Saturday, November 20, 2004

Kerry On Election Reform

People ask me, "Why did Kerry concede so soon before all the votes were counted?"

From now on, my answer will be: because of the DLC.

Despite what certain Clintonistas are saying throughout the mainstream media, John Kerry does have his eye on the provisional ballot count going on in Ohio, and the recounts scheduled to take place there soon after and in Florida and New Hampshire.

How do I know this?

John Kerry had this to say in a letter sent to his campaign supporters:

"Regardless of the outcome of this election, once all the votes are counted -- and they will be counted -- we will continue to challenge this administration. This is not a time for Democrats to retreat and accommodate extremists on critical principles -- it is a time to stand firm. I will fight for a national standard for federal elections that has both transparency and accountability in our voting system. It's unacceptable in the United States that people still don't have full confidence in the integrity of the voting process. I ask you to join me in this cause."

Any "democrat" out there that tells you differently, any "moderate" out there that doesn't think it's the right time to fight for electoral reform, any "progressive" out there that employs the term "conspiracy theorist" is not part of the solution. They are the problem. It's high time we address that problem. It's high time that the Joe Liebermans of the party shape up or ship the fuck out.

Kerry wants our help. Let's show him that we support the true wing of the Democratic Party: the liberal wing.

Normally, a member of the Senate will first approach other senators and ask them to co-sponsor a bill before it is introduced -- instead, I am turning to you. Imagine the power of a bill co-sponsored by hundreds of thousands of Americans being presented on the floor of the United States Senate. You can make it happen. Sign our "Every Child Protected" pledge today and forward it to your family, friends, and neighbors:"

Speaking of Ohio, some more links:

Common Cause ("a nonpartisan nonprofit advocacy organization founded in 1970 by John Gardner as a vehicle for citizens to make their voices heard in the political process and to hold their elected leaders accountable to the public interest") has a blog devoted to Ohio voting stories:

DKosopedia, the free political encyclopedia, has a page devoted to 2004 Ohio Irregularities (Dkosopedia

The Cleveland Plains Dealer has a story about lawyers pressing for a recount in Ohio (Lawyers to challenge election in Ohio): "A trio of activist lawyers armed with mysteriously wrong exit polls and hundreds of voter horror stories announced plans Friday to contest Ohio's presidential election as soon as the vote is official. Their challenge could lead to widespread reconsideration of dozens of alleged election irregularities around the state - from reported computerized voting glitches to provisional-ballot mishaps to unusual incidents involving voter rolls, poll workers and machine technicians."

This website for the Ohio Democratic Party also has a bunch of good links: Ohio

The Free Press has a great article about the Ohio Election Protection Coalition’s public hearings held last week ( This testimonial is from Carol Shelton, presiding judge, precinct 25 B at the Linden Branch of the Columbus Metropolitan Library: “The precinct is 95 to 99 percent black. . . . There were 1,500 persons on the precinct rolls. We received three machines. In my own precinct in Clintonville, 19E, we always received three machines for 700 to 730 voters. Voter turnout in my own precinct has reached as high as 70 percent while I worked there. I interviewed many voters in 25 B and asked how many machines they had had in the past. Everyone who had a recollection said five or six. I called to get more machines and ended up being connected with Matt Damschroder, the Director of the Board of Elections. After a real hassle -- and someone here has it on videotape, he sent me a fourth machine which did not dent the length of the line. Fewer than 700 voted, although the turnout at the beginning of the day would cause anyone to predict a turnout of over 80 percent. This was a clear case of voter suppression by making voting an impossibility for anyone who had to go to work or anyone who was stuck at home caring for children or the elderly while another family member voted.”


<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?