Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

PatrickHenry · Jul 5, 2005, 03:13 am

The essence of a republic is electing representatives. That voting process legitimizes or delegitimizes the subsequent government. Honest elections are the result of a process involving many elements and if certain elements are suspect, the whole election may be under a cloud. This creates mistrust from the citizens and weakens the government.

What are the elements that make for a true electoral contest?

equal ballot access for all candidates
roughly equivalent funding for all candidates
fair media treatment for all candidates
no unfair incentives or punishments for voting
unbiased polls and poll workers
a transparent voting system with safeguards to prevent outright fraud
an unbiased counting process
a means of challenging violations of the elements of fair polling

These are some I can think of. Can you list some others? My concern with our republic (USA) is that the system is becoming less transparent and less fair with each election cycle. Is this just a nearsighted myopic concern, or is it based upon widespread observations of unfairness?

Black Box Voting says that Diebold's Optical Scan system is vulnerable to tampering: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf and recommends a complete overhaul of this flawed approach to certifying an honest vote. This is a serious issue and should be dealt with before the next election cycle. But other elements of the process are breaking down, too. Do we as a voting public care? Or are we willing to trust that somehow everything will "work out okay?"

What are your views on elections in America? Do you think anyone would really be willing to cheat, here?

tinybear · Jul 5, 2005, 03:25 am

I never thought the USA has absolutely fair and equal voting system. For a start there are always only two candidates/parties with any realistic chance of being elected and there are virtually no restrictions on election spending. So unless you belong to the two major political parties and have a lot of money to spend on your election campaign, you might as well not enter the race. In effect, what happens in America is a bunch of wealthy, elite members of the community get together and decide which two candidates can compete for the Presidency and the rest of the population's choice is restricted to the two they choose.

oranged · Jul 5, 2005, 03:57 am

I agree, look what happened to Ralph Nader.

tinybear · Jul 5, 2005, 03:57 am

Or even a wealthy guy like Ross Perot.

m3talsmith_redu · Jul 5, 2005, 09:56 am

Welcome to the Libertarian world.

Nono · Jul 5, 2005, 10:42 am

Quote:

Quote by: m3

Welcome to the Libertarian world.

Or to the Electoral Reform World.
But both are probably equally illusory.

lsbskins1 · Jul 5, 2005, 11:59 am

This is the way I see it. We have a two party system and for the most part it has served us well. No matter what "system" you choose, their will be draw-backs. Multi-party systems allow for more varried representation, but they are also notorious for inefficiency (small minority groups can hi-jack the process and halt almost anything from progressing unless their demands are met). I mean, look at Israel and the Knesset. Look at how the far right in that country can hamstring almost any move those in the main stream attempt. Is their any absolute way to assure there is no cheating and voting is completely staight-forward? I don't believe there is, but as long as we are aware and vigilent, I believe elections are as close to honest as you can get in this country, under our economic and social systems.

Osborn F Enready · Jul 5, 2005, 01:20 pm

Ibiskins said:
This is the way I see it. We have a two party system and for the most part it has served us well.

I say:
What laws have been passed in the last 154 years that make your life better, and increase your liberty? It has only been 154 years since we have been "MAINLY" a two party country.

In the last election the Libertarians achieved ballot access in 49 states for the presidential election with practically NO media. That means they met, or surpassed all ballot requirements without the help of major network media, and that is a significant accomplishment of notice no matter how you slice it.

Media sways the largest majority of voters, if the Libertarian canidate is given equal time to debate, address and lobby the public as the major parties, this will no longer be a two party country. I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT!

The two major parties are SOLELY responsible for the dismantling of our Constitution, and our Bill of Rights.

PatrickHenry · Jul 5, 2005, 01:39 pm

My thesis is that the vote can be rigged in a number of ways. It can only be fair if ALL of the means of rigging are forestalled. I submit that there are numerous rigged elections in our homeland(USA) and that they have delegitimized our government.

Milton Bradley · Jul 5, 2005, 01:54 pm

Quote:

Quote by: PatrickHenry

My thesis is that the vote can be rigged in a number of ways. It can only be fair if ALL of the means of rigging are forestalled. I submit that there are numerous rigged elections in our homeland(USA) and that they have delegitimized our government.

It is so bad, and so recognized that Jimmy Carter's organization is not even allowed to work under conditions this poor. Ironically, they are forbidden from the organizations charter.

lsbskins1 · Jul 5, 2005, 02:29 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Osborn F Enready

I say:
What laws have been passed in the last 154 years that make your life better, and increase your liberty?

UMM, lets see...
[Article XVII.]
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
(Direct election of Senators rather than appointment by state legislators, gave me greater say in my government, increasing my liberty. Ratified 1913)

Article [XIX].
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
(I'm a woman, so this has very large bearing on my rights and liberties. Ratified 1920)

Amendment XXII
Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
(Presidential Term Limit decreases chance of abuse of power by sheer accumulation of power over time. Increases my long-term chances of securing my liberty against tyrany)

Title IX

Allowed me to participate in High School Athletics on an equal footing with my male counterparts and learn what men had for so longed claimed women were unable to learn without competitive chances, how to work as part of a team. Increased my marketability in the world of work and enhanced my life in multiple other ways.

Do you really want me to go on...?

Quote:

Quote by: Osborn F Enready

Media sways the largest majority of voters, if the Libertarian canidate is given equal time to debate, address and lobby the public as the major parties, this will no longer be a two party country. I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT!

The Whigs are gone, the Federalists are gone. There have been times in our history when there was a shift in power and a new party came to prominence. If the time is right for Libretarians, it will happen, but I bet there were members of the Progressive party who made the same sort of guarantees and they would have been wrong.

PatrickHenry · Jul 6, 2005, 01:26 pm

Anybody catch this show on PBS last night? http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2005/streetfight/
About the mayoral race in Newark NJ in 2002? All the stuff I mentioned in my initial post was in play apparently. Lots of intimidation and dirty tactics resulted in a win by the incumbent. Yeesh!

Quote:

There's a saying that democracy is a contact sport. The new film "Street Fight" gives you a ringside seat. Even if you know the outcome from national reports, or lived in Newark at the time, this insider's chronicle of the 2002 race for mayor in Newark, New Jersey is riveting, delivering a dramatic account of youthful energy and ideals running headlong into old-guard machine politics and racial demagoguery. These opposing forces are, of course, nothing new in American elections. But, in Newark in 2002, a black mayor was using these tactics against a black challenger.

Early on, a staffer for Cory Booker, the upstart challenger in the race, warns that this election will be decided in the streets. "Street Fight" lives up to the staffer's prediction — and to its own title — as the campaign between Booker and four-time Mayor Sharpe James devolves from dirty tricks to intimidation to the threat of worse. The film crew itself becomes a target for Mayor James' supporters — and the mayor himself — who see everyone as either for them or against them.

Osborn F Enready · Jul 6, 2005, 06:47 pm

Ibskins said:
UMM, lets see...
[Article XVII.]
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
(Direct election of Senators rather than appointment by state legislators, gave me greater say in my government, increasing my liberty. Ratified 1913)

Article [XIX].
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
(I'm a woman, so this has very large bearing on my rights and liberties. Ratified 1920)

Amendment XXII
Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
(Presidential Term Limit decreases chance of abuse of power by sheer accumulation of power over time. Increases my long-term chances of securing my liberty against tyrany)

Title IX

Allowed me to participate in High School Athletics on an equal footing with my male counterparts and learn what men had for so longed claimed women were unable to learn without competitive chances, how to work as part of a team. Increased my marketability in the world of work and enhanced my life in multiple other ways.

Do you really want me to go on...?

I say:
YES, I want you to show me some LAWS, not constitutional AMENDMENTS. I am talking about laws that are actually heard in court, besides the supreme court. I am not talking about common law, the only REAL LAW, I am talking about civil law, tax law, you know, the big books you are required to know every letter of, since ignorance of the law is no excuse.

One of these forms of law:
http://dir.yahoo.com/Government/U_S__Government/Law/

This is just the tax code....(over 17,000 pages, and over 700 different forms required.)
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/#TITLES

Constitutional Law is changed by THE PEOPLE, and that was in no great part to party politics. Party politics is what is passed into law everyday, when the cameras aren't on them (except of course C-Spans, bless their hearts.)

So please, tell me, out of the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of laws passed by the two major parties, is the overwhelming percentage to benefit the citizens?

Is it possible to know all legal code that pertains to the average citizen, or may effect them in any situation?

PatrickHenry · Apr 22, 2006, 03:39 am

Warren County, Ohio: http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publ...icle_721.shtml

Quote:

The Free Press predicted early on that the ballots would be found punched only for Bush in Warren County. The Moss v. Bush lawsuit pointed to Warren, Butler and Clermont Counties as the three counties that provided more than Bush's entire margin in the Buckeye State: Bush won Ohio by 118,000, and 132,000 votes were supplied in these three southwestern Republican counties.

Now, for the first time, the Free Press is releasing images of the obvious election fraud in Warren County. The Free Press will continue its ongoing investigation in Ohio despite stonewalling by Republican state officials. See the images by clicking on the link

Milton Bradley · Apr 22, 2006, 06:49 am

Great!

I wonder if this is in time to ruin the Republican candidates efforts to gain office this election?

We sure need to keep certain crooks out of office. ( Like Ken Blackwell )

[crosses fingers, and hopes]

Milton Bradley · Apr 23, 2006, 10:46 am

I saw a story on C-SPAN where Ken Blackwell came forward, and claimed that a financial manager ( without his knowledge ) heavily invested Blackwell in Diebold just prior to the last election. He came forward to report that he has, upon "learning" of the investment, that he will be divesting himself of the stocks.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0406-27.htm

http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/04/gop_calls_for_i.php

Isn't this a comforting little story?

Jul 5, 2005, 03:13 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
PatrickHenry 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438	Vote Rigging in America The essence of a republic is electing representatives. That voting process legitimizes or delegitimizes the subsequent government. Honest elections are the result of a process involving many elements and if certain elements are suspect, the whole election may be under a cloud. This creates mistrust from the citizens and weakens the government. What are the elements that make for a true electoral contest? equal ballot access for all candidates roughly equivalent funding for all candidates fair media treatment for all candidates no unfair incentives or punishments for voting unbiased polls and poll workers a transparent voting system with safeguards to prevent outright fraud an unbiased counting process a means of challenging violations of the elements of fair polling These are some I can think of. Can you list some others? My concern with our republic (USA) is that the system is becoming less transparent and less fair with each election cycle. Is this just a nearsighted myopic concern, or is it based upon widespread observations of unfairness? Black Box Voting says that Diebold's Optical Scan system is vulnerable to tampering: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf and recommends a complete overhaul of this flawed approach to certifying an honest vote. This is a serious issue and should be dealt with before the next election cycle. But other elements of the process are breaking down, too. Do we as a voting public care? Or are we willing to trust that somehow everything will "work out okay?" What are your views on elections in America? Do you think anyone would really be willing to cheat, here? "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams

Jul 5, 2005, 03:57 am	#3 (permalink) (top)
oranged fanatic and profound Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 335	I agree, look what happened to Ralph Nader. "It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it."- Aung San Suu Kyi

Jul 5, 2005, 11:59 am	#7 (permalink) (top)
lsbskins1 Redskins Rule Location: South-Western Virginia Posts: 2,456	This is the way I see it. We have a two party system and for the most part it has served us well. No matter what "system" you choose, their will be draw-backs. Multi-party systems allow for more varried representation, but they are also notorious for inefficiency (small minority groups can hi-jack the process and halt almost anything from progressing unless their demands are met). I mean, look at Israel and the Knesset. Look at how the far right in that country can hamstring almost any move those in the main stream attempt. Is their any absolute way to assure there is no cheating and voting is completely staight-forward? I don't believe there is, but as long as we are aware and vigilent, I believe elections are as close to honest as you can get in this country, under our economic and social systems. All I see when I look down, something jumpin' on the ground, Scratchin' dirt, cluckin' in the barnyard - Tell me, could that be you? John Kay

Jul 5, 2005, 01:20 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	Ibiskins said: This is the way I see it. We have a two party system and for the most part it has served us well. I say: What laws have been passed in the last 154 years that make your life better, and increase your liberty? It has only been 154 years since we have been "MAINLY" a two party country. In the last election the Libertarians achieved ballot access in 49 states for the presidential election with practically NO media. That means they met, or surpassed all ballot requirements without the help of major network media, and that is a significant accomplishment of notice no matter how you slice it. Media sways the largest majority of voters, if the Libertarian canidate is given equal time to debate, address and lobby the public as the major parties, this will no longer be a two party country. I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT! The two major parties are SOLELY responsible for the dismantling of our Constitution, and our Bill of Rights. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

Jul 5, 2005, 01:39 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
PatrickHenry 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438	My thesis is that the vote can be rigged in a number of ways. It can only be fair if ALL of the means of rigging are forestalled. I submit that there are numerous rigged elections in our homeland(USA) and that they have delegitimized our government. "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams

Jul 5, 2005, 03:25 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Hong Kong (for now) Posts: 7,016	I never thought the USA has absolutely fair and equal voting system. For a start there are always only two candidates/parties with any realistic chance of being elected and there are virtually no restrictions on election spending. So unless you belong to the two major political parties and have a lot of money to spend on your election campaign, you might as well not enter the race. In effect, what happens in America is a bunch of wealthy, elite members of the community get together and decide which two candidates can compete for the Presidency and the rest of the population's choice is restricted to the two they choose.

Jul 5, 2005, 03:57 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Hong Kong (for now) Posts: 7,016	Or even a wealthy guy like Ross Perot.

Jul 5, 2005, 09:56 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
m3talsmith_redu Libertarian Location: S. Michigan Posts: 173	Welcome to the Libertarian world.

Jul 6, 2005, 06:47 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	Ibskins said: UMM, lets see... [Article XVII.] The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. (Direct election of Senators rather than appointment by state legislators, gave me greater say in my government, increasing my liberty. Ratified 1913) Article [XIX]. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. (I'm a woman, so this has very large bearing on my rights and liberties. Ratified 1920) Amendment XXII Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term. (Presidential Term Limit decreases chance of abuse of power by sheer accumulation of power over time. Increases my long-term chances of securing my liberty against tyrany) Title IX Allowed me to participate in High School Athletics on an equal footing with my male counterparts and learn what men had for so longed claimed women were unable to learn without competitive chances, how to work as part of a team. Increased my marketability in the world of work and enhanced my life in multiple other ways. Do you really want me to go on...? I say: YES, I want you to show me some LAWS, not constitutional AMENDMENTS. I am talking about laws that are actually heard in court, besides the supreme court. I am not talking about common law, the only REAL LAW, I am talking about civil law, tax law, you know, the big books you are required to know every letter of, since ignorance of the law is no excuse. One of these forms of law: http://dir.yahoo.com/Government/U_S__Government/Law/ This is just the tax code....(over 17,000 pages, and over 700 different forms required.) http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/#TITLES Constitutional Law is changed by THE PEOPLE, and that was in no great part to party politics. Party politics is what is passed into law everyday, when the cameras aren't on them (except of course C-Spans, bless their hearts.) So please, tell me, out of the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of laws passed by the two major parties, is the overwhelming percentage to benefit the citizens? Is it possible to know all legal code that pertains to the average citizen, or may effect them in any situation? Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

Apr 22, 2006, 06:49 am	#15 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	Great! I wonder if this is in time to ruin the Republican candidates efforts to gain office this election? We sure need to keep certain crooks out of office. ( Like Ken Blackwell ) [crosses fingers, and hopes]

Apr 23, 2006, 10:46 am	#16 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	I saw a story on C-SPAN where Ken Blackwell came forward, and claimed that a financial manager ( without his knowledge ) heavily invested Blackwell in Diebold just prior to the last election. He came forward to report that he has, upon "learning" of the investment, that he will be divesting himself of the stocks. http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0406-27.htm http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/04/gop_calls_for_i.php Isn't this a comforting little story?