Tags for This Article:

Democracy (1625)  Election Theft (621) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ;
Add to My Group
June 13, 2007 at 04:13:27

2004 Election: The Urban Legend - Bush Won in Big Cities

by Michael Collins     Page 1 of 11 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com

Tell A Friend


Scoop American Coup II presents...

Election 2004: The Urban Legend


Michael Collins

This analysis is based on original, unpublished research by
web commentator, anaxarchos, to whom I owe a debt of gratitude

[[Ghosts]]
Click for big version

“Scoop” Independent News

See also companion article… "Sludge Report #177 – Bigger Than Watergate II"

IMPORTANT NOTE: Publication of this story marks a watershed in American political history. It is offered freely for publication in full or part on any and all internet forums, blogs and noticeboards. All other media are also encouraged to utilise material. Readers are encouraged to forward this to friends and acquaintances in the United States and elsewhere.

The night of November 2, 2004, was exhilarating or devastating, depending on how you voted and where you were. If you were a rural conservative who voted based on your religious affinity to Bush, you were elated. You were also relieved, because your peers had not turned out with the same enthusiasm that they had shown in 2000. If you were in the suburbs and had campaigned hard for Kerry, you were probably devastated. After all that work in your first campaign ever, the big crowds and the optimistic polls, your man lost. But if you were white, living in a large city, and probably a returning voter after missing several elections, you were positively exuberant. You and your like-minded peers continued George W. Bush’s reign as the 43rd President of the United States. It was a miracle.

This election was a sight to see. Few in the country had the vantage point of network news commentators. Throughout the day these experts received a stream of information from the exit polls of the National Election Pool (NEP). Sponsored by a media consortium consisting of the four major television networks plus CNN and the Associated Press, the NEP provided the most sophisticated polling data ever.

The pundits had the national Exit Poll of 13,660 respondents [1] and parallel State Exit Polls of over 77,000 respondents. The NEP was the only source on “who voted for each candidate; why the voters in each area made critical choices; and where geographical differences on candidates and issues were a factor.”

If you paid attention and knew your craft, you were on fire. Election 2004 was the best thing to happen since Truman beat Dewey and you probably weren’t around for that. It was a unique moment. Just a day or two after the election, experienced analyst Charles Cook practically gushed after he studied the exit polls saying the Bush effort was “…unquestionably …the best planned, best executed presidential campaign ever.”[2]

Based on what he knew at the time, this made sense. Cook reflected that, “Perhaps the most interesting, and maybe puzzling, exit poll finding is that (compared to 2000) Kerry lost 11 points among the 13 percent of Americans who live in cities with populations over 500,000, while President Bush jumped up 13 points (since 2000).” He concluded that the surprising urban performance, required for a Bush win, was a result of defections from the Kerry camp by black, Latinos, and Jewish voters. This is the stuff of legends.

Cook’s analysis pinpointed the actual location the Bush victory: urban voters. His mistake was to think that the normal Democratic constituencies in the cities did anything different from what they had always done. Cook himself was one of a few who actually saw and understood the critical role large cities played in providing the Bush victory margin.

The Conventional Wisdom

On election eve, a different story prevailed. While they had access to the same exit polls that Cook had, the news people did not notice the same trends and numbers that Cook noticed. Network anchors and others talked about the red-versus-blue battle. There were the very red rural evangelicals, almost all white. The media rolled out the newly minted “security moms” in the purple suburbs plus the true blue Democrats in our largest cities, a predictable group if there ever was one. Unlike Cook, who studied the exit polls, the popular news casters assumed that the Rove strategy had materialized.

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11

 

http://electionfraudnews.com

Michael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Spurl      Tag!RawSugar      Shadows Tag!      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
13 comments

Have been a soldier, an intelligence analyst, an engineer, a physicist, and a writer.

Right now mostly a writer.

camHave been a soldier, an intelligence analyst, an engineer, a physicist, and a writer.

Right now mostly a writer.

Explain the mechanism

You analysis appears to founder on the shoals of the actual vote count. As I understand your analysis, your "phantom" voters are not excess votes but either a massive shift in urban voter allegiance or a vast number of votes tallied to the wrong candidate.

A fraudulent count implies an underlying mechanism. You imply the mechanism but not its workings. How was it done?

by cam (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 54 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 8:51:06 AM
 


A Bleeding heart liberal from California
Bleeding Heart LiberalA Bleeding heart liberal from California

How Voting may have been rigged

Most likely mechanism of vote rigging was the optical scan machines. See Chap 5 of Bev Harris' book http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-5.pdf

Quote:

 How to compromise an optical-scan system Optical-scan systems involve filling in an oval or drawing an arrow on a paper ballot, which then is fed into a scanner. People think these systems can’t be rigged because they have a paper ballot, but there are anecdotal reports of optical scan systems flipping elections as far back as 1980.

An election official I spoke with from California reported that in her county, Jimmy Carter soundly defeated Ronald Reagan during the 1980 presidential election. However, the computer tally from the optical scanner reversed the results, giving Carter’s votes to Reagan and vice versa. By doing a hand audit using the paper ballots, they were able to straighten out the results, but when she requested that the state of California do more audits to see how widespread the problem was, she was ignored.

Most people believe that optical-scan machines are tamper-proof because they provide a paper ballot. But election officials generally don’t use the ballots to check the machine count, and in some states it’s against the law to do so. If you don’t audit properly, opticalscan machines are no safer than paperless touch screens.

Some people think that all we need to do is vote absentee and the touch-screen problem is solved. Unfortunately it will not be solved until we actually look at those ballots. When you vote absentee, your ballot is usually run through an optical-scan machine. Hack either the scanner or the main accumulation and you take the election away, while ballots sit forlorn in a box that no one is allowed to open.

The official results come from the county, not the polling place, so if you adjust the optical scan data before it gets into the county accumulator, you’ve just rigged the election. No one’s going to look at those paper ballots, but if they do a spot check, see below. I’ll show you how a crooked programmer can create a safety net for spot checks.

by Bleeding Heart Liberal (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 48 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 11:22:28 AM
 


Michael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.
Michael CollinsMichael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.

Well said Rajiv, bears repeating...

"Some people think that all we need to do is vote absentee and the touch-screen problem is solved. Unfortunately it will not be solved until we actually look at those ballots. When you vote absentee, your ballot is usually run through an optical-scan machine. Hack either the scanner or the main accumulation and you take the election away, while ballots sit forlorn in a box that no one is allowed to open."

People need to have full access to registration, voting, and counting processes...open witnessing. England has it, why not here?

But the key point is that a permissive environment for secrecy and cutting corners has no counterweight, other than those highly focused on the issue, and we lack sufficient girth (to stay with the metaphor).

When results like this come out, they must be challenged.

Those elected have to show that they were truly elected, not just digitally self or "other" appointed.

 

by Michael Collins (79 articles, 11 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 283 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 2:33:32 PM
 


Michael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.
Michael CollinsMichael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.

Thanks for asking...

I focused on the lack of any sensible path to a Bush victory, from a new angle, thanks to web commentator Anaxarchos. There is simply no sensible way to lose your base and rock on into the night picking up huge gains hostile territory, thus winning the eleciton. That hasn't happened before. We're taking this from the simplest vantage point - plausibility - a 66% presidential turnout increase in big citeis; 80% increase in white voters over 2000 in those big cities (5 to 9 million, 80% more white voters); the absense of any Get Out The Vote (GOTV). In the big cities of those called, only 1 in 10 received calls from the Republicans. The nine other calls were from the Democrats. It goes on and on.

Establishing this with obvious arguments that everyone can understand:

Collins: "Bush won it in the big cities!"

City friend: "Knock it off, what's the matter with you today?"

Collins: "No seriously, he's base in rural/red America was on strike election day, way down in total votes and Bush votes. So he used that city charm of his and all those great things he did for cities and pulled it out at the last minute."

City friend: "Nah, com'on...stop messing with me."

My suburban and country friends would say the same thing. That's the imiportance of this case. You don't need a stat background to get it.

The mechanism is well presented as referenced below in a response to your question. Also, take a look at this. It's a comprehensive and elegant statement of the mechanisim of election fruad. Quite persuasive.

Thanks for your point.

Scoop - The Sludge Report - Bigger than Watergate II

 

 

by Michael Collins (79 articles, 11 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 283 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 2:26:44 PM
 


Registered voter in West Chester, Ohio
sbakerRegistered voter in West Chester, Ohio

still?

still we are trying to convince ourselves that Bush was not elected? How much time will we waste in this futile effort. Bush Won, twice. MOVEON.ORG

by sbaker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 95 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 1:18:38 PM
 


Middle aged guy.
Alessandro MachiMiddle aged guy.

Explosion in votes for Republicans...

I did some research a few years ago on prior presidential vote totals for both democratic and republican presidential elections.  Over the past several presidential elections since the late 80's, the Democratic vote totals have always increased at a very steady rate of between 8-12% for each and every election, whereas the republicans experienced a one time only "explosion" voter increase  of 25% increase between 2000 & 2004 elections. (I am recalling the data from memory and apologize if I have misstated the data).


Just what did Mr. Bush do to justify a 25% increase in vote totals compared to his prior election win when that represented well over a 100% increase in the rate of increase for Republican vote totals?

by Alessandro Machi (13 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 174 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 1:38:16 PM
 


Michael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.
Michael CollinsMichael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. See this summary of his articles plus Election 2004: The Urban Legend and groundbreaking research and commentary in "" His web site, Election Fraud News & The Money Party, offers a collection of resources and commentary on critical issues facing the country.

What did he do indeed.

He was below 50% throughout the campaign, he was taking a thumping in new registraitons, GOTV activities in cities and suburbs, the small towns turned on him in a huge way, and the rural folks went from 23% to 16% of the electorate.  Yet he won, imagine that.  What nonsense...but we buy it.  The public is more able to find information through alternative channels and theirs a lot of cynicism out there, comendable given the performance of the WH.

I'd be interested to see what you came up with.  There are somethings that just don't happen, like  Bush getting a 153% increase in votes from 2000 to 2004... When do they roll out the slide show for some terrific Bridge in Brooklyn, your's for a song.

 

by Michael Collins (79 articles, 11 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 283 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 2:39:06 PM
 


Retired Educator Who Believes in a Constitutional Government of equal citizens.I d/p>I believe in the right of an active informed Citizenry to formulate responsible policy. I believe in hand counted paper ballots. We need small group meetings where a citizens can gather periodically give voice to their concerns, make decisions and act politically to implement their decisions.
Bucky the CommonerRetired Educator Who Believes in a Constitutional Government of equal citizens.I d/p>I believe in the right of an active informed Citizenry to formulate responsible policy. I believe in hand counted paper ballots. We need small group meetings where a citizens can gather periodically give voice to their concerns, make decisions and act politically to implement their decisions.

Quote on fraudulent vote counting

"It is not the people who vote that count, It is the people who count the votes."

Josef Stalin

I will never trust any method but counting and tallying hand marked paper ballots at the precinct level. Paper ballots always have provided an accountable paper trail in the past. Why ruin a good system by replacing it with one that ordinary voters rightfully do not trust. And further to that it provides jobs at the local level where they are not needed with a minimum of bureaucracy.

 

by Bucky the Commoner (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 33 comments) on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 1:56:47 PM
 


Holly Berkowitz, RHIT in Health Information Managment and BA in Linguistics produces a weekly television series, Nature's Logic documenting sounds and images of nature for relaxation. She lives in Iowa City, Iowa with her husband, children and dog in a cabin in the woods by the Iowa river.
HollyBerkowitzHolly Berkowitz, RHIT in Health Information Managment and BA in Linguistics produces a weekly television series, Nature's Logic documenting sounds and images of nature for relaxation. She lives in Iowa City, Iowa with her husband, children and dog in a cabin in the woods by the Iowa river.

The evidence has become overwhelming: And accountability?

The evidence has become overwhelming that this Bush-Cheney White House has lied illegally about 9/11, WMD, Saddam Hussein's links to 9/11, Saddam Hussein's nuclear capacity and the real reason for invading Iraq....oil....to cause a criminal war of aggression against Iraq, criminal wars of aggression, plural, if Bush-Cheney's Lay's Enron also needed 9/11 as an "excuse" to invade Afghanistan to erect and oil pipeline through Afghanistan to connect the "cheaper" oil of the Caspian Sea with Enron's power plants in northern India...yet another criminal conflict of interest.


The eivdence has become overwhelming that this Bush-Cheney White House authorized illegal spying on thousands of innocent Americans and authorized torture and other war crimes banned by civil laws of civil nations ....9/11 Bush-Cheney's "excuse"...at our expense.

The evidence has become overwhelming that this Bush-Cheney White House needed 9/11 as an "excuse" to cause war for private profiteering to pay back war profiteers, oil barons and no-bid contractors (Carlyle Group, Enron, Bush & Bin Laden families, Cheney's Halliburton, Rumsfeld's Tamiflu) that put Bush-Cheney into our White House illegitimately in 2000 and 2004 (Palast, Kennedy), put the GOP in the White House in 2008 with no paper trail (Diebold, ESS).

I should not need to spend hours and days and weeks and months and years trying to protect myself, my family, my nation from criminals in my White House.

Investigate, indict and impeach for "high crimes" such as treason now..before it's too late.

Holly Berkowitz, RHIT

by HollyBerkowitz (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 9 comments) on Thursday, June 14, 2007 at 3:59:51 PM
 


John Smith is an engineer, musician, and political junky. He prides himself on his ability to explain technical issues to non-technical people.
John SmithJohn Smith is an engineer, musician, and political junky. He prides himself on his ability to explain technical issues to non-technical people.

what do the numbers say

There was a strong implication in your article that the total number of votes reported was much greater than the number of votes that were cast. Is it possible that this is true and noone noticed ? Is there any way of getting the numbers ?

by John Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Thursday, June 14, 2007 at 9:00:06 PM
 


I am a social worker who works with chronically mentally ill people.  Like enjoy reading, quilting and visiting with people
beccyI am a social worker who works with chronically mentally ill people.  Like enjoy reading, quilting and visiting with people

2004 Election

While it seems that the bush administration were busy little beavers on election night 2004.  I remember that day so well.  I lost alot of faith in my country that day.  I was a democratic checker in a black area of town.  People stood in line for up to three hours until people thought of ways to speed the process up.  Then the republican party had white people come in from a bible school up north.  I never would have believed that people would harrass someone to keep them from voting if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.  I find myself staying away from anyone who voted for him.  I have no respect for them.  I would not want my choice of President to get into office if he didn't win.  My mother thinks that god works in strange ways.  If her god put king george in office I want nothing to do with him.

by beccy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 87 comments) on Friday, June 15, 2007 at 10:32:40 PM
 

 

13 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008

 

 

 

 

Articles
Diaries Members
Products Events
Polls  
  

Articles Popularity:

Momentum Building For Bugliosi's Case Against George W. Bush For Murder
by Linda Milazzo

Bush Fulfills His Grandfather's Dream
by David Swanson

A Declaration of Independence from the Government of the United States
by Anonymous

The Perfect Storm from Hell
by Lord Stirling

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GAS REACHES 7 DOLLARS A GALLON ?
by Allen L Roland

Fortis Prediction of US Bank Meltdown a Net Hoax: The Making of an Urban Legend
by Paul Haughey

POW/MIA Families Alleged McCain Assault: Senate Ethics Committee Failed to Investigate
by elliot cohen

Why were 'first responders' de-contaminated at the Pentagon?
by Len Hart

Ex Weapons Inspector: Iran Not Pursuing Nukes, But U.S. Will Attack Before '09
by Jason Leopold

Raw milk and the government/corporate effort to crush it
by Linn Cohen-Cole