Bush Really Proud About Allowing Election

We missed this on Saturday, because who the hell actually listens to the President’s Radio Address, but it’s still worth a post because it’s insane. Here’s an actual quote from Bush on the radio:

One freedom that defines our way of life is the freedom to choose our leaders at the ballot box. We saw that freedom earlier this week, when millions of Americans went to the polls to cast their votes for a new Congress. Whatever your opinion of the outcome, all Americans can take pride in the example our democracy sets for the world by holding elections even in a time of war.

Jesus Christ, we never figured James Baker III would save democracy ….

Soft-bigotry-of-low-expectations watch [Carpetbagger Report]
President’s Radio Address [White House]

When Strategy Fails, Rove Will Fight Dirty

By Larisa Alexandrovna, AlterNet
Posted on November 3, 2006, Printed on November 7, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/43798/

Let us begin in the middle -- that is, at the center of a chess board, the most important area strategically to control in any game -- and take a bird's eye view. There is no question that all things being equal, the Democrats will utterly slaughter their opponents from one side of the nation, slashing and slicing, all the way to the other.

I am therefore amused at the Monday-night quarterbacking going on -- still -- as though with only a week left, the outcome of this upcoming election is still somehow debatable. Karl Rove -- aka Bush's colon -- might have his math, as he so arrogantly chirped recently, but the rest of the science-abiding world can still add and subtract, and it is quite obvious to anyone with the ability to dress themselves in the morning that there are simply not enough members of the hate constituency to deliver this election to the Republicans. There are not enough homophobes, bigots, and criminal braggarts left to offset the massive exodus of the recently awakened from the rotting base of the GOP.

The strategy played thus far by the RNC has been catastrophic, and all the talk of a Rove endgame surprise -- that is, a legal surprise -- is pure nonsense to anyone who understands strategy, as well as to anyone who knows that once you have lost control of the center, you are at a material disadvantage, and your opponent is positioned but a few moves from checkmate, there is absolutely nothing that can be done to salvage the game.

Then again, Rove has never been a strong chess player, or strategist even. His success comes simply from his willingness to act outside the law, an endless amount of money with which to do it, and connections that will keep him safe from legal prosecution. That is not genius, it is simply power crank. Because he is such a weak strategist, Rove tends to play the same game over and over and over. But his favored divide-aggravate-focus strategy is not working this time; it is simply far too visible, and the GOP is far too corrupt for even the most faith-based of their base.

So then why have I been in near panic for the last few weeks?

Because all things are not equal, or even barely Constitutional, and they have not been for some time now.

Distilling panic

Because I play chess, I can see that (a) the Republicans must hold the House to avoid impeachment, (b) yet because it is simply not probable that the GOP can hold the House, then (c) the game must be altered to favor the GOP in some way.

There is no question that the Republicans must keep the House, if they are to avoid criminal investigations which will no doubt land many of them in prison. More importantly, the unprecedented abuse of power by the White House cannot be allowed to be examined or investigated, because there is enough evidence to not only impeach this administration, but also to convict them of serious, criminal, even treasonous acts.

But that is not all that is at stake here, because of the unprecedented corruption, criminal activity, and outright violations of domestic and international law that include as bedfellows fascists and corporate interests. Halliburton, Exxon, and AT&T, for example, will no doubt face serious probes. Halliburton alone has been engaged in enough criminal activity to make the combined crimes of Enron, Arthur Andersen, and WorldCom look like standard operating procedure in comparison.

But how?

My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will, never, never surrender to what is right. —Dan Quayle

Since the House must be kept under GOP control at all costs, thereby assuring a safe haven for the blue chip mob, how can such a miracle be pulled off in the face of simple math?

I am obviously not speaking from a position of direct knowledge when I present what I feel are logical scenarios. This is pure speculation on my part. That said, however, I am speculating as a person who studies history, as a chess player, and as someone who understands what is really at stake here.

The only way that Republicans can fix an election watched this closely and with so much focus on vote fraud allegations -- and with good reason -- against a party that excels in suppressing the vote, is for them to have three very important control mechanisms in place and operational: numbers, media and diversion.

It's all in the numbers

Karl Rove's recent deployment of a "question the polls" edict to his minions shows that the argument is already being planted by which to minimize the shock of an impossible GOP win. But that alone is not nearly enough when real math is to be Republicanized.

Have you ever wondered why it is that the GOP will go out of its way to falsely register Democratic voters as Republican voters? The most recent example of this bizarre activity occurred in Orange County, where 12 Republican operatives have tricked Democrats into registering as Republicans. What is the point of putting so much effort and money into wrongly registering people, when in the end, regardless of party affiliation, people vote in private for whomever they choose?

The answer is, quite simply, that if you are going to fix an election, you have to show that the exit polls are wrong, an argument that tends to cause mass riots in other countries, but in the math-impaired States seems to have no effect.

One way to show that the exit polls are inaccurate is to point to increased registration for a particular party and thereby claim larger voter turn out, because despite how someone actually votes, the GOP can claim she/he voted for a Republican candidate based on her/his party affiliation, listed on their newly minted registration card.

But this too is not enough to make the numbers game work. Consider, for example, the obvious issue surrounding black voters appearing on election day in large numbers. African-Americans generally vote for Democrats, and because they can be identified as opposition voters simply by the color of their skin, their visibility might counter the Republicanized math version of reality.

In Ohio during this past election cycle, it was possible to see Democratic voters in large numbers waiting in line for up to 11 hours because of the color of their skin, something that the bigots of the RNC cannot afford to simply put, the visible presence of black voters might make lying about the tally that much more difficult. Which is why Ohio was such an obvious mess of numbers.

So for the GOP to win, voters of color must be purged, and have been in large numbers already. This now applies to Hispanic voters as well, since the hate constituency has added them to this election cycle's undesirables list.

In Florida, for example, during the 2000 and 2004 election cycles, the GOP created a caging list by which to suppress Democratic voter turnout. That list was based on the color of the voter's skin, and regular citizens who had never committed a crime in their life ended up on felon lists across the state. In Florida, felons cannot vote, and at least 20 thousand innocent Americans suddenly found themselves listed as felons. During the same election cycles, the Hispanic community had actual felons scrubbed off a real felon list, because in Florida the anti-Castro Cuban community tends to vote Republican.

Now, however, the anti-immigration rhetoric has put Hispanics on the target list, so they too are being purged from registration lists across the nation or intimidated into not voting by phony GOP letters sent out warning them of arrests.

For a party who claims that they represent the majority of American people, even claiming a mandate last time around, they sure go to a great deal of trouble to suppress voter turn out, do they not?

Karl Rove's recent comments about his own private math system adds to the fuzzy math suspicions, because other than to monitor in advance what adjustments need to be made for each district, why does he need to watch polls so closely? Remember, these are people who claim over and over that they don't pay attention to the polls to begin with.

I have never heard Howard Dean say he watches all the national polls to this extent, or even the number of polls he pays attention to. Rove's assertion that he has access to roughly 65 polls and claims he is privy to polls that the public is not privy to, should have sent shockwaves through our brave new Democracy. Is Howard Dean privy to this same information, or is Karl Rove just the lucky one?

I have asked the following since day one of this presidency and still have gotten no answer: Why does Karl Rove get to run the national election representing only one party from the national seat of power and using the highest of security clearances and all the power of the presidency? How is this legal?

Add to this the brilliance of the early-voting system, which of course is just so convenient for us working folks, giving us extra options of when to vote, just in case we have to work on election day. Did it ever occur to anyone to simply make national voting day a national holiday, thereby giving people the day to cast their ballot?

And the early-vote coupled with the "ease-of-technology without paper" concept together make U.S. elections now the best hacked open secret in the world.

Consider Broward County, Fla., in 2004 as an example of how to adjust the numbers game in advance of the actual national voting day. It was amazing that no one seemed to really notice or care that on election day, 21 voting machines were mysteriously disappeared after having been left unattended for two weeks during the early voting period. Yes, they had votes on them. I tried to find these machines at the time: who took them, where they were taken to, and for what reason really, etc. Sadly, I did not get very far.

Someone has to set the tone: Enter the media

None of the GOP's contract on America can happen, of course, without the help of an obliging fourth estate, who will always deny accusations of election fraud while trying to make funny math seem like a logical explanation for the improbable.

Remember the "sore-loser" theory as a way to explain away anyone who questioned the math of the 2004 Ohio miracle? Or what about myth of the "values voter," who suddenly appeared in large numbers to give the Bush-Cheney cabal a mandate? The right wing targeted (also as part of the distraction mechanism) anyone who relied on logic and reason, labeling him or her a lunatic, idiot, or bad sport. The right had help from the mainstream media, of course, and from the label-phobic liberals who embraced this foolishness for whatever reason.

The exit polls simply could not account for the sudden influx sometime around 10 p.m. EST of these mysterious values voters, who inexplicably and suddenly moved Ohio into magical number territory. That did not stop the press from using this nonsense to explain away those who dared to question the supposed Christians of America. The exit polls told us who really won and have been accurately predicting elections all over the world for ages. But since Bush and the Republicans took over America, exit polls have suddenly become faith-based.

During the same election cycle, Ukrainian citizens took to the streets when the exit polls were out of sync with the official outcome. The American media supported the citizens of Ukraine in their effort to reclaim their electoral victory, but they abandoned their own citizens who pointed to the same type of discrepancies in our domestic election. Our media was more than willing to help spread democracy and champion free elections in another country, just not here, where it would be too close to their own paychecks, it seems.

Distraction

The most important feature for a stolen election, Republican-style or otherwise, is to create a distraction to draw attention away from the theft. The media cannot do its part without some pieces and lies to work with, and the RNC has been very creative in throwing sand in the eyes of American citizens. In order for the media to even halfway buy into the tricky numbers game and subsequently sell it to the public, there must be an event or some dramatic effect that mobilizes the supporters of the GOP while at the same time silencing the opposition. Once again, enter the mysterious values-voters and their magic numbers.

Fatih is personal and sacred to any real practicing member of any religious institution. Using faith as a distraction was as brilliant as it was cynical. On the one hand, the hate constituency was mobilized by pride and fiercely protective of its supposed victory. It made a great deal of noise, if anyone remembers, despite the reality of what the math showed. On the other hand, the left was largely intimidated into near silence for fear of attacking something as personal as faith.

This time around, however, the real Christians in America have pushed back against the hate constituency and exposed not only their duplicity but also their small numbers. Sure, there are some small voter pockets of the pedophiles-for-God clique, but they are hardly a force of any import.

Enter now

What then will be our current distraction, and how will it be delivered to a public finally wide awake and paying attention? My near-panic mode almost entirely hinges on this one question.

The fuzzy numbers game is obvious and a given, for me anyway, at this point. But it is the distraction mechanism that keeps me awake at night.

To really understand the full implications of the distraction question, it has to be cut into pieces and digested slowly for the full flavor of my concern to register.

What would a morally bankrupt, criminal, and arrogant person with a casket full of millions do in order to retain power? What would a person who is willing to violate the Geneva Conventions, torture and degrade people, and watch as an entire American city slowly drowns on live television do to retain power? And what would someone like this, with an endless supply of resources and money, with the highest security clearances and running a campaign from the national seat of power, be able to achieve?

Does this not frighten you? It frightens me greatly. What can be done that would occupy a no-longer friendly media and silence an outraged public when the election results come down and, once again, show up as imaginary numbers and mysterious calculations?

And this is where my usually logical, measured self begins to see the sheen of tin-foil. One scenario, especially, has kept me swimming in liquid foil for weeks, hoping to be wrong and hoping against hope to prove that history need not repeat itself.

In case of an emergency

The possibility of something sinister delivered as a diversion is not unthinkable, given this crowd and what they have already done. But how far would they be willing to go in order to retain power and thus avoid prosecution for crimes already committed?

If recent developments are any indication, we may be looking at something so drastic that I am fully ready to attire myself from head-to-toe in all manner of paranoia. There is logic here, and it is measurable, adding fuel to my near panic.

When the President recently signed the Military Commissions Act (better known as the Stalin “No Man, No Problem” Decree), amounting to the end of habeus corpus, my panic became palpable. This law is so antithetical to the principles of democracy, that to even put pen to paper in order to sign this farce of a bill into law amounts to treason, in my humble opinion.

This law literally gives the president alone full authority over all branches of government to decide who is an enemy of the United States and who is an ally. It grants the president power over that person's freedom, property, and basic human rights -- short of organ failure (as if murder in secret can be objectively investigated for signs of "organ failure" type torture). The operative word here is "secret" and the frightening reality is that if one considers the crimes this administration has already committed by the light of day, imagine what happens when night falls.

For whom was this law really passed, and why was it so urgent before the election? Add to the MCA the passage of HR 5122, which has buried in it authority for the president to federalize the National Guard. Again, for what purpose is this law needed, and why was it so urgently needed before the election? Are there not other, more pressing, more obvious issues to deal with?

My panic continues from my initial question to what, for lack of any real answers, my imagination addresses.

If there is no insurrection, then why suspend habeus corpus? Unless it is a contingency plan for a possible insurrection. Why pass this before the election, urgently, as though the country were on fire and despite the begging of the world? Perhaps the contingency planning for an insurrection is taking into account what the exit polls will once again fail to deliver. Perhaps the answer is as simple as it is historically supportable: (a) if the GOP cannot give up control of Congress, (b) and there is ample proof that they will retain control of Congress through election fraud, then (c) faced with a no longer sedated public, this brave new America of the GOP might require extreme measures in order to secure peace in the event of an uprising, (d) perhaps through something like domestic policing measures.

This may be my Soviet-background paranoia coming into play. Or it may be the shiny-happy tin foil that has grown on my skin over the course of this presidency.

But as a chess player, I too am watching the game and attempting to calculate well in advance the strategy and the desired outcome of my opponent. I have to play out each possible scenario to its end and find the most logical and probable solution, even if it is possibly the most morally challenging one. I have to assess my opponents from top to bottom and calculate what they are planning to do based on what they have already done.

All that said, in the end, the most frightening aspect of the brave new American election system is that it appears to move in the ether, with stage-craft, far removed from us citizen-voters, despite its direct effect on every facet of our daily lives. It is that sense of having no voice that frightens me to no end, and it is the fear that attempting to reclaim that voice might cause an already deadly animal to go on the defensive. But since when has fear ever stopped a revolution?

© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/43798/

Problems Reported With Voting Machines by Microvote

Several Reports Say New Voting Machines Not Working

Problems during early voting on the Suncoast

Down phone lines might affect Election Day

Mo. elections chief in election dispute

Would open source make elections fair?

Poll workers struggle with vote machines

Local Polling Places Report Some Problems

VOTE FRAUD AND THE BANKRUPTCY OF THE UNITED STATES

The 2004 US Elections: The Mother of all Vote Frauds

Politics

Gutter politics has reached a new low. Automated push polling has been introduced to the get out the vote operation. It is cheap and deadly. If you haven't received one of these, very briefly, it works like this. The computer calls hundreds of thousands of people and plays a message like: Hello, this is the XYZ polling company. Press 1 if you know that candidate A supports conducting medical experiments on innocent healthy babies, else press 2. Then it asks more questions, but the purpose is to slander candidate A, who supports stem cell research, not run a poll. The NYT has the story.

The table below contains the final predictions of the top political analysts in the country, as well as Electoral-vote.com. The order of the numbers is: Democrats-Republicans-Tossups. As you can see, some analysts are bold and brave and give actual predictions, while others try to weasel out of making tough choices. Clearly a Senate prediction of 27-40-33 can't be wrong, but it isn't very ambitious. Final results will come in the next few days, or after the Supreme Court meets, whichever comes first. The electoral-vote.com entry is based on the polls. The Votemaster entry is my personal intuition.

Politics

Researchers at Harvard have looked at the youth vote (18-24) and written a short report on their findings. Briefly summarized, expected turnout, although pitiful (32%), will be better than usual, and highly Democratic. The young voters give President Bush a D+ grade on Iraq and a C- overall and think it is time for a change. If the Democrats could mobilize these young, but apathetic, voters, they could win big time. Is giving out free beer in front of polling places legal?

On the sleaze front, disgraced Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH) has finally resigned from Congress after pleading guilty to taking money from Jack Abramoff in return for favors.

In other sleaze news, Ted Haggard, the head of the National Association of Evangelicals until yesterday, when he resigned after word got out that he had been hiring a gay prostitute for 3 years now admits that he bought methamphetamine. However, he says he never used it. What a dodo. Why pay good money for drugs and not use them? That's as stupid as Bill Clinton paying good money for marijuana and not inhaling. Advice to politicians: it is better not to buy drugs at all, but if you must buy them, use them. It makes you look uncool to buy the drugs and then flush them down the toilet. You're never going to get the 18-24 year olds to vote for you that way.

Politics

The final Rothenberg Report prior to the election is out. Rothenberg is predicting a Democratic gain of 34 to 40 seats in the House, a victory that would rival the Republican tidal wave of 1994. Our best guess is a gain of 38 seats, well within Rothenberg's range. Rothenberg also expects the Democrats to pick up six seats in the Senate and gain control.

Rep. Don Sherwood of PA-10, whose idea of family values is choking his long-term mistress, a Peruvian immigrant 35 years his junior, has agreed to pay her $500,000 to buy her silence, according to an AP report.

In other family values related news, Ted Haggard, the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, resigned yesterday after a male prostitute said that Haggard had paid him for sex for three years. The prostitute did not accuse Haggard of trying to choke him to death and no settlement has been reported. This news item is related to the election because Haggard has campaigned very hard for a proposition on the ballot in Colorado (where Haggard lives) that would ban gay marriages in the state. The proposition does not address the issue of gay prostitution, however.

Projected New Senate: 50 Democrats 49 Republicans 1 tie

Projected New House*: 241 Democrats 193 Republicans 1 Tie

How to Stop the November Elections from Being Stolen

By Don Hazen, AlterNet
Posted on October 30, 2006, Printed on October 30, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/43645/

"We can't let the machinations of possible electoral problems prevent us from getting to the polls in massive numbers; in fact, it is an argument to get even more people to vote, so that the majorities are fool proof." -- Robert Greenwald, Producer, Director Iraq for Sale and Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices.

Emotions are running high as the mid-term election approaches, and polls show Democrats are ahead in many key Congressional races. Less than two weeks before the Nov. 7 election, the latest Associated Press-AOL News poll found that likely voters overwhelmingly prefer Democrats over Republicans.

Voters are angry with President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress, and say Iraq and the economy are their top issues. In the poll, 56 percent of likely voters said they would vote to send a Democrat to the House and 37 percent said they would vote Republican -- a 19-point difference. Only 12 percent of likely voters say they are enthusiastic about the administration. The percentage of those who say they are angry with it has grown to 40 percent from 32 percent in early October."

In the light of such overwhelming poll numbers, Democrats and progressives sense the opportunity to win back at least one of the Houses of Congress, perhaps both, ending the iron rule of the Republicans. But -- there is a big "but."

The hope of many Democrats for success on November 7th is sharply tempered by still-fresh memories of perceived Democratic victories turned into defeat in 2000 and 2004. Even more disconcerting is the fact that since 2004, there has been overwhelming documentation of voter repression and fraud. The result is that many believe that past elections have been stolen, and efforts to prevent people from voting -- especially minorities -- have been successful.

Voter protection groups gearing up

In the face of the fear about what might be in store come election day, a veritable cottage industry of voter protection/election reform groups and coalitions has emerged. They include ElectionDefenseAlliance.org, Do More Than Vote, VerifiedVoting.org and the Velvet Revolution, which has developed an Election Protection Strike Team (the Strike Team has offered rewards for evidence of fraud and have a hot line for people to call: 1-888 VOTETIP), and MoveOn.org has a comprehensive progressive voter contact program to reach out to voters.

Other innovative efforts are emerging and ratcheting up their operations for November 7th, to protect the vote and stymie the voter shenanigans that have frustrated the country in recent elections, including: Video the Vote, which are taking advantage of inexpensive video cameras, and the Internet, planning for their teams to be the eyes and ears of the voter protection effort. Meanwhile, Working Assets has created a Voter Protection Immediate Response Network for using text messaging to alert voters of problems where they may send a message about a short and easy action that could be taken -- like get more voting machines to a precinct that is overloaded.

Overcoming the negative expectations

However, part of the struggle leading up to the election is to neutralize negative expectations about voting and counting, as well as increase turnout amidst widespread worries that votes won't be counted or they will be turned away at the polls. Ronald Walters, director of the African American Leadership Institute at the University of Maryland, told Ian Urbina of the New York Times:

...[E]pisodes of voter suppression that were dismissed in 2000 as unfounded recurred in 2004 and were better documented because rights groups dispatched thousands of lawyers and poll watchers. In addition, the first national data-tracking tool, the Election Incident Reporting System, offered a national hotline that fed a database of what ended up to be 40,000 problems. This hot line is live for the 2006 election at 1-800-OUR-VOTE.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile told the Times, "This notion that elections are stolen and that elections are rigged is so common in the public sphere that we're having to go out of our way to counter them this year. This will be the first midterm election in which the Democratic Party is mobilizing teams of lawyers and poll watchers, to check for irregularities including suppression of the black vote, in at least a dozen of the closest districts."

The voting situation is dicey

It is no exaggeration to suggest that the overall voting situation is dicey and volatile. Advocates and experts who have exposed the system for its many failures are now faced with the fact that very little has been fixed or changed to make the system more transparent, accountable, or trustworthy. In fact Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar writing in the Los Angeles Times suggests: "Election Day could bring a new round of problems, confusion and partisan rancor. Unproven electronic voting machines, stricter voter identification requirements in many states, new databases and partisan disputes over registration campaigns are all contributing to the concern."

Thus, the situation at the polls is arguably worse than in 2004, and the steady drumbeat of election fraud has had its impact. No one disagrees that the Republicans benefit from low turnout: the lower the better, to take advantage of their effective consumer voter targeting -- something that the Democrats have yet to master. In fact, some would say that Karl Rove is smiling at every report of election fraud and machine breakdown, thinking that it will make the Democratic voters more paranoid. Rove's recent assertion on NPR that, based upon "secret polls," the Republicans are going to keep control of Congress was evidence to some that the election was already being stolen.

Encouraging voters

So what do you tell voters to help them combat this psychological problem that could depress voting? "I tell voters we have to win by such an overwhelming margin that it isn't close enough to steal," says Bob Fertik, the head of Democrats.com, an activist web site not part of the Democratic party, that calls themselves aggressive progressives. Robert Greenwald says, "This is no time to play victim, bemoaning all the problems in the voting system. Our job is to get people to the polls and make sure they can vote, and be absolutely tough about it. "

Fair voting advocate Brad Friedman, whose Bradblog.com has become possibly the most popular spot to gather information on all-things-voting, says: "There is absolutely zero evidence that speaking about this depresses voter turnout. In fact, I've found evidence suggesting precisely the opposite. Candidates across the country who have come out strong for Electoral Integrity have been winning huge at the box office so far this year."

According to Friedman, "It's not talking about election suppression that keeps folks from turning out. They know about these matters (a recent Zogby poll showed that 92% believe their votes should be counted transparently, 80% were against secret software counting their votes, and 62% had already heard about these concerns). It seems that when these issues are not discussed, people feel the system is rigged -- nobody in DC cares, so why should I bother to turn out?"

Time will tell as to whether this analysis is correct, but at the moment, there is some evidence to suggest otherwise, at least potentially for black voters. African-Americans are key constituencies in Senate races that are necessary for the Democrats to secure a majority -- particularly in Tennessee, and Missouri where African-American voters are the key to victory for Democrats.

But as the New York Times notes, a Pew Research Center report found that blacks were twice as likely now than they were in 2004 to say they had little or no confidence in the voting system, rising to 29 percent from 15 percent. And more than three times as many blacks as whites -- 29 percent versus 8 percent -- say they do not believe that their vote will be accurately tallied: "Long lines and shortages of poll workers in lower-income neighborhoods in the 2004 election and widespread reports of fliers with misinformation appearing in minority areas have had a corrosive effect on confidence, experts say."

The larger question of course is whether voters' negative experiences at the polls will diminish turnout, or will the overwhelming dissatisfaction with Bush and the Republicans, as noted in the polls, translate to substantial voter turnout?

Mark Crispin Miller, author of Fooled Again, who travels the country talking about election fraud, is clear that theft is on Republican the agenda, and isn't very confident that Democrats will be able to stop them. Miller says: "We need the national turnout to be very high because the GOP intends to steal this one, too. In other words, people should turn out to vote, not because they can be confident that their particular choices will prevail. It would be irresponsible to offer that assurance. Rather, the American people must turn out to vote as an essential protest on behalf of free and fair elections. To turn out on Nov. 2 is to make a statement of no confidence in Bush or his 'elections,' and a call for the salvation of US democracy. The higher the turnout, the harder it will be for the Republicans. to spin their looming 'upset victory' as legitimate. That's why I advise against early and absentee voting -- because it will dilute the impact of the actual E-Day turn-out."

The challenge to protect the vote

Democrats clearly have a big challenge on their hands. They need to run effective campaigns, pull out potentially discouraged voters, protect voting rights, document instances of voter suppression and election fraud, monitor voter counts, and grapple with electronic machines which offer no transparency. Fortunately for the Dems, the stolen election issue has become a cause celebre, raising consciousness about the issues among many activists, and mobilizing people to fight for voter rights at the polls.

Mark Ritchie, a voter reform candidate, who is running hard to be Secretary of State in Minnesota, says: "We know the policies that are needed to help ensure fairness, like paper ballots, Election Day registration, and post-election random audits. We also know that we have to go beyond good policies to include active citizenship. Everyone needs to be a poll watcher. Every voter needs to know who to contact if there suspect any problems. Every person needs to feel empowered to make sure our elections are free and fair."

Blogger Friedman adds, "When we talk about these issues, people realize that someone does care, is fighting to make sure their vote is counted and counted accurately, and they are given tools to use to try and help make sure that will be the case." Democrats.com's Bob Fertik says, "We have to get involved in organized efforts to audit the elections by groups like ElectionDefenseAlliance.org, VelvetRevolution.us, BlackBoxVoting.org, etc. I'd also like to see Democratic voters hold candlelight vigils outside each county's board of elections after the polls close, holding signs saying 'Count Every Vote' and 'No More Stolen Elections!' Imagine a Blue Revolution, every bit as joyous and historic as the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Cedar Revolution Lebanon, the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia -- right here in the United States of America."

So, when you add it all up, the consensus seems clear, if not a little daunting. For the Democrats to win big, as they hope, they must work for a large turnout and big voter margins. But especially in races where the margins are razor thin, active volunteers and voters must play their parts, encouraging voters, monitoring polls, documenting foul play, and insisting on voters rights. Only then, and of course this is a sad commentary on Democracy in America, do they stand a chance of winning elections, even those where they have healthy advantages in the polls.

Don Hazen is the executive editor of AlterNet.

© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/43645/