Response to A Vote/Referendem.....
Regarding Patrick's comment
' But there certainly was no fore-knowledge that Florida would become the key state, so suggestions that the Republicans risked pre-rigging the South Florida assumes that they are reckless in the extreme.'
No it doesn't , it proves how arrogant they are. They felt they would get away with it, and guess what?-they did. We see stories about corrupt practices coming out all the time in Ireland, and people have gotten away with it.
These are some of the sources given by Michael Moore for the information on the US elections.
"Florida's 'Disapeared Voters': Disfranchised by the GOP" Gregory Palast, February 2001, The Nation
"How the GOP Gamed the system in Florida" John Lantigua, April 30 2001, The Nation
"Florida Net Too Wide in Purge of Voter Rolls", Lisa Getter, May 21, 2001 Los Angeles Times
"Eliminating Fraud-Or Democrats?" Anthony York, December 8, 2000 Salon.com
United States Commission on Civil Rights "Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election", June 8, 2001. Can be read at www.usccr.gov
I had a look myself at the last website mentioned. In a press release headed 'US Commission on Civil Rights concludes that 'No Count' is Real Issue in Florida - Voter Disenfranchisement is at the Heart of the Issue', they state that
' the evidence points to an array of problems. These ranged from Florida election officials' failure to provide adequate resources to handle increased voter turnout to at least one unauthorized law enforcement checkpoint. The Commission also flagged the removal of non-felons from the voter registration rolls on the basis of unreliable information collected during a sweeping, state-sponsored felony purge.
The Commission cited other problems in Florida which prevented voters from exercising their franchise, including the assignment of many African Americans to polling sites that lacked sufficient resources to confirm voter eligibility; failure to process voter registration applications under the "motor voter" law in a timely manner; use of defective and complicated ballots that caused many "overvotes" and "undervotes"; early closing of polling places; relocation of polling places without notice; use of old and defective election equipment in poor precincts; failure to provide requested language assistance to Haitian American and Latino American voters; and failure to ensure access for voters with disabilities. '
I also posted a piece before about how some of the people who took part in the "Miami Brooks Brothers Riot" were on the payroll of the Bush's recount committee.( http://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/080502a.html ). Bush spent almost $13.8 million to stop the recount.
Regarding the statement '.. no study of the vote counting has concluded that further counting would have given the election to Mr. Gore'
Michael Moore mentioned a piece in the Miami Herald which does conclude that Gore won the elections. There is also a link from the piece above about the riots to an article entitled 'So Bush did Steal the White House' (http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/112101a.html).
I don't think that it would make a huge difference whether it was Bush or Gore who was elected to office. Both Democrats and Republicans attack the poor and support the rich, and both work with and support dictators when it suits them. I just mentioned this issue to show the sort of intrigues the Bush administration have gotten up to in the past, and it is hypocritical of them to talk about democracy considering their own behaviour. Can we really trust they job they would do in Iraq when this is the sort of thing they got up to at home to get themselves into office? (Of course there are many other reasons for distrusting them).
Created By: Orla Ni Chomhrai