Since the George W. Bush Republicans clearly stole the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, are we to assume they threw this one?
I’m just saying….
63 Replies to “OK, I Just Have To Ask”
No matter who won the election, shouldn’t Americans be demanding better from their electoral system? Why not have a uniform process across the country? And why have voting machines at all? Is it too hard to do an “X” on a ballot and have the voting scrutineered by campaign supporters?
Although Canada is 1/10 the size of the U.S., we do manage to do a general election where the results are known practically within a few hours. Putting a machine in the middle of the election, while admirable from supposed productivity gains, just sets up any party for claims of fraud. Machines can be reprogrammed or hacked, period.
“Let us start by taxing the living daylights”
Well said garhane!
Put that on the grave marker of the socialist utopians.
By whatever comparison, to even attempt to position Canadian democracy as being better than the US is ridiculous.
An unelected Liberal senate?
Quebec maintaining the balance of power with 73 seats, while stealing money in transfers?
The Bloc?
I think the only way this country can become a true and just democracy, rather than the travesty it is – is for Alberta to elect a federal separatist party with seat demands equal to Quebec, and then form a coalition government with the Conservatives.
The economic engine of Canada has moved to Alberta, so must the political power if strong armed.
Socialist Quebec would no longer have a death grip on the political future of Canada. And the Liberals, if they were ever to hope to form a government again, would have to campaign on ideas good for everybody in the country, rather than only good for themselves.
The Democrats stole this one.
It’s obvious,
First of all Todd, the theme of this thread is about accusations of Bush throwing elections. It clearly did not happen.
Second; comparing our population to the States is ridiculous. First of all what was the turn out/total amount of votes counted? I daresay the U.S. vote participation is way better than our pathetic exercises at democracy. There is also a huge amount of absentees to count in the US. One County quit counting the absetees because it was a long day and as the Returning officer stated; “tired people make mistakes.”
In the same story I read that they were translating people’s intentions, decipering scribbles and mistaskes and transfering the votes to the mmachines (in the presence of witnesses). You will never see that happen in Canada. I don’t think you should either, but their ballots are way more complex with all the local initiatives to vote on.
Many voters, including Republicans, were satisfied with the machines. I don’t think it’s an issue. The issues I read were in relation to too few and more than 1 type used. Those could be valid concerns. If they want quicker results, machines are the way to go.
Cheri, my comments were to the point of accusations of cheating. Simply put, if a machine is inbetween a person and what is actually recorded, their will always be a chance of cheating, the machine having problems or votes just plain getting screwed up.
I still don’t understand why the way people vote are different from not just each district but potentially each county. Why isn’t there a uniform way of voting across the U.S.?
I’ve particiated in elections where there are initiatives or referendums too. It’s not to hard to count ‘yes’ or ‘no’ checks.
Kate, my dear, you are missing the point. Let me try an analogy from poker: if you try to bluff with every hand, you’ll eventually go broke. Similarly, if you try to steal every election, you’ll eventually get caught. So you have to let one go by every now and then so that you can win the big one, which is trying to keep Hillary in NY in 2008.
Bill could have been a disaster but he had a Republican congress to prevent that. The US government really didn’t do much in the Clinton years, which is certainly one reason the 90’s were so prosperous. But Hillary with a Democratic congress? (shudders)
Here’s the Toronto Star’s take on election ballot messages:
Headline: “Voters jolt red-state religious right”
Ah, yes, of course, it’s those evil Christians that are the enemy, and the non-Christian Liberals finally did ’em in. This despite the fact that many Democrats were openly campaigning as Christians and Conservatives. But that doesn’t matter in bubbleville.
“This was really a rebellion in the heart of red-state, pro-life America – the heart of the northern Bible Belt,” said Sarah Stoesz, head of the Planned Parenthood chapter that oversees South Dakota.
The wins:
– “The verdict on abortion rights was particularly clear. Oregon and California voters defeated measures that would have required parents to be notified before a girl under 18 could get an abortion.” Two states make it “particularly clear” in la la land. And I didn’t know that either of those are red ‘Bible Belt’ states. Curious.
– “Endorsing stem cell research in Missouri.” It seems stem cell approval in one state has, “…altered America’s culture wars and dismayed the religious right.”
– “…and in a national first, rejecting a same-sex marriage ban in Arizona.” Oh, boy, and now because of one state not banning SSM, “Conservative leaders were jolted by the setbacks and looked for an explanation yesterday.”
Buried at the end of the article, though:
“Liberal groups did have some setbacks…”
– “Michigan voters banned some types of affirmative action programs.”
– “Colorado and Arizona passed measures targeting illegal immigrants.”
– “Seven states approved gay-marriage bans, joining the 20 that had done so in previous elections.” (Score: 27 no vs. 1 yes)
This is what passes for news rather than opinion, in the star.
With the type of voting system they run in the States, there’s plenty more stealing yet to come from “both” sides.
And they can’t cheat with paper ballots?
I think the comments that the Democrats are not some androgynous leftie party are correct. Add to that the the US system is more bipartisan than our system and, of course, the Dems are to the right of the Liberals here. With a one seat majority in the Senate, it will be difficult to completely impose an aganda, especially when one considers Joe Lieberman in the mix. Having said that, the dems still control Congress, though it will likely be in their best interests to gain cooperation with GOP. Clearly this isn’t a simple majority situation for the dems.
“And they can’t cheat with paper ballots?”
That’s right Cheri, they can’t on as wide a scale, in such a significant and undetectable way.
Saskboy; at one time I admit, I too was suspicios of machines. No longer. I’m fed up with all the conspiracy theories. If someone wants to cheat badly enough, here or in the States, they’ll do it. They’ll also get caught eventualy.
I’m not too sure how confident I am of Elections Canada after some of the shenanigans in the last couple Federal Elections. Ditto the last municipal election in Calgary. Both were hushed up, never to be heard of again.
No matter who won the election, shouldn’t Americans be demanding better from their electoral system? Why not have a uniform process across the country? And why have voting machines at all? Is it too hard to do an “X” on a ballot and have the voting scrutineered by campaign supporters?
Although Canada is 1/10 the size of the U.S., we do manage to do a general election where the results are known practically within a few hours. Putting a machine in the middle of the election, while admirable from supposed productivity gains, just sets up any party for claims of fraud. Machines can be reprogrammed or hacked, period.
“Let us start by taxing the living daylights”
Well said garhane!
Put that on the grave marker of the socialist utopians.
By whatever comparison, to even attempt to position Canadian democracy as being better than the US is ridiculous.
An unelected Liberal senate?
Quebec maintaining the balance of power with 73 seats, while stealing money in transfers?
The Bloc?
I think the only way this country can become a true and just democracy, rather than the travesty it is – is for Alberta to elect a federal separatist party with seat demands equal to Quebec, and then form a coalition government with the Conservatives.
The economic engine of Canada has moved to Alberta, so must the political power if strong armed.
Socialist Quebec would no longer have a death grip on the political future of Canada. And the Liberals, if they were ever to hope to form a government again, would have to campaign on ideas good for everybody in the country, rather than only good for themselves.
The Democrats stole this one.
It’s obvious,
First of all Todd, the theme of this thread is about accusations of Bush throwing elections. It clearly did not happen.
Second; comparing our population to the States is ridiculous. First of all what was the turn out/total amount of votes counted? I daresay the U.S. vote participation is way better than our pathetic exercises at democracy. There is also a huge amount of absentees to count in the US. One County quit counting the absetees because it was a long day and as the Returning officer stated; “tired people make mistakes.”
In the same story I read that they were translating people’s intentions, decipering scribbles and mistaskes and transfering the votes to the mmachines (in the presence of witnesses). You will never see that happen in Canada. I don’t think you should either, but their ballots are way more complex with all the local initiatives to vote on.
Many voters, including Republicans, were satisfied with the machines. I don’t think it’s an issue. The issues I read were in relation to too few and more than 1 type used. Those could be valid concerns. If they want quicker results, machines are the way to go.
Cheri, my comments were to the point of accusations of cheating. Simply put, if a machine is inbetween a person and what is actually recorded, their will always be a chance of cheating, the machine having problems or votes just plain getting screwed up.
I still don’t understand why the way people vote are different from not just each district but potentially each county. Why isn’t there a uniform way of voting across the U.S.?
I’ve particiated in elections where there are initiatives or referendums too. It’s not to hard to count ‘yes’ or ‘no’ checks.
Kate, my dear, you are missing the point. Let me try an analogy from poker: if you try to bluff with every hand, you’ll eventually go broke. Similarly, if you try to steal every election, you’ll eventually get caught. So you have to let one go by every now and then so that you can win the big one, which is trying to keep Hillary in NY in 2008.
Bill could have been a disaster but he had a Republican congress to prevent that. The US government really didn’t do much in the Clinton years, which is certainly one reason the 90’s were so prosperous. But Hillary with a Democratic congress? (shudders)
Here’s the Toronto Star’s take on election ballot messages:
Headline: “Voters jolt red-state religious right”
Ah, yes, of course, it’s those evil Christians that are the enemy, and the non-Christian Liberals finally did ’em in. This despite the fact that many Democrats were openly campaigning as Christians and Conservatives. But that doesn’t matter in bubbleville.
“This was really a rebellion in the heart of red-state, pro-life America – the heart of the northern Bible Belt,” said Sarah Stoesz, head of the Planned Parenthood chapter that oversees South Dakota.
The wins:
– “The verdict on abortion rights was particularly clear. Oregon and California voters defeated measures that would have required parents to be notified before a girl under 18 could get an abortion.” Two states make it “particularly clear” in la la land. And I didn’t know that either of those are red ‘Bible Belt’ states. Curious.
– “Endorsing stem cell research in Missouri.” It seems stem cell approval in one state has, “…altered America’s culture wars and dismayed the religious right.”
– “…and in a national first, rejecting a same-sex marriage ban in Arizona.” Oh, boy, and now because of one state not banning SSM, “Conservative leaders were jolted by the setbacks and looked for an explanation yesterday.”
Buried at the end of the article, though:
“Liberal groups did have some setbacks…”
– “Michigan voters banned some types of affirmative action programs.”
– “Colorado and Arizona passed measures targeting illegal immigrants.”
– “Seven states approved gay-marriage bans, joining the 20 that had done so in previous elections.” (Score: 27 no vs. 1 yes)
This is what passes for news rather than opinion, in the star.
With the type of voting system they run in the States, there’s plenty more stealing yet to come from “both” sides.
And they can’t cheat with paper ballots?
I think the comments that the Democrats are not some androgynous leftie party are correct. Add to that the the US system is more bipartisan than our system and, of course, the Dems are to the right of the Liberals here. With a one seat majority in the Senate, it will be difficult to completely impose an aganda, especially when one considers Joe Lieberman in the mix. Having said that, the dems still control Congress, though it will likely be in their best interests to gain cooperation with GOP. Clearly this isn’t a simple majority situation for the dems.
“And they can’t cheat with paper ballots?”
That’s right Cheri, they can’t on as wide a scale, in such a significant and undetectable way.
Saskboy; at one time I admit, I too was suspicios of machines. No longer. I’m fed up with all the conspiracy theories. If someone wants to cheat badly enough, here or in the States, they’ll do it. They’ll also get caught eventualy.
I’m not too sure how confident I am of Elections Canada after some of the shenanigans in the last couple Federal Elections. Ditto the last municipal election in Calgary. Both were hushed up, never to be heard of again.