2004 Ohio election results (Bush theft number 2)

[Akrasia]

The chief election official in Ohio, secretary of state Jennifer Brunner, announced the results of a major study into Ohio's voting system and the conclusions were that there were 'critical security failures' in the voting machines used to 'elect' G W Bush' in 2004.

All of the 5 voting systems used in Ohio have “critical security failures” that make them vulnerable to tampering and should be replaced with paper ballots counted at a central location, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner concluded after a top-to-bottom review of the systems.

The findings, released this morning, apply both to the electronic touch-screen machines used in 57 of Ohio’s 88 counties as well as the systems using paper ballots counted in precincts.

http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/co ... /vote.html

Voting systems were so vulnerable to manipulation that anyone with a blackberry PDA with wireless enabled could remotely alter the voting results on some machines. There were hundreds of reports of people saying they pressed Kerry on the electronic voting machines, and saw Bushs name light up. This vote flipping was exactly the kind of operation that could be performed using a PDA

Exit polls all across the U.S. showed discrepancies, but nowhere was this so blatant as in Ohio, where in one precinct, exit polls predicted a 67% victory for Kerry, but the official result gave him only 38%. Statistically, the chance of such a discrepancy happening by chance would be around 1 in 3 billion.

In the vast majority of cases where the exit polls were different from the final result, the discrepancies were always in Bush's favour. That is not a statistical failure, it is a strong indication of widespread voter fraud.

Why was Ohio so much worse than other U.S. states? Well, it might have something to do with who was running the election in that state. Kenneth Blackwell, one of the director of Bush's re-election campaign

The most extensive investigation of what happened in Ohio was conducted by Rep. John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.(52) Frustrated by his party's failure to follow up on the widespread evidence of voter intimidation and fraud, Conyers and the committee's minority staff held public hearings in Ohio, where they looked into more than 50,000 complaints from voters.(53) In January 2005, Conyers issued a detailed report that outlined ''massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio.
The problems, the report concludes, were ''caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... ion_stolen
So we have motive, We have opportunity, we have widespread evidence of voter fraud.

The 2004 U.S. presidential election was stolen.

There is another election due in 2008.

How can we be sure that this election won't be stolen too?

[seabhcan]

Greg Palast is the reporter who uncovered most of this material - he thinks the 2008 election has already been stolen.

[NeilW]

in one precinct, exit polls predicted a 67% victory for Kerry, but the official result gave him only 38%. Statistically, the chance of such a discrepancy happening by chance would be around 1 in 3 billion.

Can you go through how you worked that statistic out for us?

[seabhcan]

in one precinct, exit polls predicted a 67% victory for Kerry, but the official result gave him only 38%. Statistically, the chance of such a discrepancy happening by chance would be around 1 in 3 billion.

Can you go through how you worked that statistic out for us?

Exit polls are a widely used test for voter fraud. When the UN monitors elections this is what they do - if the exit polls differ to much from the official count, they cry foul.

[NeilW]

in one precinct, exit polls predicted a 67% victory for Kerry, but the official result gave him only 38%. Statistically, the chance of such a discrepancy happening by chance would be around 1 in 3 billion.

Can you go through how you worked that statistic out for us?

Exit polls are a widely used test for voter fraud. When the UN monitors elections this is what they do - if the exit polls differ to much from the official count, they cry foul.

I was asking how the 1 in 3 billion figure was arrived at.

[seabhcan]

in one precinct, exit polls predicted a 67% victory for Kerry, but the official result gave him only 38%. Statistically, the chance of such a discrepancy happening by chance would be around 1 in 3 billion.

Can you go through how you worked that statistic out for us?

Exit polls are a widely used test for voter fraud. When the UN monitors elections this is what they do - if the exit polls differ to much from the official count, they cry foul.

I was asking how the 1 in 3 billion figure was arrived at.

Its all here I believe: http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/OH/ ... s-2004.pdf

[Defeated Romanticist]

Greg Palast is the reporter who uncovered most of this material - he thinks the 2008 election has already been stolen.

Could you furnish more details one this please.

The reason the Democrats nominated and didn't kick up a fuss about Kerry was they thought that if they ran some non-controvertial nobody they could win on Bush hate alone. They may have ultimately right, but given the margin of the win for Bush in the popular vote I'm not surprised they didn't fight for the win. I've even heard it posited the Democrats such as Hillary wanted Kerry to lose because 2008 was her only chance and that would be gone if he won in '04. The Republicans are doing the same this time with Hillary(I accidently typed Hitler, hell of a Freudian slip!), running someone they don't really want because they think he can win on Hillary hate.

[seabhcan]

Greg Palast's Website

[Akrasia]

I didn't work it out, some statistician did.
Its taken from this report http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/OH/ ... s-2004.pdf

· 6% of Ohio’s precincts each have virtually zero chance (less than one in 15,000) of occurring
due to sampling error, given their Kerry official vote count.2 Even if the “within precinct
discrepancy” (WPD) is adjusted for all the precincts to remove any possible effect due to Kerry
voters completing more exit polls, the probability of obtaining Ohio’s exit poll discrepancies are
virtually impossible.3
· Over 40% of Ohio’s polled precincts have discrepancies having less than a 5% chance of
occurring, given the official vote counts.4 The expected number of such precincts in a sample of
49 precincts would be five such precincts, not the 20 found.
· Ohio's exit poll discrepancies, when plotted against precinct exit poll share show a pattern that is
consistent with vote miscounts that benefited Bush, and
· The pattern of Ohio's exit poll discrepancies cannot be explained by random sampling error or
partisan exit poll completion rate differences.
Without fair and accurate democratic elections, America is not a democracy.

Are you suggesting that a discrepancy of 31% between the exit poll and the official result is within a normal or acceptable range?

If the discrepancies were on both sides then a case could be made that the pollsters were doing something wrong, but in almost every single instance, the polls gave Kerry more votes than the official tally

[Destiny's Soldier]

Sometime back in July or August I was writing about vote fraud in Ohio.

Where you have exit polls differing from the actual poll by more that 0.3 % you have vote fraud.

RTE got it spot on for our Election but Ohio couldnt. It's somehow far more difficult and complex according to some.

Google Clinton Curtis on vote fraud in Flordia. He testified that Tom Feeney (running mate to Jeb Bush) asked him to rig the programme on the Diebolt voting machine the skew the vote.

It would be non traceable.