for the BBC and was unreported by the U.S. press at the time (Dec 2000).

The congressional black caucus, after becoming aware of this demanded a remedy so that such a thing couldn't happen again. In 2002, George W Bush signed the HAVA law. Within the law it states that if you aren't on the voter rolls when you go to vote, you shall receive a "provisional" ballot. In addition, if your are "challenged", you also receive a "provisional" ballot. Although the HAVA law says you get a provisional ballot, it makes no mention that your ballot has to be added to the count.

With these rules in place, Karl Rove and his crew proceded to complete pervert the process. In 2004, there was a mass "challenge" of voters nationwide by republican operatives, but particularly in swing states and particularly amongst African-Americans. In all there were over 3 million chalenges resulting in "provisional" ballots. Of these "provisional" ballots, over 1 million were disqualified and usually on the flimsiest of technicalities. In the event that these "provisional" ballots were being examined by a Secretary of State that was a Bush supporter, they usually would get denied and not counted.

The lists of voters to challenge were generated by something called "caging" lists. In most cases these lists were in violation of election and voting rights laws and a felony. Rove and his crew were exchanging all of their email via the RNC HQ computers to avoid detection (everything on the White House computers is saved). When the various committees supoenaed the emails, they were told that they had been "accidentally" deleted.

Not all of the emails disappeared. 500 or so were misaddressed and ended up in the possession of the worlds greatest investigative journalist. He wrote about this in his 2006 book and also detailed a number of other methods used to uncount votes and steal the election. However, since the Democrats regained control of the House and John Conyers became chairman of the House Judiciary committee, the evidence has been turned over to them. When it was announced that the committee had the evidence, interim US attorney Tim Griffin resigned. To find out why, go to the thread I started and check out some of the links to the various stories and videos.

Here's the thread

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=271695

You know a lot of background on some of the HAVA requirements. I can tell you with the last 4 tears working on the county and state levels with elections and we have never had any problems with provisional ballots. The ones that go with election laws are allowed, and those tha do not, don't.

ndv180

ledvedderman wrote:

ndv180 wrote:

You know a lot of background on some of the HAVA requirements. I can tell you with the last 4 tears working on the county and state levels with elections and we have never had any problems with provisional ballots. The ones that go with election laws are allowed, and those tha do not, don't.

If you are in Illinois, chances are they didn't pervert the process in 2004. It was not a state that George W Bush had a shot at winning, even if 5 percent of the vote was suppressed. Are you aware of voters being shunted to "provisional" ballots due to "challenges" where you are? If so, was it on a large scale? Also, what are examples of things that don't go with election laws that lead to "a provisional" ballot being denied?

In 2004 in Ohio, there over 160,000 "challenges" that resulted in "provisional" ballots. Nationwide, the total was around 3 Million. Those are absurdly ridiculous numbers. Ken Blackwell is scheduled to appear before the House Judiciary committee tommorrow, I'm sure he'll be asked about some of this.

ledvedderman

ndv180 wrote:

ledvedderman wrote:

If you are in Illinois, chances are they didn't pervert the process in 2004. It was not a state that George W Bush had a shot at winning, even if 5 percent of the vote was suppressed. Are you aware of voters being shunted to "provisional" ballots due to "challenges" where you are? If so, was it on a large scale? Also, what are examples of things that don't go with election laws that lead to "a provisional" ballot being denied?

In 2004 in Ohio, there over 160,000 "challenges" that resulted in "provisional" ballots. Nationwide, the total was around 3 Million. Those are absurdly ridiculous numbers. Ken Blackwell is scheduled to appear before the House Judiciary committee tommorrow, I'm sure he'll be asked about some of this.

If a poll watcher challenges someones residence than the person usually has to vote provissional. I'm sure it happens in every county. Another instance is that if someone hasn't voted in two general elections they go from an "active" to "inactive" voter status, and if they show up to vote, and can't prove that they are at the same address than they will have to vote provissional.

One thing that causes a voter to get "purged" like is when the election authorities mail out new voter cards to everyone in the county, and if the post office tries to deliver it and the person doesn't live there anymore it's returned to the county. From that point they pupt that voter on the "inactive" list because they clearly don't live at the address the are registered at.

ndv180

ledvedderman wrote:

ndv180 wrote:

If a poll watcher challenges someones residence than the person usually has to vote provissional. I'm sure it happens in every county. Another instance is that if someone hasn't voted in two general elections they go from an "active" to "inactive" voter status, and if they show up to vote, and can't prove that they are at the same address than they will have to vote provissional.

One thing that causes a voter to get "purged" like is when the election authorities mail out new voter cards to everyone in the county, and if the post office tries to deliver it and the person doesn't live there anymore it's returned to the county. From that point they pupt that voter on the "inactive" list because they clearly don't live at the address the are registered at.

It seems to me that you are backing up the perversion of the process. In 2004, the RNC sent out welcome letters to new registrants (as the pretext to challenging voters). They only sent these out to new registrants they suspected would not be voting for their guy. They also sent mail to other African-American voters. They had to send these out "first class" at great cost to them (i.e. millions of $$). No election campaign sends out first class mail. It's too expensive. The letters were marked "Do Not Forward". If the letters came back, those registered voters were put on a list to be challenged at the polls and forced to vote via "provisional" ballot.

Letters were sent during the summertime to students who were registered at all black colleges. These came back because noone is there in the summer. Letters were sent to homeless people who had used a homeless shelter as an address on their registration. Since they were living on the streets, the letters came back. Most disgusting of all, letters were sent to African-American soldiers who were sent overseas. Of course the first class letters were undeliverable at the address they had registered from. All of these people were "challenged" by Republican operatives and if the vote counters were for the Republican candidate (i.e. George W Bush), these "provisional" ballot would get rejected. This is in large part how the 2004 election was stolen, although there were other methods employed.

You seem to be endorsing the HAVA law. The HAVA law was created under the guise of a well intentioned law, but it was actually put together by the Bush Administration to effectively suppress millions of likely Democratic candidate votes.

The mail scheme that was employed is something called "caging" and "caging" is an illegal felony if it is done to target voters by race. The evidence of "caging" was never supposed to get in the hands of anyone other than the criminals. However, some of the missing email from the RNC HQ computers was misaddressed and went to the wrong server. Now the Judiciary committee has the evidence and there will be jail time for one or more of the conspirators.

House Judiciary chairman John Conyers has introduce a bill to make caging illegal. Speaking for myself, when I was younger I was a registered voter using my parents address on my registration. Eventually, I moved around to a few different locations within 15 miles of that residence. During elections, I would still go to the polling place of my registration and cast my ballot. Apparently, I could have been subject to challenge and had my ballot rejected.

The whole system is being ravaged by those who don't want the people to decide who gets elected and they are using the incorrect notion that illegal aliens are voting and possibly voting more than once. This is not happening, but they want to create a hysteria to get support for voter ID cards. If they ever get that, the homeless and the poor will be locked out of the voting booth and Democracy will be dead.

ndv180

ledvedderman wrote:

ndv180 wrote:

If a poll watcher challenges someones residence than the person usually has to vote provissional. I'm sure it happens in every county.

Before the HAVA law, it never would happen or happened very rarely. In 2004, there were over 3 million challenges nationwide. I request that you stop being an apologist for this law.

ledvedderman

ndv180 wrote:

ledvedderman wrote:

Before the HAVA law, it never would happen or happened very rarely. In 2004, there were over 3 million challenges nationwide. I request that you stop being an apologist for this law.

I'm not being an apologist for this law. I'm paid by HAVA funds, my job is to get the whole state of Illinois (110 Election jurisdictions) up to code on a statewide voter registration database. I'm sorry you don't like the part about provisional ballots, but out of thirty pages of legislation for the bill I am sure there are things I would not agree with either.

An Act

To establish a program to provide funds to States to replace punch card voting systems, to establish the Election Assistance commissio to assist in the administration of Federal election laws and programs, to establish minimum election administration standards for Staes and units of local government with responsibility for the administration of Federal elections, and for other purposes.

Sounds like a real evil bill. There's much more to it than your provissional grievence.

Edit:

I have to be quite honest with you. I just re-read section 302 of HAVA, which deals with provissional ballots, and it does not mention anything about someone being challenged. If someones name does not appear on the official poll book then they are allowed to vote a provissional ballot. You might run into problems with these because some counties/states use provissionals as a way to end an argument at a polling place. It allows for it to be decided later with the county official making the call---who knows the laws better than a 80 year old lady making $100 a day to be a poll worker.

What we do in Illinois is give you a receipt number if you have to vote provissional. You can then log onto our website, enter your number, and you can see if your vote counted or not. It seems to work pretty well.

ledvedderman

My friend, I think you are arguing against the dirty politics found in a loophole of the HAVA bill. The RNC has taken advantage of that like you stated. I'm sure the DNC has as well.

How would you go about provissionals? Just let someone vote even if they aren't registered in that precinct? Do you have any idea what that would lead to? There has to be a way to do provisionals and right now this is what we've got. There's loopholes in it, just like every other piece of legislation, and some groups will exploit that.

redsdisease

ledvedderman wrote:

I would think he's gone a little past authoritarianism

What do you mean gone past authoritarianism? Towards what? Communism?Communism is a system of economics, it has nothing to do with authoritariansim. Most (probably all) existing "communist" states are authoritarian, but just because a state has strict control over the population, doesn't mean it's communist. In a pure, Marxist communism, the state would cease to exist.

ledvedderman

redsdisease wrote:

What do you mean gone past authoritarianism? Towards what? Communism?Communism is a system of economics, it has nothing to do with authoritariansim. Most (probably all) existing "communist" states are authoritarian, but just because a state has strict control over the population, doesn't mean it's communist. In a pure, Marxist communism, the state would cease to exist.

I understand that communism is a system of economics. My reference was to going back to the type of leaders that Russia had while it was a communist state.

firstquartermoon

To get back on track:

To anyone thinks that there is a conspiracy against Ron Paul supporters:
You, my friend, are a moron. At least when it comes to the voting process. Ron Paul is a republican. Millions of people are republican. And Unless you went to the RNC website and entered all of your personal information on the "We're voting for Ron Paul so please descriminate against us" page, then I can't see any way they'd be able to do that.
Because you changed from democart to republican? I'm sure many people did that to vote for McCain, as he's popular with that crowd.
It's a big process, people, and mistake will happen. Yes, maybe california is worse, but McCain (who is popular with democrats, remember) won that state.
And second, anyone MORON that brings a camera into a voting station is going to be told to shut it off. Or is every polling worker alerted when an RP supporter comes in? That would be pretty difficult.
Of course, there aren't that many, so I guess that makes it easier.

So please, no more "Oh, Republicans are being treated unfairly at the polls" threads. They are moronic.

ledvedderman

Videos are not allowed in poling places. Especially as close to the table as this guy was. Poll books have all sorts of information on them that I don't think any regular Joe would like to video taped and lord knows what done w/ it.

That's probably why the poll worker got so pissy.