Unspun Logo

Did Bush Steal The Election?

Posted by Rick · December 14th, 2004 · 12 Comments

There’s been some talk about the possibility that this election was stolen by the Bush Administration.

Many people don’t believe it. Others think it’s impossible even if the Administration wanted to do it.

The Blue Lemur website provides a partial transcript of testimony before the Ohio Judiciary Committee investigating this issue. In it, a programmer testifies under oath that he was hired by a Florida Republican legislator (now congressman) for what he thought was a job detailing what to look for if the Democrats tried to rig voting machines to win the Florida election. Instead, he was told,

You don’t understand, we need to hide the fraud in the source. In the source code…. — site admin, Programmer that alleged vote-rigging prototype testifies to Democratic House Judiciary hearing in Ohio (December 14, 2004) The Blur Lemur.

After learning his job was to create vote-rigging software, he left the company and does not know if vote-rigging software was ever implemented. He did note that the exit polls should have tracked the vote, saying that the fact that they didn’t indicates either the exit polls or the vote were tampered with.

A lot of people don’t realize that exit polling isn’t a guessing game. It’s pretty solid science. In fact, exit polls are routinely utilized in foreign countries to detect election fraud. As Republican consultant and Fox “News” regular has said,

Exit polls are almost never wrong…. So reliable are the surveys that actually tap voters as they leave the polling places that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries. When I worked on Vicente Fox’s campaign in Mexico, for example, I was so fearful that the governing PRI would steal the election that I had the campaign commission two U.S. firms to conduct exit polls to be released immediately after the polls closed to foreclose the possibility of finagling the returns. Dick Morris, Those faulty exit polls were sabotage (November 4, 2004) The Political Life

Yet, Morris unabashedly goes on to state that this year, in the United States, “they got all the Bush states wrong.”

Steven F. Freeman, Ph.D., from the University of Pennsylvania, in his paper, “The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy,” also notes that exit polls are almost never wrong. (A PDF version is also available.) His paper documents instance after instance in nation after nation in which exit polls have been accurate to within a tenth of a percentage point. In fact, one reason exit polling was delayed by the “news” organizations this year is because the polls have historically been so accurate in the United States that reporting about them was felt to discourage voters from turning out. (It’s ironic that they did that this year, since in the last two elections, the results — being so close — would more likely inspire people to make sure they placed their vote!)

Even students learning about exit polls have these high degrees of accuracy: “Students at [Brigham Young University] have been conducting Utah exit polls since 1982.” Their tabulations? In the 2003 Salt Lake City mayoral race, they missed it by 0.2% — that’s right: two-tenths of a percentage point. And their tabulations in the 2004 Presidential Election predicted Kerry at 26.5% and Bush at 70.8%. The actual figures were Kerry, 26.4%; Bush, 71.1%. (Freeman, supra.)

So how did professionals get it wrong in states critical to Bush? How did Bush go from losing Iowa with only 48.4% (predicted) to winning by 50.1% (tallied)? How did he shift from a loss at 47.9% in Nevada to a win at 50.5%? A New Mexico loss at 47.5% to a New Mexico win at 50.0%? An Ohio loss of 47.9% to an Ohio win at 51.0%? How did the differences between exit polls and final vote counts in eleven battleground states range from 0% difference (only in Wisconsin) to as far off as 9.5%? How did George Bush go from losing the 2004 President election by 289 to 249 electoral votes in favor of Kerry to winning the election by 286 electoral votes to 252 in favor of Bush?

Chances are, the exit polls didn’t get it wrong. Given the track record of exit polls, it’s more likely the election was stolen by re-tabulating electronic votes in Republican-owned Diebold’s voting machines.

Were it not for this fraud, Kerry, not Bush, would be preparing for his inauguration. Kerry, not Bush, would be appointing the next several Supreme Court Justices. Kerry, not Bush, would be President. (And we wouldn’t be seeing international anti-U.S. sentiment in European countries starting to spill over towards the American people — historically, any distaste for America has typically been directed at our government, while American people were generally appreciated.)

If this had happened in, oh, say the Ukraine, no one would doubt that the election was fraudulent. They might even decide to hold the election over again!

So why is there not nightly discussion of this on Fox, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN or any other “news” stations? Why are there no demands or outrage from American voters?

Probably because about half the nation — including nearly all the richest Americans and Corporations, which includes those who own the “news” stations — don’t care how Bush won the election. They’re happy with the result.

And in America anymore, it’s now how you play the game — it’s whether you win or lose.

Categories: 2004 Presidential Election


12 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Malnurtured Snay // Dec 14, 2004 at 6:28 am

    Did Bush & Diebold Steal the Election?

    Don’t read this article over at Rick’s unless you want to be really upset. So how did professionals get it wrong in states critical to Bush? How did Bush go from losing Iowa with only 48.4% (predicted) to winning by…

  • 2 nick meyer // Dec 14, 2004 at 8:24 am

    Give it up already. Really, enough is enough.

  • 3 Rick Horowitz // Dec 14, 2004 at 8:57 am

    Nick, is there a reason we should “give it up”? Are you really okay with it if the election was stolen?

    Frankly, I didn’t write about this before, because I didn’t believe — like you, I don’t want to believe — that the election was stolen. After all, it means the end of democracy; it means the end of the rule of law.

    If Bush’s supporters, in fact, rigged the election for the Presidency of the United States of America — and got away with it because people like you refuse to even look at the evidence — then what — what — does that say for us? If this happened, then it means there is no more electing of Presidents. It’s a coup! A bloodless coup.

    And voting literally does not matter anymore. Not only did my vote not count, but yours didn’t, either. If what’s being reported is true, it means that a few people “picked” the President and then made it look like a majority of Americans did it. Rather than “give it up,” there should be huge protest marches in the street. It would mean that Bush is, in fact, a true dictator. It would mean that fascism is actually the form of government we have, not just some word people who hate the USA PATRIOT Act throw out.

    And if this is true, you need to remember this: just because you like a dictator doesn’t mean he’s not a dictator. What will you do if he starts doing things you don’t like?

    And, as was noted in the article — backed up by evidence, mind you, not just “give it up” — when the exact same thing happens in other countries, we make them do the election over.

    Sometimes, we even invade them.

  • 4 Rick Horowitz // Dec 14, 2004 at 10:47 am

    I’m so stunned by Nick’s response that I have to reply again. I started to email this to him, but it contains questions I’d like to ask everyone; not just him.

    Nick, your arguments are always so compelling. 😉

    In all seriousness, Nick — and remember that I like you as a person when you read this question, you’re a good neighbor and I hope you’ll continue to be, but I really want a serious answer if you can muster one — do you even THINK about things before commenting? Or do you just figure “que sera, sera – everything is going fine for me”? As insulting as the question might sound, I’m virtually at a complete loss to understand you (and others like you) in this regard. So I have to ask. I (realio trulio) don’t mean it as an insult. I just have to know how you function.

    I mean, even if you were right — and you know I don’t think you are — but even if you were right, your responses don’t make any sense. “Someone might have stolen the election? There’s actual evidence and testimony? Even Republicans say things that would make a rational person wonder if it was true? Well, give it up.”

    As I said in my response above, you may like Bush. Fine. No problem. Seriously. But would that justify these things if they’re true?

    Aren’t you the one who told me that I shouldn’t work so hard to get guys out of jail because they belong there? If not for that crime, then for some other? Are you saying that it goes the other way, too? No matter what crime you might commit — even if it includes actually rigging a U.S. election — it would be okay if you happen to be George Bush? Or do you somehow actually think that the idea of rigging an election is preposterous and could never happen?

    If that’s your view, think about these things (really think about them, folks): It happens in other countries — it just happened in the Ukraine, so they’re doing their election over again on December 26 — why not here?

    People have been known to do strange things, Nick, to get what they want. Sometimes they kill people. Sometimes they hire other people to kill people. Sometimes — remember Watergate? — even Presidents of the United States do things that are illegal to advance their political goals.

    So what makes rigging an election so unbelievable? What makes you not even want to ask to consider the evidence or investigate before saying, “give it up”?

  • 5 nick meyer // Dec 14, 2004 at 10:57 am

    Conspiracy theories are what get me. look at all the “evidence” concerning JFK’S assassination. Yet nothing changed, no “solid proof” , yet to thios day there is still talk about additional shooters etc>>. My point is this. If you honestly feel he stole the election, do something about it. Go stand at Blackstone and Shaw with your homemade signs demanding a new election. Writing here and arguing here does nothing to change the situation. ACTION!!! If not than as I said, give it up.

  • 6 Rick Horowitz // Dec 14, 2004 at 11:15 am

    So the fact that we still don’t know the truth about JFK’s assassination means we don’t bother to look at the truth of any future questionable events? All these events are connected and our inability to prove one case means we don’t bother to examine any others when questions come up? So…if there’s no proof that Cain killed Abel, do we stop putting murderers on trial in 2004? (Absurd, isn’t it? But that’s not an illogical statement based on what you said.)

    I’m fairly well convinced after reviewing the information available to me that there are reasons to seriously examine the question of whether the election was stolen. I think the chances are that it was. Am I certain? Not yet. But as I pointed out in my post, based on the kind of evidence currently out there, if this were some other country, the United States would be saying the election had been a fraud.

    And I am doing something about it. I’m not standing on a street corner where I get to freeze my buns off while I’m ignored by folk who think “well, it doesn’t matter to me if the election was stolen.” Or worse yet, having them throw bottles at me, as has happened to protesters out there before. I’m writing about it here. (And posting comments on other blogs.) I’m trying to get people to think.

    In the end, do you have to become convinced? No. It may be that you’ll see the evidence and say, “there’s no proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    But you haven’t done that. You aren’t even willing to do that.

    And that I find very puzzling. As I said before, don’t you realize that if this is true, it means your vote didn’t count, either? You just got lucky. If this is true, you happened to cast your vote for the guy who cheated. If he cheated, he would have won without you. He would have won even if you didn’t like him. He would have won even if you hated him. He would have won even if you voted against him.

    That you happen to like the guy doesn’t change any of that. Yet you manifest an “it’s not important enough to consider” attitude even though official government agencies are investigating and finding evidence that raises serious questions.

  • 7 Bob // Dec 14, 2004 at 11:19 am

    Hey Nick,

    I gotta tell you that I have to agree with Rick on this one for TWO reasons:

    1 – I did not put much weight into conspiracy theories but then that whole scandal broke about how we were treating prisoners in Iraq. I’ve been in the military and I know from personal experience that more people knew about that whole mess than were charged. That, my Harley riding friend, is conspiracy.

    Do I believe that a conspiracy large enough to steal a presidential election is possible? Probably not but that leads to my second point.

    2 – Let those that believe this theory explore and research and dig till their heart is content. If they can’t find anything substantial then it probably didn’t happen. That would bring me peace of mind.

    If, on the other hand, they DID find something, I’d want to know about it and see it fixed.

    It’s a win / win situation with little energy required from me.

    Nick, in my book anyone who owns a Harley is a good guy. Someone who owns two is off the charts. Please consider this without being offended. These are far different times than even ten years ago. I work with computers all day. ANYTHING is possible today, including throwing an election. I still think its doubtful but it IS possible.

    Hope you’re having a great holiday season! Call me if you EVER consider selling on of your bikes!

    That would make MY holiday!

  • 8 Mark // Dec 14, 2004 at 11:42 am


    Congressional hearings taking place now are uncovering stories of widespread manipulation of the voting process in multiple locations in Ohio, from actually shutting down polls because of “terrorist threats” (this was after telling poll workers the day before the election to plan for such an “emergency” shut down) to making sure that there were fewer machines available in Democratic areas to many other things.

    Furthermore the exit polls that were supposedly so wrong about the Presidential race picked the other races accurately! How could that be, Nick? When observers oversee elections in other countries, the first sign of trouble is when exit polls, which are known to be extremely reliable, are vastly different from the “results” that were reported. The voting machines, and more importantly, the computers that tabulated the votes, were owned and controlled by a company run by a partisan Republican who promised to do everything in his power to deliver Ohio for Bush. Looks like that’s precisely what he did.

    You may think all of this theft is cute, Nick. But if the shoe were on the other foot, you and all of the followers of drug-addicted radio talk show hosts throughout America would be screaming bloody murder.

    If someone broke into your house and stole everything you own, would you want others to tell you, “Give it up already. Really, enough is enough.”? Be honest. You would want something done, and you would want it done fast.

    There is a lot of credible evidence that in Ohio and other states, this election was stolen by the tabulating computers that were pre-programmed to give the desired results regardless of how citizens actually cast their votes. Your nonchalant reaction to this is both saddening and frightening. I shudder to think that so many Americans don’t seem to care.

  • 9 nick meyer // Dec 14, 2004 at 1:20 pm

    Bob I do understand. Your point # 2 is well taken.And I do not at all feel offended. If as you stated that something concrete was found then I also would like to know and see it remedied. But as you feel I doubt that anything will be found to substantiate these ridiculous claims. And I do not want to excert any energy on these liberal nut case claims.

  • 10 Rick Horowitz // Dec 14, 2004 at 3:42 pm

    I’m just curious again here, Nick.

    What is the basis for saying these are “ridiculous claims” and “liberal nut case claims”? Have you already seen this evidence and judged it insufficient after having seen it? Or are you just convinced that anyone opposing your desired outcome is clearly a nut case?

    I have, myself, called people nutcases, as you know. When I do, I provide reasons for that belief.

    But I guess in order to provide reasons, you must first have reasons.

  • 11 Mark // Dec 14, 2004 at 10:43 pm


    At one time, I had thought you were above the playground antics of a former visitor to this site who called his opponents names and ran down their ideas without offering any basis for his arguments. It’s sad to see that I was mistaken. I had thought you were better than that. Obviously, I misjudged you.

  • 12 Silvie // Dec 17, 2004 at 4:03 pm

    It seems to me that the wide-spread reluctance to consider that the possibility that the election was stolen could be anything but a nutcase conspiracy theory is rooted in two very basic facts.

    One, that US citizens are utterly unused to thinking of their country as anything but what Reagan called “the last bastion of freedom”, and their government – whether they agree with party lines and individual policies or not – as a just and democratic government doing its level best to uphold democracy, to fight for the common good, and to defend freedom. liberty, justice and everything that is right. The concept that danger could come not from outside the country and outside the laws, but from *inside*, from within the system and from the government itself – this concept is alien. It’s not a danger that occurs to people, not a threat that can be seen, or taken seriously if pointed out. This cannot happen – not here.

    Two, that to accept that the possibility exists, and that the government may truly be a real and present danger, not in a vague philosophical manner, but in a very real and immediate way – that this is a truly terrifying thing. It wouldn’t only shake the foundations of US Americans’ beliefs; that the most powerful nation on earth could basically turn into a fascist dictatorship would be a horror that no-one wants to believe. It’s just too terrible. It’s far easier to not see any signs that things might indeed be heading that way.

    I’m not even an American, and God, I so do not want to believe it. But looking at the way the Bush administration operates, as a matter of course – at the way civil rights of Americans and basic human rights of other people are being crippled more and more – both officially, in the name of terror prevention, and unofficially, in the name of “we have the power so we will damn well do it and you can do nothing to stop us”…

    This administration has shown over and over again that if it can’t get what it wants in a legal and above-board manner, it has absolutely no compunctions about doing whatever it takes. Election fraud really isn’t such a big thing, comparatively speaking.

    And yet I still don’t want to believe it is true, and I can only imagine how much less US citizens want to believe it.

    This unwillingness to believe in the awfulness of the situation because it just can’t be true, because we don’t *wan’t* it to be true, because we’d feel so helpless and terrified in the face of this potential truth that we deny belief – this unwillingness is perhaps the largest danger of all.

Leave a Comment