South Dakota Suspicions [Vote fraud]

National Review Online ^ | November 7, 2002 | Byron York

[dark_lord]

Republicans want to be careful in the course they choose. They have already won the Senate, and they do not want to embroil the party in a long, acrimonious fight over a contest that will not affect the balance of power in Washington.

Byron York is wrong. Going from 51 to 52 in the Senate is worth fighting for - especially if it can root out vote fraud. Failure to aggressively fight vote fraud just gives the Dems an edge. In 2004 we want to increase Republican seats in the Senate to 55+. Ideally we want > 60 Senate seats Republican. This is very possible, and will make the Senate filibuster-proof.

[hchutch]

I don't know.

Still, to me, we need to plan for a full-scale defense by the Dems. If they need vote fraud to win, they WILL defend it on a party line. We're going to have to approach things on that basis.

The FBI and DOJ are running investigations. They might take a lot of time, that's true, and we might have to have Johnson in there for a bit. But the converse is the fact that they WILL be believed by all but the biggest hard-core DUmmycrap.

If you are going to overturn an election on the basis of fraud, we need to have smoking ballot-box proof. The fact that the FBI and DOJ were investigating SINCE OCTOBER (prior to this election), and that there has been at least one arrest leads me to believe that they're already on the case.

We need to get this done right as opposed to quick. Do it right, and you sink the Dems for a LONG time. Remember, the Senate can hold things up as well. We just need to let the FBI and DOJ do their jobs.

[5by5]

Dark Lord is correct...it is worth fighting for. But putting a stop to Democratic Machine ballot stuffing is even more important than the extra seat.

I'd give 'em the seat, if we could stop the vote fraud.

[WatchOutForSnakes]

My guess is we roll over. Just like Ashcroft did in Missouri. Maybe if we had fought for Missouri it wouldn't have happened in South Dakota. They will do it until we stop them. Is a 1 seat margin in the Senate really enough?? I don't think so.

[KC Burke]

I think that Thune has made clear that in the absence of any clear evidence of problems by the time of certification by the local County election boards (when his three day clock starts to run, by Statute, for requesting a re-count) he will not request a recount. It is he that has to do it. So the issue is within his campaign staff. What is shown to them will be the deceiding factor. We should ask who on his staff is the point person for this information. .

[KC Burke]

While I put it on another thread, I may as well add it here.

From Findlaw's site on SD recount statutes:

12-21-12. Candidate's petition for recount in close state or district election -- Notice to county auditors. If any candidate for an office, position, or nomination other than the Legislature is voted upon in more than one county, and has been defeated according to the official returns by a margin which does not exceed one-fourth of one percent of the total vote cast for all candidates for such office, position, or nomination, the candidate may within three days after completion of the official canvass by the State Board of Canvassers file a petition with the secretary of state setting forth that the candidate believes a recount will change the result and that all of the votes cast for the office, position, or nomination should be recounted. The secretary of state shall, by registered or certified mail, notify each county auditor that has precincts included in the petition. Each county auditor shall then conduct a recount.

The entire section can be found HERE

[F-117A]

Not wanting to deflate the balloon, but the large number of votes in Shannon county and the fact that the ballots are counted by officials in another county may have contributed to the lateness. Invalid votes may have been cast long before.

On the other hand, the fact that the tribal elections were held at the same time with food handed out (which is illegal in governmental elections, but ok in tribal election - reports are they were in separate locations, but did not indicate if they were in adjoing rooms, different building, etc.) may have caused a greater turnout. It may be that holding the tribal elections at the same time simply provides cover for fraud. Remember the reservations in NY state that Hillary would be familiar with, perhaps old Indians were taught new tricks!

Does anyone have a breakdown of actual vs. absentee ballots in Shannon county?

In the last precinct Thune picked up votes. That was probably from Davision country where they had a computer chip problem and a new one had to be driven in from Omaha.

[KeyBored]

This really isn't a new issue - as has been pointed out LBJ got his start by a rigged election (and BTW look where that led us)

I'm old enough to remember how the presidential election of '60 was stolen from Nixon (dead voting in Chicago, union thugs in PA, etc.).

Why the GOP has never made more an issue of I've never understood.

[backhoe]

Related links:

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/783963/posts

Arrest Expected in Voter Fraud Investigation (South Dakota)
South Dakota Attorney General ^ | 11/01/2002 | Mark Barnett
I just found an article that confirms that the Libertarian candidate DID drop out and DID throw his support to Thune. This minor little item barely made it to local papers, if at all.
http://www.argusleader.com/columnists/dkranz/10_20_02.shtml

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/784111/posts

So Dak More Registered Voters Than Population??
Myself ^ | 10/6/2002 | Myself

 

[Letitring]

It will be very interesting to see the end result of this investigation. I intend to follow it and hope everyone on this thread will. It's my understanding the FBI has been on the scene since they were called in by local officals. Locals became very concerned when they saw over 17,000 NEW registrations, cross their desks, JUST since the PRIMARIES. Democrat greed abounds. :)

[Letitring]

Sigh. YES, it's doing what is right. The FBI has been on scene since October. Yes, it looks to be a Federal, criminal investigation. There is not much else to be done, at this particular point in time, except to watch what happens. Some folks here at Free Republic have uncovered alot of good information, that I hope they have passed on to on scene investigators. I feel it's in good hands, at the moment.

[Letitring]

Exactly, plus noone but the Dems are stoopid enough to go into a State (Fla. ala Gore) and tick off it's entire population, then expect to return and get legitimate votes.

[ImpBill]

"... not traceable, not spelled out, but understood and executed."

Well put and more than likely quite accurate. Here is a tidbit of information little known. Some months ago an organization, name escapes but I could find out as it was in the press, from Washington, D.C. (private think tank or something like that) gave $200,000.00 to the President of the United Sioux Tribes to be used as "walking cash".

Do the arithmetic for registered voters on the res'. Remember the cigarette purchases in Milwaukee in the last Presidential election. Will this money was likewise used and in fact the lady who has been under investigation ... rebBird ... or something like that was hired by the State Dem's through the United Sioux tribes (I believe).

Anyway, I have been reading all the various threads on the matter and unfortunately the bottom line is only if law enforcement can turn up massive voter registration and/or voter fraud, John will have no choice but to concede. If the canvasing doesn't produce any remarkable irregularities or if there isn't a bunch of substancial evidence of massive fraud, he will not turn SD into a Floriduh. Ultimately courts are not going to take away citizens votes unless it is really proved substantially. And how does one do that and in what time frame.

I have also read the threads on the "blame game" stuff and they are likewise a waste of time. The fact is that South Dakota as well as North Dakota and other uppermidwestern farm states where agriculture is the main industry in the rural states, enjoys very strange politics. The people that farm and market to the farmers/ranchers are, in most cases quite conservative and traditionally valued, however farm country ecconomy's are so "dependent" upon government largess that when it comes to voting many registered Republicans that depend upon the farm economy cross over and vote for the Dem's.

In this election, with D'Ascholes machine working overtime the message was driven home time and time again about the power of incumbancy with the head of the Senate as your co-Senator bringing much "pork" and farmer assistance.

I am not going to get into a debate with anyone about the farmers/ranchers as most people look at the situation with very narrow vision and don't have a clue about the complexities of what has been created by government meddling in farm ecconomics since this state and others were settled.

Bottom line is the Dem's have and continue to do a better job at "buying votes" both legally and illegally and it is a huge problem for you all in the GOP to address and hopefully overcome. Until the GOP figures a way to resolve the mire of farm country ecconomics, or all the farmers go broke we will continue to see states like the Dakota's, Neb, Iowa, Mo, Mn, Mt and a few others continue to support conservative Presidents and turn around and elect liberal Democrats. Tip O'Neal said it best when he said, "All politics are local" or something to that effect.

Life goes on. D'Aschole's power at the national level is gone and I will be surprised if he even runs in two years. Our state legislature with Gov. Janklow's signture has made it impossible for D'Aschole to run for both the senate and the presidency. I don't Tom has the "right stuff" deep inside to step down from the leadership position and be in the minority at the same time. His ego is 6 times larger than his height.

[F-117A]

One other interesting note is that there were 2,684 more votes cast than the total for all Senate candidates. (340,181 - 337,497 = 2,684)

[KC Burke]

The bottom line, of course, is that a few thousand manufactured real votes, or fraudualant votes, held to see if they can make a difference, would have gone for naught if Thune and the GOP would have polled, 10,000, 20,000 or 30,000 more main-line SD voters.

The Dems would say that Repubs are buying votes in their own way with corporate campaign funds, etc. etc. The real deceieder is a clear cut majority that tweaking can't undo...that we didn't have.

[ImpBill]

Yep!

[MHGinTN]

The fraud (if there is fraud and it appears likely at this point, or at least gross mismanagement of totals) is the key; fraudulent votes cancel the votes of real persons doing their sovereign duty to vote, thus fraudulent votes usurp the sovereignty of the individual American casting a legitimate vote. It is no coinkidink that most vote fraud comes from the democrat party since they do not recognize the sovereignty of the individual American citizen anyway!

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list