Rolling Stone presents an article titled Was The 2004 Election Stolen? which looks at the discrepancies in the US Presidential election. There are a number of discrepancies in any process as large as an election in a nation of almost 300 million people, but when almost all of those discrepancies favour one candidate over the other, there’s something rotten in the state of Denmark. In one instance “Kerry should have received sixty-seven percent of the vote in this precinct. Yet the certified tally gave him only thirty-eight percent.”,1),
(

What’s more, Freeman found, the greatest disparities between exit polls and the official vote count came in Republican strongholds. In precincts where Bush received at least eighty percent of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of ten percent. By contrast, in precincts where Kerry dominated by eighty percent or more, the exit polls were accurate to within three tenths of one percent — a pattern that suggests Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in Bush country.(39)

‘’When you look at the numbers, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports the supposition of election fraud,’’ concludes Freeman. ‘’The discrepancies are higher in battleground states, higher where there were Republican governors, higher in states with greater proportions of African-American communities and higher in states where there were the most Election Day complaints. All these are strong indicators of fraud — and yet this supposition has been utterly ignored by the press and, oddly, by the Democratic Party.’‘

Sure, the article is written by Robert F. Kennedy, so there’ll be accusations of partisan bias, but all his sources are listed at the bottom of the article and there’s just too much evidence for it all to be easily explained away.

Knowing what we now know about the insecurity of the Diebold election machines and the fact that the company refuses to allow independent analysis of the machines’s software, it’s easy to see how the result could be suspect. When the owner of the company, who’s a major Republican donor, comes out with a quote like the following it’s even more suspect. [link]

David Bear, a spokesman for Diebold Election Systems, said the potential risk existed because the company’s technicians had intentionally built the machines in such a way that election officials would be able to update their systems in years ahead.

“For there to be a problem here, you’re basically assuming a premise where you have some evil and nefarious election officials who would sneak in and introduce a piece of software,” he said. “I don’t believe these evil elections people exist.”

This idiot doesn’t believe corrupt election officials exist?? What planet is he living on?

It’s a long article, but definitely worth a read.