« Saturday Gumpagraph | Main | Today's Bush Joke »

November 04, 2006

Independents Favor Dems 2-To-1 Politics  Vote Fraud

A new Newsweek poll shows the Democrats continuing to surge, with a nearly 2-to-1 advantage among independent voters:

As President George W. Bush jets across Red State America this weekend, Republican candidates are falling further behind Democratic rivals, according to the new NEWSWEEK poll. While the GOP has lagged behind Democrats throughout the campaign season, the trend in the past month — when NEWSWEEK conducted four polls in five weeks — had suggested the Republicans were building momentum in the homestretch.

No more. The new poll finds support for Republicans (and for President Bush) receding. For example, 53 percent of Americans want the Democrats to win enough seats to take control of one or both houses of Congress in the midterm elections on Tuesday. Those results are close to early October levels, while less than a third of Americans (32 percent) want Republicans to retain control. If the elections were held today, 54 percent of likely voters say they would support the Democratic candidate in their district versus 38 percent who would vote for the Republican — a 16-point edge for the Democrats. [...]

Meanwhile, the President's approval has fallen back to 35 percent, after a slow but steady rise from 33 percent at the beginning of October to 37 percent in the NEWSWEEK poll last week.

The good news for Republicans is that their voters are coming home; 90 percent of likely Republican voters say they would vote for the GOP's candidate if the elections were held today, not far behind the 95 percent of Democrats who back their party's nominee. But independents say they would vote for the Democrat over the Republican in their district nearly 2 to 1 (26 percent versus 51 percent.) [...]

[O]nly 29 percent of Americans [say] they’re satisfied with the direction of the country — and 64 percent [say] they're not. [Emphasis added]

The good news: people grasp, finally, that the Bush Republicans have got to go. The bad news: they'll be voting in an election system that's pretty well rigged.

So far, election fraud has tended to be applied in cases where the pre-election polls were somewhat close, where we could tell ourselves the outcome was within the margin of error. But this time around, the polls are lopsided. If elections are stolen under these circumstances, it will be like a decree announcing the end of American democracy. We will have crossed a Rubicon from which we may never return. Meanwhile, the mainstream media will refuse to credit the evidence that will be too scary to acknowledge but too obvious to ignore. We'll see black, they'll say white.

The cognitive dissonance will cause a lot of people to just throw up their hands and say, well that's how elections are now. Nobody knows who really won. And anyway, they're all crooks, on both sides. If that happens, elections will be just another form of reality tv with a predetermined outcome. Democracy will be over. But at least we'll know where we stand.

Posted by Jonathan at November 4, 2006 01:14 PM  del.icio.us digg NewsVine Reddit YahooMyWeb


The fact that Habeas Corpus was neutered and signed into law prior to this election could prove to be a strong indicator of what the next 2 years hold should congressional republicans remain in control. We may know where we stand after this election, but I don't believe where we stand will remain static. The changes in the next two years could dwarf the changes we’ve seen in the last six years.

Fortunately, our democracy is made up of more than just the ability to elect our representatives. We still have free speech (and the Internet is still flowing all information equally) and we still have an independent court system not controlled by congress or the administration. If we're only left with scraps of democracy, that may be enough for the decent people still inside government to make positive changes, or at least change coarse.

Lastly, we seem to have a military with some high ranking officials that have scruples. More and more I get the impression the military is more on the side of the people than the government. Should push come to shove who knows how the military will respond, but it’s at least somewhat comforting to hear such strong messages speaking out against the administration coming from the military.

All that said, a hearty does of flexibility and a wiliness to accept change seem like healthy traits these days.

Posted by: Jeff at November 4, 2006 11:15 PM

Here's an HBO documentary on Diebold voting machines. It clearly shows that hacking just the removable memory cards used in voting machines can successfully rig a vote (direct access to the voting machines is not required to rig a vote). You may have heard or read about this, but to see it is truly shocking. Watch to the very end.

Hacking Democracy


(Replace [dot] with actual periods)

Posted by: Jeff at November 5, 2006 09:11 PM

I have just one last comment on elections. Determining the results of an election comes down to nothing much more than counting. An infinitesimal amount of math is all that's required to tally votes. It boggles my mind at times why more people don't get outraged when voting in America doesn't happen flawlessly.

NASA, a government agency, can send, land, and remotely control a robot on Mars. This has to be the most complex achievement of man. Calculating the trajectory alone just to get the rocket pointed at Mars uses more math than millions of average people use in their collective lifetime.

Yet, we can't seem to --- count. I wonder if the reason more people don't get outraged is because computers are used for elections. Everyone knows computers are complex machines and I wonder if people associate the complexity of computers with the tallying process.

What most people don't know is that the complexity of computer software need only be as complex as the task being performed. In this case of election software, it's nothing but c o u n t i n g. Yes, there's an OS, yes there's a GUI, and yes, local election officials have to program in the names of the candidates, but once it's up and running, ready for an election, what you have in nothing more than a calculator that performs four identical tasks for all the candidates:

1) start with a zero

now loop

2) add one to the previous number
3) make that the new number
4) remember the new number

You're now running an election.

Posted by: Jeff at November 6, 2006 02:03 AM