[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: Mozart I never said there was no evidence, I suggested that the evidence is not OBVIOUS. You have to dig for it, then you have to BELIEVE it. Diabold is run by a friend of the Bush family. Florida's govornor is The president's brother.

Great, so you have proven the ability, (which is not something you really needed to prove as I don't think anyone doubts those in power would already have this sort of ability) now you have to prove that actual events of voter fraud occurred and that they were responsible for it. Just because I have a gun doesn't mean I shot someone.

The majority of the country was for getting those responsible for the WTC attacks. Congress voted for the Iraq war due tofalsified information. Many now have recanted thier support in light of new evidence contradicting the old. In effect, the Bush administration LIED to start a war, and even many Republican congressmen are upset about that.

Exactly, so initially a lot of people believed him. So why does the general public have to be different? Why couldn't they have been fooled like everyone else into voting for him again?

I seem to recall much "hatred" for the Clinton administration, even though he didn't start any wars. All he did was have a PERSONAL relationship. Subtle difference.

Yeah, but when Clinton defeated Bush Senior everyone didn't cry election fraud. Everyone discussed how the party had lost its way. Similar to the recent 06 Senatorial election. And Clinton could have all the personal relationships he wanted as long as he didn't try and lie about them under oath. Trying to minimize that point shows bias seeing as he was even disbarred for his actions. Granted I'm not sure what Clinton has to do with the topic.

It helps when Daddy is ex-CIA director, and a good friend of the family designed and built the voting machines.

Whenever you're ready to show your actual evidence, by all means. I'm willing to look at it. Feel free to overload me with links because I'm probably not going to be able to get to it until tomorrow.

Quote by: Setnakt When have democrats shown just as much propensity for voter fraud as the republicans?

Since the party formation?

How was the democratic presidential campaign worthy of being described as "fear mongering" and full of "smear campaigns," especially in comparison to the republican campaign?

Re-read what I said. I was referring to the Bush campaign as "fear mongering" and full of "smear campaigns". Then on top of this I added the ineffective Democratic campaign for an ineffective candidate. These are the reasons why Bush was re-elected, not some back-room unsubstantiated conspiracy.

Also, according to the vote count, in both elections, the democratic candidate won. However, the supreme court ruled it in favor of the republicans both times.

That would be incorrect.
2000 was decided by the Supreme Court. 2004 was decided by a majority.