Replies

Its safe to say the democrats "have" cheated in S.D., if you believe their get-out-the-vote employee who admitted forging signatures and burning ballots. Whether this will be treated as a crime or not is not clear. Remember, Bush didn't pursue the Rich Pardon, so, since they now control the Senate, I wouldn't be surprised if they sweep this under the rug, so as to not make waves or look mean (aka spinelessness). If there is real evidence, and I believe there is, then it should be pursued. To sweep this away as has been done so many times in the past (as a matter of routine), because of spinelessness (a.k.a. Trent Lott) or fear of letting Americans know for sure that our election system isn't perfect will ensure future elections crime.

I don't know - I hate to see our side perpetuate the "don't win, take it to court" mindset. The more frequently it happens, the more it will continue to happen. The courts still tend to be stacked with libs, so in the long run that strategy could hurt us.

It can and should be pursued as a contested election by John Thune. Thune won a close race and it was likely taken from him via fraud. Sudden 100% increase in voter turnout in one county since 2000, when all other counties had similar patterns, defies logic.

To pove it, we need show how and where the extra votes were manufactured. My guess is it can be done.

Voter registration grew in a few select counties in South Dakota. Those counties - in particular Shannon - had allegations of fraud. In November, voting patterns changed dramatically from previous elections.