Posted on 12/05/2004 2:50:08 PM PST by Dashing Dasher
A republican admits that bush stole the election (albany / el cerrito) Reply to: anon-51272523@craigslist.org Date: 2004-12-05, 1:38PM PST
Voter Fraud - Please Read My Explanation Below
27.Nov.2004
Brad Menfillink
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes. People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire, Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these "irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
Hang in there!
Yes, your comments concerning my observations have given us cause to ROTFLOAO. Keep it up. Comic relief is always appreciated, even at the expense of the poster. Perhaps you and your friends can find more 'credible information, that we must be see' at the www.barney.com.
Man, there must be some GOOD drugs out there!
LOL I think I should make it clear that YOU are the poster that's providing the comic relief.
LOL
Thanks for the response. Now it's rather clear. You think just saying things makes them so.
Now I see why the posting of the article at the top of this thread wasn't a problem for you. Who cares if it didn't have a source? Who cares if it didn't provide any information that could be verified? Who cares if it was just the rantings of lunatic on the left? Who cares if it didn't even make sense. That's obviously the high standard you have adopted for yourself. That's the standard you used in your last post.
Well I don't want people coming to a conservative forum and thinking the only reason we object to the article, is because it's viewpoint would be considered anti-conservative. I think it should be discounted for the rubish it is, based on it's unverifiable nature.
I wouldn't have posted that trash here. There are plenty of articles from bonified sources that will suffice for the laughs we need on this forum. If laughs are the most important thing for you, veracity doesn't matter, perhaps you're on the wrong forum.
"Who cares if it didn't have a source? Who cares if it didn't provide any information that could be verified?"
What do you think this link is? All you have to do is point and click. Arn't computers wonderful once you figure them out?
http://www.craigslist.org/eby/pol/51272523.html
Once again...
Now I see why the posting of the article at the top of this thread wasn't a problem for you.
Who cares if it didn't have a source?
Please name the person or news organization that interviewed this individual, checked out his story and posted an article detailing the verified information.
Who cares if it didn't provide any information that could be verified?
Did the original poster of this thread contact anon-51272523@craigslist.org and ask him where he worked? Did he verifty where he worked? Did he see any documents or other proof to verify what this person was claiming to be true, was true? Did that person explain the process that facilitated all this in a rational, provable, believable manner?
Who cares if it was just the rantings of lunatic on the left?
Obviously not you.
What this person seeks to claim, is that republicans had access to the computer software at the highest levels of a number of states, so that they could manipulate the election results. Did this person provide a feasable way for this plan to have been executed?
That's obviously the high standard you have adopted for yourself. That's the standard you used in your last post.
I had checked out the link. Did you? Did you ask one critical question before buying into it hook line and sinker?
You don't even know the name of the person making these charges, yet the article obviously meets your high standards of proof, and you seek to claim it's worthy of repeating.
It isn't.
I did check the link. But the difference between you and I, apparently, is that I didn't actually buy this story "hook line and sinker". DoughtyOne, life is not one dimentional - there are many shades and shapes of things - try not to live it like it is.
LOL, do you even attempt to carry on a coeherent discussion?
I mentioned that the story was not credible, you stated it was good for a laugh.
Again I mention that this article didn't have credible sources, and that we don't want to post stuff here that is not credible, and you respond with a link. What was the link for if you agreed with my assessment?
Now you tell me that you didn't think it was credible, and I shouldn't either.
No, life is not one dimensional, but then you might try to staying in one dimension at a time when discussing an issue.
I don't think I said it wasn't credible. I do think that it's unbelievable. I'm quite certain it wouldn't take much for you to come to the same conclusion. Right?
Darb Lifnem, is that you?!! Not too good of a job on
the fake name. . when you come in tomorrow morning, there'll
be a pink slip on your desk! Wear it, Darb!! How could
you rat us out like this?!!
I don't think I said it wasn't credible. I do think that it's unbelievable. I'm quite certain it wouldn't take much for you to come to the same conclusion. Right?
Perhaps you can re-read my first two posts to this thread. You know, the ones before you began your immitation of a ten year old child.
You may not work with people, or know people who buy into the tripe that was the original post on this thread. I do. Whether sourced or not, they read stuff like this and it reinforces their belief system. The article placed here with a title, isn't identified for what it is.
This article, someone's post to another bulletin board, should not have been placed on the forum. Recognizing that, it could have at least had an adequate disclaimer. Instead this is the note the poster affixed to it.
More insanity... from the tinfoil gang! Many of the moonbats are responding with Impeachment Stories.
This indicates nothing. We refer to bonified news articles in the same manner, with numerous vartiations. It doesn't dismiss the article for what it actually is.
What specific statement appears here to give readers a heads-up that this is not a verified news story, was not sourced properly, and that the original poster wasn't even identified? The fact is that someone in a hurry could come by this thread, read the main post and be gone before they were aware that it had less connection to reality than the average article from the Onion.
That is a disservice to the forum. Whether you wish to acknowledge it or continue to act like an ass, the fact still remains that this should not have been posted here.
About 90% of what you posted to me shouldn't have been either. You know this tripe doesn't belong here. There's nothing informative or necessary about any of it.
This isn't guffaw dot com. Many of us use it to obtain 90% of our news. Would you want hundreds of posts like this piece of crap placed on the forum each day? I wouldn't. I don't want one of them here and I'm not alone.
This has got to be one of the funniest threads ever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.