Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

an Ohio recount??!!??!!

Discussion in 'Legal' started by nipprdog, Nov 15, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. nipprdog

    nipprdog Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,215
    Location:
    IN
    Ohio recount all but certain

    3rd-party candidates raise enough cash to demand another tally of state's votes

    Posted: November 15, 2004
    5:00 p.m. Eastern

    © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
    Two third-party presidential candidates say they've raised enough money to file for an official recount of the vote in Ohio, which President Bush won on Nov. 2 and where some observers claim there were irregularities and fraud in the election.

    Green Party candidate David Cobb announced today that the $113,600 needed to file for a recount had been raised, "with the vast majority in the $10-$50 range," said his media director, Blair Bobier. The fund-raising effort began on Thursday.


    "Thanks to the thousands of people who have contributed to this effort, we can say with certainty that there will be a recount in Ohio," Cobb said in a statement.

    The Green Party has been working with the Libertarian Party – both parties were on the ballot in Ohio – in securing a recount. Both Cobb and Libertarian Michael Badnarik say they've demanded that Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican who co-chaired this year's Bush campaign in Ohio, recuse himself from the recount process.

    Said Bobier: "The Ohio presidential election was marred by numerous press and independent reports of mis-marked and discarded ballots, problems with electronic voting machines and the targeted disenfranchisement of African-American voters."

    The Ohio vote will be certified on Dec. 3 at the latest, Bobier told WND. He says the candidates can file for the recount once the vote is certified.

    The Electoral College votes on Dec. 13, so it is unclear whether or not a recount would be completed by then.

    "But," commented Jonathan Turley, a professor of constitutional law at George Washington University," those votes are not opened by Congress until Jan. 6. So there is still time to challenge the results in Ohio. …"

    A demand for a recount in Ohio can only be filed by a presidential candidate who was either a certified write-in candidate or on the ballot in that state.

    Bush won Ohio by a vote of 2,796,147 to John Kerry's 2,659,664. Despite reports of irregularities and outstanding provisional ballots, Kerry conceded Ohio and the election on Nov. 3.

    Badnarik received 14,331 votes in Ohio and Cobb, as a write-in candidate, received 24 votes.

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41464
     
  2. TarpleyG

    TarpleyG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I guess these folks haven't heard that the election was over a couple of weeks ago.

    Greg
     
  3. Jeff Timm

    Jeff Timm Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    933
    Location:
    St. Augustine, FL
    As a long time resident of Cuyahoga County, I can only surmise an honest vote count will cost the Democrats 150,000 votes or more.

    Geoff
    Who is disgusted. :fire:
     
  4. reagansquad

    reagansquad Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    386
    The delay in asking for the recount is due to the fact that the 3rd party candidates had to raise $150k. The Green party was the first to come up with the money.

    There have been over 48 possible cases of voter fraud in Ohio and Florida alone with the VAST majority favoring President Bush. Like it or not, this election is far from over.
     
  5. Kaylee

    Kaylee Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,749
    Location:
    The Last Homely House
    Dude, it's done. Over. Fini. Elvis has left the building.

    Even if someone came along and managed to prove that every frickin' Bush vote in the state was personally stuck in the ballot box by Karl Rove, no one is gonna want to go through 2000 again.



    Thank God.
     
  6. Neva

    Neva Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    35
    Location:
    MI
    http://cpltrainer.com/election/election.html
     
  7. Tag

    Tag Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    599
    Location:
    Marquette, Michigan
    IMO a recount will only lead to Bush winning by more votes. Kerry already folded, it's over.
     
  8. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    In business and personal life I have always run on gut feelings, and they have served me well. In politics and world events I have the same feelings and they also are generally right. Most recently I canned an editorial piece I was doing on whether Arafat was poisoned. Only to see it pop up a few days later, again and again. I thought my piece was just too tin-hat...

    Well, don the aluminum, boys, cause I have a bad feeling we may YET see President-Elect John F'in Kerry...And God help us if I am right.
     
  9. Headless Thompson Gunner

    Headless Thompson Gunner Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,255
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Folks, this election is OVER. Bush won. No recount will change that.

    Recounts nearly always agree with the initial counts to within about 0.25% to 0.5%. I'v never heard of an election where two counts disagreed by even 1%. A difference of more than 2%, I would guess, is statistically impossible.

    Bush won Ohio by 2.490%. That margin is WELL beyond the reach of any recount. The Kerry people would have to "find" more than 136,483 votes to change the results. That's a HUGE number of votes.

    Consider it this way: Assuming that paper ballots are the same thickness as the ream of printer paper I have on hand, John Kerry would need to find a stack of ballots 51 feet tall in order to overcome Bush's lead. Does anyone really think that's possible?
     
  10. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Kerry doesn't need to find 136,000 Kerry votes. Kerry only needs to have find enough "fraud" to toss some sizeable percentage of that and then find enough Kerry votes to make up the difference. Still unlikely, I admit, but when you're willing to use fraud to claim fraud, all while using fraud to make your own votes, it becomes much more easy...
     
  11. Neva

    Neva Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    35
    Location:
    MI
    And that's an average of about 1550 votes per county, every county... and that's if not one of the Kerry votes is turned around.... given that Mr. Kerry has conceded, the point is moot, anyway....
     
  12. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    The only thing I will argue with is your last line. A concession literally means nothing legally. If someone can manufacture the votes, however they may do it, then that concession is the only thing moot. But, like I said, I hope to hell I am utterly wrong regarding those votes.
     
  13. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Folks, this recount is necessary.

    Here's why:

    We won't survive as a nation if each side that loses presumes that they lost via cheating. Too many of the electronic voting systems in use today are *literally* cheat-friendly. Diebold's crap is the best documented offender so far but major questions also surround ES&S, Sequoia and others...it's just that we've got the actual Diebold code to kick around and b'Gawd is it bad. See also:

    http://www.equalccw.com/deandemo.html

    I doubt we'll find enough BS to overturn the election although if we do, I think it'll be in Florida, not Ohio. I'm worried about the vote patterns in the Diebold "optical scan" counties...it looks like somebody went "hey, we can booger the results whatever way we want, if somebody catches wise, oh well, this crappy software hides it's tracks REAL well and since everybody thinks optical scan is "safer" because there's a paper trail, who would bother to check?".

    I think we WILL find some fraud. Sorry, it's just TOO TEMPTING, okay? Not enough to make anybody say "Yes, President Kerry?" in the White House lunch room but enough to force a serious re-think of the voting processes currently in use.

    I mean...OK, take one example: the Diebold central vote-tally software ("GEMS") allows individual login names and then the audit trail tracks what each username does. Sounds great, right? 'Cept that on election night, you've got data flooding in constantly, from modems, memory cards, big optical-scan hoppers for the absentee ballots, it's a madhouse. And to switch usernames, you'd have to SHUT DOWN the tabulator software and re-start it under the new login.

    Well nobody does that of course. So everybody just operates under the "ADMIN" username.

    Swear to God. And let's not even start with how the audit log can be edited by a goddamn chimpanzee munchin' on Menthos when he gets it right. Literally.

    Somebody really did try and hack the vote in Volusia County FL in 2000. They were incompetent; they copied a memory card for a precinct's worth of data where there were 900-something voters so that it read 16,022 negative votes for Gore, 4,000+ for Bush :scrutiny:. Sure, somebody caught that, but they didn't catch the perp(s). Same idiots were probably running around off-leash in that county THIS year and maybe they took some Visual Basic scripting classes in the last four years in which case God help us, they had direct control over the MS-Access runtime edition found in the GEMS box and could do *anything* with less than 20k of code stashed somewhere in a %$#%@#^%$ TEXT FILE.

    Is this making sense yet?

    We have to KNOW what happened. Period.

    Anybody here think I feel that way because I'm a closet Kerryite?

    :scrutiny:
     
  14. hubel458

    hubel458 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    657
    Location:
    Brinton,Mich.
    A recount will only add to the size-----of the lead..Ed

    [​IMG]
     
  15. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    The above explains why I have a bad feeling about this... Like I said, it ain't about how many sKerry votes sKerry can find, it's about how many Shrub votes sKerry can get tossed.
     
  16. one45auto

    one45auto Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,196
    Location:
    Somewhere out there
    You can take off your tin-foil hat. The fat lady has sung, and she doesn't like to give encores.

    Believe me, if Kerry and company had thought there was any chance - however slim, of challenging enough votes to win they would never have conceded, especially with a trial lawyer on the ticket.
     
  17. Neva

    Neva Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    35
    Location:
    MI
    And go through this crap again?

    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...tic' as appeal heads to Florida Supreme Court


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...r-elect Hillary Clinton heads to Capitol Hill


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...ml">Gore still sees '50-50' chance of victory


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...gress, lawmakers return for lame-duck session


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...suits may be Gore's best hope for Florida win


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...awmakers introduce voting system reform bills


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...">Wolf Blitzer gauges the presidential battle


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...ead to Capitol Hill as court battles continue


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL... talks with reporters outside the White House


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...red to hire conservative secretary of defense


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...nomic slowdown doesn't mean recession ... yet


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH...Bush doing well after hip replacement surgery


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL... Clark on encouraged, energized Bush campaign


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...itors challenges before federal appeals court


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/12...>Florida absentee ballot case could help Gore


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...om: Last hope for Gore may be 1 word: 'Doubt'


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...rk Potter on the legal maneuvering in Florida


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...nior senator gets one more candle on the cake


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...neman seen likely as US agriculture secretary


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...uctantly' appear for interview by prosecutors


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...points Jean Carnahan to husband's Senate seat


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL...aker raises possibility of no special session


    http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOL....html">Iowa results: Gore wins by 4,144 votes

    No, this never-ending whining over what this side or that side feels is the same old-same old.
     
  18. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    If we don't fix this now and get rid of these crapola machines, we're going to face this EVERY TIME.

    By about round four, the whole country will come completely unglued.

    Dammit folks, we had ELECTION VIOLENCE this year. We can campaign headquarters buildings on each side raided, vandalized, computers stolen. That didn't used to happen!

    It has to end. Period. And yes, this year and if means FL2000 all over again, so be it.
     
  19. hubel458

    hubel458 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    657
    Location:
    Brinton,Mich.
    Jim is right....The recount process is just part of the election law
    as a whole and our country won't go wrong by following it....They will
    do the whole state, not pick and choose where they think they can gain like the Dems did in FL...Ed.
     
  20. Coronach

    Coronach Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,109
    DING DING DING!

    Until something new has developed, I'll stand by this. We're seeing a lot of "abnormalities" because, frankly, these past few elections are the first ones that have been under the post '00 media microscope, in reference to the actual counting. Combine that with the new (possibly sub-optimal, certainly immature) voting machine technology that has been pressed into service since the '00 Florida debacle, and I'm surprised that there there has not been more of an outcry. But I think much of it is just same old, same old.

    But unless there is some new revelation that will change a lot of votes, I cannot help but note that the guy running the race has even said that there is no way to win...and his staff is not exactly ill-prepared to examine the issues in question.

    Mike
     
  21. Headless Thompson Gunner

    Headless Thompson Gunner Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,255
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Statistically, there will always be some degree of error whenever you try to count anything this large. Any time you try to get 100 million people to do something, there will be errors and abnormalities. The question is whether or not that degree of error is enough to change the outcome. The margins are simply too big this time around. Whatever faults our voting systems have, they're at least good enough that we can becertain that we know the true and correct results this time around.

    Our voting systems in the past were too good for there to be systematic error large enough to change the election results this time. If what Jim March claims is true, then perhaps the past performances are no longer indicative of current capabilities. Perhaps the new voting equipment isn't as resistant to error as the old stuff was.

    If so, this should be investigated thoroughly. Any guilty parties should be strung up by the toenails. If that were the purpose of these recounts I'd supprt them fully. But it appears that these recounts are simply a bunch politically motivated BS.
     
  22. Malone LaVeigh

    Malone LaVeigh Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,136
    Location:
    Washed out of Four-dollar Bayou. Now I'm... somewh
    I haven't wanted to touch this subject, because everyone here knows how I feel about Bush. But I got this the other day by e-mail from a guy that was in Ohio for the election. I'm going to cut-n-paste a small part of it, but you can see the rest at the link. This stuff is important if the country is going to function anything like it's supposed to. And I can't say I think too highly of those that seem to be saying it might be a little inconvienient to open the can of worms. This is your country, fer cryin out loud...

    Note: This entire message is posted online at http://www.WantToKnow.info/electionsproblems

    Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Board of Elections Website - 29 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, reported votes cast above the number of registered voters - 93,136 extra votes total. And the numbers are on the official Cuyahoga County Board of Elections website below. To verify the discrepancies, first look at the number of registered voters for the below precincts, then scroll down to the number of ballots cast for the precinct. In particular, compare the numbers for the precincts listed below.

    http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/currentresults1.htm

    Bay Village - 13,710 registered voters / 18,663 ballots cast
    Beachwood - 9,943 registered voters / 13,939 ballots cast
    Bedford - 9,942 registered voters / 14,465 ballots cast
    Bedford Heights - 8,142 registered voters / 13,512 ballots cast
    Brooklyn - 8,016 registered voters / 12,303 ballots cast
    Brooklyn Heights - 1,144 registered voters / 1,869 ballots cast
    Chagrin Falls Village - 3,557 registered voters / 4,860 ballots cast
    Cuyahoga Heights - 570 registered voters / 1,382 ballots cast
    Fairview Park - 13,342 registered voters / 18,472 ballots cast
    Highland Hills Village - 760 registered voters / 8,822 ballots cast
    Independence - 5,735 registered voters / 6,226 ballots cast
    Mayfield Village - 2,764 registered voters / 3,145 ballots cast
    Middleburg Heights - 12,173 registered voters / 14,854 ballots cast
    Moreland Hills Village - 2,990 registered voters / 4,616 ballots cast
    North Olmstead - 25,794 registered voters / 25,887 ballots cast
    Olmstead Falls - 6,538 registered voters / 7,328 ballots cast
    Pepper Pike - 5,131 registered voters / 6,479 ballots cast
    Rocky River - 16,600 registered voters / 20,070 ballots cast
    Solon (WD6) - 2,292 registered voters / 4,300 ballots cast
    South Euclid - 16,902 registered voters / 16,917 ballots cast
    Strongsville (WD3) - 7,806 registered voters / 12,108 ballots cast
    University Heights - 10,072 registered voters / 11,982 ballots cast
    Valley View Village - 1,787 registered voters / 3,409 ballots cast
    Warrensville Heights - 10,562 registered voters / 15,039 ballots cast
    Woodmere Village - 558 registered voters / 8,854 ballots cast
    Bedford (CSD) - 22,777 registered voters / 27,856 ballots cast
    Independence (LSD) - 5,735 registered voters / 6,226 ballots cast
    Orange (CSD) - 11,640 registered voters / 22,931 ballots cast
    Warrensville (CSD) - 12,218 registered voters / 15,822 ballots cast



    Michigan City News-Dispatch - In LaPorte County, Indiana, a Democratic stronghold, electronic voting machines decided that each precinct only had 300 voters. "At about 7 p.m. Tuesday," according to this report, "it was noticed that the first two or three printouts from individual precinct reports all listed an identical number of voters. Each precinct was listed as having 300 registered voters. That means the total number of voters for the county would be 22,200, although there are more than 79,000 registered voters."

    http://www.wanttoknow.info/041104newsdispatch (article became pay for view shortly after elections)
     
  23. Destructo6

    Destructo6 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,997
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    There are many others with totals going the opposite direction:
    • REGISTERED VOTERS - CLEVELAND HEIGHTS 38840
      BALLOTS CAST CLEVELAND HEIGHTS 29885

      REGISTERED VOTERS - WESTLAKE 25627
      BALLOTS CAST WESTLAKE 25173

      REGISTERED VOTERS - LAKEWOOD 41983
      BALLOTS CAST LAKEWOOD 28531
    Those taken more or less at random.

    Be sure to also note:
    That's not exactly the final word, is it?
     
  24. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    The part of the process that blackboxvoting.org is involved in began *months* ago. I should know, I helped write the public records requests.

    Which started going in the mail on election day all right - before the polls even closed.

    Were we interested in a "pro-Kerry recount", or were we checking the dang machines?

    :scrutiny:
     
  25. jsalcedo

    jsalcedo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,683
    It doesn't sound like the Democrats are screaming for a recount.

    Any recount and investigation into voter fraud will expose the democrat's crooked tactics and severly weaken and embarass the party.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page