Wisconsin "Found" Votes

42 posts / 0 new

Thom,

Every time I've voted, I come in, show ID, and sign the register that I have come to vote.

If the Waukesha Election Board found all these extra votes, would it not be easy to check to see if the machine counted more votes than people came in to vote.... now that would be a big problem, wouldn't it?

What would be the possible punishment for a Election Board official who would do this?

Thanks,

Lee

Fort Lauderdale

larnette's picture
larnette
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

C'mon, you're from Florida. They get elected to Congress.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

You are not required to show photo ID here but you do have your registration verified and you are checked off as you walk in the door and this is typically done on hardcopy.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

Now what's happened? Is there some evidence that those votes are not legitimate?

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Shouldn't we be finding out how to remove this person from her job? She unquestionably has to go. This person cannot be allowed to stay on. It is very clear given her past 3 or 4 elections that she is either a criminal or incompetent or both. anywhich way, she's gotta go.

Her position should not be an elected official. I think there needs to be a state elections board that can appoint someone to each county to oversee this. Clearly, an elected official with such ties cannot be allowed to do this. It's too important.

Also, can someone do more digging on what was in that last budget bill. All I was able to see was the bickering, and that was it.

no to fascism's picture
no to fascism
Joined:
Feb. 18, 2011 4:27 pm
Quote willat:

Now what's happened? Is there some evidence that those votes are not legitimate?

I think that the suspicion comes from other factors as a recount or other investigation in regards to fruad have not been conducted yet.

1. She is a republican who was involved with Walker's campaign as I understand it.

2. The votes were "found" in one of the most conservative districts in the state.

3. They were "found" only after the tallies were in and revealed that Kloppenburg had won.

4. Almost the precise number needed to avoid an automatic recount were found.

There is just a lot of coincidental aspects to the situation that lead people to believe it is simply too good (or bad) to be true. It also doesn't help that we know Koch bros are medling here and that we use electronic voting machines.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

The same number of votes that the City of Brookfield clerk gave to Nicklaus on election eve and subsequently "found" by her two days later were also posted on the city's website that same night. A reporter from The Brookfield Patch, a "hyper-local" news website owned by Huffington/AOL, received the same numbers from The Brookfield City Clerk and reported them on election eve. http://brookfield-wi.patch.com/articles/brookfield-gives-prosser-nearly-.... The votes in question were the unofficial canvassing results and final offical numbers support those reported by Brookfield on election eve.

Nicklaus sounds incompetent. At clerking, not at stealing elections.

I don't think fraud is a realistic accusation in this case. I understand how the too good to be true aspect of the number is off putting. I guess it could have been a really clever diabolical psyops kind of thing- but incompetence seems more likely.

Also, can someone do more digging on what was in that last budget bill.

http://www.wisconsinrapidstribune.com/article/20110224/WRT0101/110224063...

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

My wife and I were wondering why she would hide these votes if they were going to give Prosser the edge. The only thing I could think of is she had the numbers somehow cooked. This situation is too weird. You just don't misplace one of the largest voting counties in the state. This woman has a long history with Prosser and the republican party and she specifically denied the updating her voting system. Sometimes if it walk and quacks like a duck....

collecticon's picture
collecticon
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2011 12:17 pm

I grew up near Chicago. There were always dead people voting there.

collecticon's picture
collecticon
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2011 12:17 pm

Wisconsin County Clerk said she didn't save the tally. She also said she used the off the shelf Access Database. It saves automatically. Many precincts across the state were said to have run short of ballots with the much higher than anticipated turnout.Is it just me or does any one think it is odd that, considering the importance and attention given this judicial race and its ties with Walker, that Wisconsin would have a larger than normal voter turn out for this election. Now I am reading that Waukesha turn out was equal to past spring elections. Was there a larger than normal turn out in this election and why did Waukesha show average turn out in comparison with past spring elections? I would be curious to see if Waukesha is consistent with the rest of the state in this regard.

islandmu's picture
islandmu
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote ah2:
Quote willat:

Now what's happened? Is there some evidence that those votes are not legitimate?

I think that the suspicion comes from other factors as a recount or other investigation in regards to fruad have not been conducted yet.

1. She is a republican who was involved with Walker's campaign as I understand it.

2. The votes were "found" in one of the most conservative districts in the state.

3. They were "found" only after the tallies were in and revealed that Kloppenburg had won.

4. Almost the precise number needed to avoid an automatic recount were found.

There is just a lot of coincidental aspects to the situation that lead people to believe it is simply too good (or bad) to be true. It also doesn't help that we know Koch bros are medling here and that we use electronic voting machines.

So, in other words, there is no evidence that there was any kind of fraud, faked votes, rigged machines, or made up votes. Everything I've read shows it was nothing but a mistake, by a republican that almost gave an election to a democrat. The bigger question is how did this woman get even close, she was way behind. There should be an investigation into areas that she won. I wouldn't be surprised if she won areas with more than a 100% turnout, which would be nothing new for a democrat.

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote willat:
Quote ah2:
Quote willat:

Now what's happened? Is there some evidence that those votes are not legitimate?

I think that the suspicion comes from other factors as a recount or other investigation in regards to fruad have not been conducted yet.

1. She is a republican who was involved with Walker's campaign as I understand it.

2. The votes were "found" in one of the most conservative districts in the state.

3. They were "found" only after the tallies were in and revealed that Kloppenburg had won.

4. Almost the precise number needed to avoid an automatic recount were found.

There is just a lot of coincidental aspects to the situation that lead people to believe it is simply too good (or bad) to be true. It also doesn't help that we know Koch bros are medling here and that we use electronic voting machines.

So, in other words, there is no evidence that there was any kind of fraud, faked votes, rigged machines, or made up votes. Everything I've read shows it was nothing but a mistake, by a republican that almost gave an election to a democrat. The bigger question is how did this woman get even close, she was way behind. There should be an investigation into areas that she won. I wouldn't be surprised if she won areas with more than a 100% turnout, which would be nothing new for a democrat.

Explain to me how you are supposed to produce evidence PRIOR to an investigation. The fact that these votes were first misreported and then turned the election in favor of the losing candidate is enough for people to look into it. That's it. The investigation is to search for evidence. You can't magically materialize it without looking for it first.

That said, there will most likely be a recount of the entire state.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

You know, maybe she did it just to zing the left, that would be great! Kloppenbagger (whatever her name is) declares herself to be the winner in a very tight race, and ooops! You lose. Like we need more inexperienced lefties in government!

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

She has a very dirty record, is highly ideological on the culture war and the whole idea should be in a zany comedy about corrupt politics.

The "winner" in this close election declares the win, and the recount begins. Believe me, had Prosser won by 5 votes, he would have called himself the winner. Your post is ignorant of both fact and history.

Compared to the "experienced" Righties we have had, I would choose boy scouts and train them because they could do no worse. "Inexperienced lefties in government" indeed! What a hoot!

The Right has a history of stolen elections using computers and electronic machines. The Left does not. Don't go back to JFK. We are talking about big time frauds in Florida and Ohio, so admit that there is some smelly cheese in this Wisconsin backroom.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

When does the investigation start? Better yet, who is doing it and who will ajudicate the findings?

garyej's picture
garyej
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Given the consistency between what Brookfield reported to the press and on its website on election eve and the votes that were tardy its unlikely that much of an investigation will be forthcoming. this dog won't hunt.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

New information out from yesterday. The Democratic observer, Ramona Kitzinger, made a statement on Monday to clarify her position as she felt she had been misrepresented by the media.

"I am 80 years old and I don�t understand anything about computers. I don�t know where the numbers Kathy was showing me ultimately came from, but they seemed to add up. I am still very, very confused about why the canvass was finalized before I was informed of the Brookfield error and it wasn�t even until the press conference was happening that I learned it was this enormous mistake that could swing the whole election."

Full statement:

http://www.orchidforchange.com/parties/waukeshadems.com/ht/display/ArticleDetails/i/1343504

Is that enough of a red flag for an investigation willat? I just want to make sure that the state of Wisconsin has your permission before we make sure our democratic process hasn't been compromised.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

Bring it on. This woman confesses to be ignorant about computers, good choice for an observer.

This is an old script from the left. They can't lose an election, it must have been stolen. Remember 2006, when they took over Congress. Oh, they were going to hold hearings and investigations to get to the bottom of all the goings on in the White House. The Times had story after story, boy this was serious!

After hundreds of investigations, there was nothing, But no big stories in the Times about that, nope, not covering that story. Just the seriousness of the charges, that's what's really important.

But, they are not paying much attention to this race, since there is not much there. They'll have some investigation, and then no story about how stupid it was.

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Willat, you are repeating lies. After Florida, the press finally admitted that had all the votes been counted, Gore would have won. Conclusive report, no fudging. Someone may have it archived, but it was a follow up story that got little lip service on the TV. We don't investigate Republican crimes.

The computer trails in Ohio were stinky, and the company processing the data ran Republican campaigns. Lots of data, but Kerry was faced with a "war President" and caved.

The machines are terrible and fraud has been far too common in their use. It is part of the voter exclusion tactics of the Right. There is almost no "voter fraud" involving people who are not eligible to vote. There is a huge orchestration of voter roles to dump legitimate Democratic registrants along with numerous false registration programs where Democratic registrations are lost.

This is no neutral public servant doing this. This is a rabid partisan with a record of fudging the votes in favor of her ideology. The reported totals are "just enough" to make the opponent pay for the recount. How convenient, says the Church Lady. Stinky Cheese.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote DRC:

Willat, you are repeating lies. After Florida, the press finally admitted that had all the votes been counted, Gore would have won. Conclusive report, no fudging. Someone may have it archived, but it was a follow up story that got little lip service on the TV. We don't investigate Republican crimes.

The computer trails in Ohio were stinky, and the company processing the data ran Republican campaigns. Lots of data, but Kerry was faced with a "war President" and caved.

The machines are terrible and fraud has been far too common in their use. It is part of the voter exclusion tactics of the Right. There is almost no "voter fraud" involving people who are not eligible to vote. There is a huge orchestration of voter roles to dump legitimate Democratic registrants along with numerous false registration programs where Democratic registrations are lost.

This is no neutral public servant doing this. This is a rabid partisan with a record of fudging the votes in favor of her ideology. The reported totals are "just enough" to make the opponent pay for the recount. How convenient, says the Church Lady. Stinky Cheese.

News organizations began their own counts of the disputed ballots, once they became public records, in an attempt to put the issue to rest and to find out, in the words of the Miami Herald, "What went wrong." Most found that Gore would not have overcome his vote deficit, even with the most liberal of standards for counting partially-marked ballots.

http://www.usconstitution.net/elec2000.html#g

Looks like you may be the one "repeating lies". You should drop that attitude about the left being all above reproach on elections. Bush won fair and square, by the rules, and that really gets under the left's skin, for more than a decade now! It was aparent to me that Gore lost the following morning.

Seems like anytime the left loses an election, there must something "stinky" about. What about last November, was that all rigged too?

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote DRC:

Willat, you are repeating lies. After Florida, the press finally admitted that had all the votes been counted, Gore would have won. Conclusive report, no fudging. Someone may have it archived, but it was a follow up story that got little lip service on the TV. We don't investigate Republican crimes..

WOW.. that is delusional.

There was NO option available to Gore or the Florida Courts that would have helped Gore win. Only a statewide recount would have help Gore. Gore NEVER requested a Statewide and the Courts never offered one. There was NO WAY Gore would have won Florida.

Merrilin's picture
Merrilin
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2011 10:21 am

Do you want to talk about who got the most votes or how the process was screwed? And who screwed it and why it could not get unscrewed and then the Supremes screwed us big?

I am not a bit delusional about the assault on democracy and the effing use of machines that cannot be audited correctly. Those who sold this pile of crap to us are not people of integrity, not lovers of democracy and respecters of their fellow citizens. They lie, cheat, kill and do whatever in the certainty of their convictions. I just want them to be convicted for it.

But, in a pathologically dysfunctional phony democracy, expectations of law and order are only depressants. Realism tells you not to buy the lie even if you have to live with it. That's all. Don't buy the spin in place of what really matters. The reasons Gore could never have "won" the votes is that the Empire was not going to let him win. It really is that simple. The alignment of the powers does not even require conscious conspiracy. It just fits their collective agenda.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote DRC:

Do you want to talk about who got the most votes or how the process was screwed? And who screwed it and why it could not get unscrewed and then the Supremes screwed us big?

I want you to finally accept that Gore lost and nothing Gore could have done was going to change that.
The "empire" had nothing to do with Gore's loss. Gore had the option to request a Statewide recount and instead choose a few counties. The courts could have requested a Statewide recount but that wasn't what Gore wanted. Gore lost because he's an idiot and Floridians don't know how to use a ballot. Once you come to terms with that, your life will be much better.

All the Supremes did was Put Gore out of his misery

Merrilin's picture
Merrilin
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2011 10:21 am
Quote DRC:

The reasons Gore could never have "won" the votes is that the Empire was not going to let him win. It really is that simple. The alignment of the powers does not even require conscious conspiracy. It just fits their collective agenda.

Just that simple! Why bother with the election even? I hate to be the one to point this out (the empire might get me!), but the "empire" is doing a really crappy job, as we have a democrat in the WH now, and there have been others! It must be the rebel alliance .

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

willat, no matter what you say, you are not going to convince anyone here that checking to make sure an election was counted accurately is ever a bad idea.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm
Quote ah2:

willat, no matter what you say, you are not going to convince anyone here that checking to make sure an election was counted accurately is ever a bad idea.

You better get caught up on current events, we are way past counting. We are talking about empires making elections coming out how they want them to. Well, once in a while.

You forgot something, it's not just counting, it's following the rules.

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Merrilin:
Quote DRC:

Willat, you are repeating lies. After Florida, the press finally admitted that had all the votes been counted, Gore would have won. Conclusive report, no fudging. Someone may have it archived, but it was a follow up story that got little lip service on the TV. We don't investigate Republican crimes..

WOW.. that is delusional.

There was NO option available to Gore or the Florida Courts that would have helped Gore win. Only a statewide recount would have help Gore. Gore NEVER requested a Statewide and the Courts never offered one. There was NO WAY Gore would have won Florida.

Is this the definition of contradiction?

"There was NO option available to Gore or the Florida Courts that would have helped Gore win. Only a statewide recount would have help Gore."

It was found that a recount of the counties in question would not have helped Gore that is true but a full recount would have made him president.

We must count every vote! By hand! On paper! Every Election.

MA'AT's picture
MA'AT
Joined:
Jul. 6, 2010 5:45 pm

I think this picture of out-of-state Republican operatives disrupting the Florida 2000 recounts says it all (scroll to item 10.)

LeMoyne's picture
LeMoyne
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

If Republicans keep "finding" lost votes that flip election results in their favor, at some point the angry villagers are going to find their pitchforks, torches and a stout length of rope...

DB

DancingBear's picture
DancingBear
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Early, & often

Yammerman
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote MA'AT:

Is this the definition of contradiction?

"There was NO option available to Gore or the Florida Courts that would have helped Gore win. Only a statewide recount would have help Gore."

It was found that a recount of the counties in question would not have helped Gore that is true but a full recount would have made him president.

We must count every vote! By hand! On paper! Every Election.

Hindsight is wonderful. If only Gore had thought a statewide recount would have benefitted him he could have asked for it. In no other senerio or possible outcome does Gore Win. Gore lost becuase he choose poorly. hat is not Bush's fault, Supreme Courts fault or Florida's fault

Merrilin's picture
Merrilin
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2011 10:21 am
Quote DancingBear:

If Republicans keep "finding" lost votes that flip election results in their favor, at some point the angry villagers are going to find their pitchforks, torches and a stout length of rope...

DB

Funny, the last time an election changed because of "found" votes. Was the 2004 Washington State governor race. Except in that Race they had to keep finding them through 3 recounts for the Democrat governor to win.

Merrilin's picture
Merrilin
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2011 10:21 am
Quote Merrilin:
Quote DancingBear:

If Republicans keep "finding" lost votes that flip election results in their favor, at some point the angry villagers are going to find their pitchforks, torches and a stout length of rope...

DB

Funny, the last time an election changed because of "found" votes. Was the 2004 Washington State governor race. Except in that Race they had to keep finding them through 3 recounts for the Democrat governor to win.

Don't forget that clown Al Franken.

willat's picture
willat
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote willat:
Quote Merrilin:
Quote DancingBear:

If Republicans keep "finding" lost votes that flip election results in their favor, at some point the angry villagers are going to find their pitchforks, torches and a stout length of rope...

DB

Funny, the last time an election changed because of "found" votes. Was the 2004 Washington State governor race. Except in that Race they had to keep finding them through 3 recounts for the Democrat governor to win.

Don't forget that clown Al Franken.

Yes, lets not forget Al Franken. The elctoral boards had thrown out some absentee ballots that would have swung the election to Franken which is why Coleman won in the initial count. When the "error" was discovered and all the legal ballots counted, Franken won. Coleman filed a legal challenge and it was summarily rejected by a special judge commission and the Minnesota Supreme Court.

God it sucks when democracy works and everyone's vote counts. When that happens, Democrats win.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

Oh and Washington State Governor election? Same damn thing. You had people throwing out valid absentee ballots.

King County Council Chairman Larry Phillips was at a Democratic Party office in Seattle on Sunday December 12, reviewing a list of voters whose absentee votes had been rejected due to signature problems, when to his surprise he found his own name listed. Phillips said he was certain he had filled out and signed his ballot correctly, and asked the county election officials to investigate the discrepancy. They discovered that Phillips' signature had somehow failed to be scanned into the election computer system after he submitted his request for an absentee ballot. Election workers claimed that they had received Phillips' absentee ballot in the mail, but they could not find his signature in the computer system to compare to the one on the ballot envelope, so they mistakenly rejected the ballot instead of following the standard procedure of checking it against the signature of Phillips' physical voter registration card that was on file. The discovery prompted King County Director of Elections Dean Logan to order his staff to search the computers to see if any other ballots had been incorrectly rejected.

Logan announced on December 13 that 561 absentee ballots in the county had been wrongly rejected due to an administrative error.[13] The next day, workers retrieving voting machines from precinct storage found an additional 12 ballots, bringing the total to 572 newly discovered ballots. Logan admitted the lost ballots were an oversight on the part of his department, and insisted that the found ballots be counted. On December 15, the King County Canvassing Board voted 2-1 in favor of counting the discovered ballots.

Upon examination of the discovered ballots, it was further discovered that, with the exception of two ballots, none of the ballots had been cast by voters whose surnames began with the letters A, B, or C.[14] There was a further search for more ballots, and on December 17, county workers discovered a tray in a warehouse with an additional 162 previously uncounted ballots.[14] All together, 723 uncounted or improperly rejected ballots were discovered in King County during the manual hand recount.

Chairman of the Washington State Republican Party Chris Vance stated that he was "absolutely convinced that King County is trying to steal this election." The National Rifle Association, which had endorsed Rossi, sent a mass e-mail on December 14 to its members asking for volunteers to go to King County in order to sit in on the county elections office and observe the recount.

The Washington State Republican Party filed a restraining order in Pierce County District Court, requesting an injunction against King County to block the tabulation of the uncounted ballots.[15] The request was granted on December 17, but Democrats appealed to the Supreme Court. On December 22, the court ruled against the Republican Party and overturned the restraining order, allowing King County to count all ballots.[15] The next day, Sam Reed issued a statement explaining the process for certification of the uncounted ballots and the standards for fair voting practices in the state.[16]

Protesters gathered in front of both Democratic state headquarters and Republican state headquarters in the days after the injunction against King County's discovered ballots. On December 21, Republican protestors rallied in front of the Washington State Supreme Court Building dressed in orange and holding signs saying "Welcome to Ukraine", comparing the inclusion of the discovered ballots to the election fraud in the recent Ukrainian presidential election.[17]

After all other counties submitted their recount votes, it was revealed on December 20 that at least five other counties besides King County had included ballots that had been discovered after the initial count. For example, Snohomish County included 224 missed ballots that had been discovered underneath mail trays. The outcome of the State Supreme Court hearing regarding King County's votes could have potentially affected those counties' counts as well.

Only a Republican would complain about getting an actual valid count of all the votes because it revealed their candidate lost.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

In attempt to preempt what I know is going to be the typical Republican response, Bush v. Gore was an example of the courts STOPPING a complete recount of votes, not certifying a complete recount that had taken place. And that is why we complain about this. Let's hear it again...

Because when you actually count all the legal and valid votes, Democrats win.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

Not to keep rahashing Gore vs. Bush, but I am still somewhat puzzled at democrats who place the blame for Gore not making it to the White House on the SC, or "chad" counters, or whatever.

All Gore had to do was win his home state of Tennessee and whatever happened in Florida would have been moot. That should have been a given. You would think that the people who elected him to the senate, and his father, would have wanted a native son in the WH. I put the blame squarely on Gore and his campaign for this failure.

Coalage's picture
Coalage
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The USA is NOT a democracy. But I suppose it makes people feel better to believe that it is.

If someone with enough money doesn't like the outcome. The result is magically altered. How is that democracy?

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Given that historically the candidate that spends the most money wins, it isn't really all that different than it has been. Is that true for other countries as well? I only am familiar with US history in that regard.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

Well no I don't think most of Europe has gone the way of the plutocracy quite yet. Although the UK could be on its way. However, I don't think this present gang will be successful.

First of all (and this is a big deal) you have more than just 2 parties in most European nations. In fact right now here in Britain we have a coalition government which is a combination of two parties. Can you even begin to imagine the Dems and Repubs in the US forming a coalition?

Second, you have pretty strict spending limits on political campaigns here in the UK. Television advertising is severly limited and there is equal play for ALL the parties (even the smaller fringe parties).

You no longer have a democracy in America. Sad but true. When elections don't go the way in which the people who actually control the country want, they just play dirty. Pretty crappy system, IMO.

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

well theoretically you might be able to say we have a coalition in our political system too between the tea party. It sorta depends on whether we actuallly buy that the Tea Party is really a separate entity and what its life span will really be. In most parlimentary systems with more than two parties, there are always coalitions. Coalitions in a 2 party system doesn't make much sense.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

The plutocracy would have been just fine with Gore (if they weren't, he never would have been nominated), but I'm sure they preferred Bush. If for no other reason than switching parties every 4, 8 or 12 years helps maintain the illusion that the US is democratic.

Voting machines are a disaster, regardless of who wins. But what really pisses me off are the attempts to prevent certain people, particularly the urban poor, from voting. Sure, I feel like voting is an exercise in futility and would be illegal if it made a significant difference, but it still pisses me off that certain folks are disenfranchised.

Speaking of plutocracy-approved candidates and voter turnout, this seems relevant and worth reading: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Ruling_Elites/Candidate_Selection_TPTB.html

Garrett78's picture
Garrett78
Joined:
Sep. 3, 2010 8:20 am

Currently Chatting

Can Democrats Set Out a New Path?

Democrats must embrace a pro-government platform, not run away from it.

Those were the sentiments of Senator Chuck Schumer today, in a speech given at the National Press Club. Talking about the reasons for Democrats’ losses on Election Day, Schumer said that those losses were proof that the American people and middle-class want a government that will work more effectively for them.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system