1 posted on
11/07/2002 8:23:41 AM PST by
jwalburg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
To: jwalburg; mr.sarcastic; Pippin; Hail Caesar; Marylander; hellinahandcart; KLT; Angelwood; ...
Can you say Glendening vs Sauerbrey? I knew you could.
2 posted on
11/07/2002 8:27:16 AM PST by
sauropod
To: jwalburg
So the Democrats hold out a few precincts to see how many votes they need to manufacture. Big deal. Just another stolen election. That's the only way they can win now. Nothing to see here. Move along.
3 posted on
11/07/2002 8:30:03 AM PST by
Arkie2
To: jwalburg; AmishDude; aristeides
Even though the total number of voters in Shannon County has gone up dramatically, it appears that virtually none of them chose Thune. Well written and researched article.
To: jwalburg
Has Thune conceded?
To: jwalburg
BUMP
To: jwalburg
However, I do not wish to put the people of South Dakota through this process unless it is absolutely necessary. Therefore, if there is no change in the vote totals or any irregularities after the official canvass, we will pursue no further action and the results will stand...No one would be happier than I to see those numbers change as the process continues. However, if the numbers stand, I am prepared to accept the outcome and know that my supporters and all those who have stood with me during this process will accept the outcome as well.If Al Gore had taken this approach in 2000, the Democrats might not have lost the Senate this year, and Jeb! may have had a tougher time to win his second term. But when Al Gore declared war against the Republicans in 2000, the parameters in the equation changed.
If the Senate leadership hung in the balance, Thune's approach might need to be different. But, with things the way they are, the Republicans could lose more by fighting than by accepting the results, unless, of course, irregularities can be conclusively proven.
To: jwalburg
No matter "that it will not affect the balance of power in Washington," voter fraud must be pursued and prosecuted with implacable vigor. There was voter fraud in Shannon County. Republicans must stand against it as forcefully as they did the Democrats' attempt to steal Florida in 2000 with "hanging chads."
8 posted on
11/07/2002 8:37:16 AM PST by
Whilom
To: jwalburg
I wonder if Trent Lott is going to put the kabosh on any effort to rectify this situation like he did in Louisiana when Landru illegally snatched the Senate seat from the Republican. She "won" because the riverboat gambling interests played with the loose slots in the ballot boxes.
9 posted on
11/07/2002 8:38:46 AM PST by
Slyfox
To: jwalburg
Velly intelesting...there is something rotten in Shannon county...
Look at Thune's totals in the last precincts:
1) 166,558 (838 of 844)
2) 166,747 (841 of 844), an increase of 189
3) 166,707 (843 of 844) - a DECREASE of 40!!!
4) 166,954 (844 of 844) - an increase of 247
Someone needs to ask some questions here. There could have been some corrections made in previous precinct tallies that resulted in a decrease of 40 votes from 841 to 843 precincts tallied. There could also have been fraud.
IMO, the registration lists (signatures on the registrations) and voting records (signatures at the polls) should be carefully compared in Shannon county, before the count is certified by the state.
14 posted on
11/07/2002 8:44:10 AM PST by
RandyRep
To: jwalburg
Definately a Rat involved in the numbers. The FBI has already found some fraud.
The big question is, will they find enough and reverse the results?
Based on history,...............NO. (even if they do find enough)
To: jwalburg
If we don't go in and fight this tooth and nail, we deserve to LOSE the Senate again.
16 posted on
11/07/2002 8:45:52 AM PST by
Timesink
To: jwalburg
Hello Mr. Ashcroft! Whatever Thune does, it is time to sic the FBI on voter fraud in SD. Let's string up some exemplars as a warning. If an FBI probe and prosecutions show enough fraud to have swung the election, political punishment (recall?) can follow.
To: jwalburg
He doesn't mention the apparent fact that every man and woman in the county, save approximately
two, are registered to vote.
This blatant fraud MUST be prosecuted, or our entire system of government is a sham.
18 posted on
11/07/2002 8:53:59 AM PST by
B Knotts
To: jwalburg; kevao
This is an execellently researched article - thanks for posting it. I wonder if Bon Homme County is near Shannon and the area suspected of fraud. Did you see this thread yesterday?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/783850/posts
Here's the gist of it:
I read in an earlier thread that, as of the March 2002 primaries, Bon Homme County had some 2,200 registered republicans and some 1,900 registered democrats. CNN shows that Johnson received 1,858 votes (nearly 100% dem turnout) versus Thune's 144 votes (only 7% republican turnout). How could the republican turnout be so low? Just a 50% republican turnout would have put Thune way over the top.
24 posted on
11/07/2002 9:06:27 AM PST by
Quilla
To: jwalburg
Bump
To: jwalburg
The constitution guarantees every state (and by implication its citizens who comprise the state) a "republican" form of government. This means at minimum fair elections untarnished by blatant fraud. The fourteenth amendment guarantees "equal protection" of the laws. Allowing or facilitating election fraud certainly violates this provision since the truly elected candidate may be fraudulently denied office.
While I do not like the Florida example of using the courts to try to overturn elections I don't know where else a citizen can go to get a hearing and redress when they belileve their votes are being cancelled by fraud. It seems to me that legal voters in S. Dakota who suspect fraud would therefore have standing to sue the corrupt election or party officials who knowingly participated in a fraudulent election. If there is evidense of fraud, I would hope that thousands of S. Dakota citizens (not the political parties or the candidate but the actual citizens!) would file a class action suit demanding immediate action to investigate and correct the vote. It would be refreshing for honest citizens who just want a fair election to use the courts and the laws to protect their civil rights for a change!
39 posted on
11/07/2002 9:44:30 AM PST by
politeia
To: jwalburg
They should look into it, but quietly.
41 posted on
11/07/2002 9:47:53 AM PST by
MEGoody
To: jwalburg
Shannon County, 1998 Senate:
1559 votes cast
1228 Dem candidate {78.8%}
0239 Rep candidate {15.3%}
0092 3rd candidates {5.90%}
Shannon County, 2002 Senate:
3118 votes cast
2856 Dem candidate {91.6%}
0248 Rep candidate {7.95%}
0014 3rd candidates {0.45%}
Shannon County, 2002 vs 1998:
1559 more votes were cast {exactly 2 times more}
+ 1628 Dem candidate {132% increase}
+ 9 ..... Rep candidate {3% increase}
- 78 .... 3rd candidates {84% DECREASE, the war paty must have chased them off the reservation!}
To: jwalburg
bump to read later...looks interesting
To: jwalburg
I sent this entire thread to Trent Lott.
59 posted on
11/07/2002 10:50:48 AM PST by
Pushi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson