In the fall of 2001, after an eight-month review of 175,000 Florida ballots never
counted in the 2000 election, an analysis by the National Opinion Research Center
confirmed that Al Gore actually won Florida and should have been President. However,
coverage of this report was only a small blip in the corporate media as a much
bigger story dominated the news after September 11, 2001.
New research compiled by Dr. Dennis Loo with the University of Cal Poly Pomona
now shows that extensive manipulation of non-paper-trail voting machines
occurred in several states during the 2004 election.
The facts are as follows:
In 2004 Bush far exceeded the 85% of registered Florida Republican votes that
he got in 2000, receiving more than 100% of the registered Republican votes
in 47 out of 67 Florida counties, 200% of registered Republicans in 15 counties,
and over 300% of registered Republicans in 4 counties. Bush managed these remarkable
outcomes despite the fact that his share of the crossover votes by registered
Democrats in Florida did not increase over 2000, and he lost ground among registered
Independents, dropping 15 points. We also know that Bush "won" Ohio
by 51-48%, but statewide results were not matched by the court-supervised hand
count of the 147,400 absentee and provisional ballots in which Kerry received
54.46% of the vote. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio the number of recorded votes was
more than 93,000 greater than the number of registered voters.
More importantly national exit polls showed Kerry winning in 2004. However,
It was only in precincts where there were no paper trails on the voting machines
that the exit polls ended up being different from the final count. According
to Dr. Steve Freeman, a statistician at the University of Pennsylvania, the
odds are 250 million to one that the exit polls were wrong by chance. In fact,
where the exit polls disagreed with the computerized outcomes the results always
favored Bush - another statistical impossibility. .
Dennis Loo writes, "A team at the University of California at
Berkeley, headed by sociology professor Michael Hout, found a highly suspicious
pattern in which Bush received 260,000 more votes in those Florida precincts
that used electronic voting machines than past voting patterns would indicate
compared to those precincts that used optical scan read votes where past voting
There is now strong statistical evidence of widespread voting machine manipulation
occurring in US elections since 2000. Coverage of the fraud has been reported
in independent media and various websites. The information is not secret. But
it certainly seems to be a taboo subject for the US corporate media.
Black Box Voting reported on March
9, 2005 that voting machines used by over 30 million voters were easily
hacked by relatively unsophisticated programs and audits of the computers
would not show the changes. It is very possible that a small team of hackers
could have manipulated the 2004 and earlier elections in various locations throughout
the United States. Irregularities in the vote counts certainly indicate that
something beyond chance occurrences has been happening in recent elections.
That a special interest group might try to cheat on an election in the United
States is nothing new. Historians tell us how local political machines from
both major parties have in the past used methods of double counting, ballot
box stuffing, poll taxes and registration manipulation to affect elections.
In the computer age, however, election fraud can occur externally without
local precinct administrators having any awareness of the manipulations - and
the fraud can be extensive enough to change the outcome of an entire national
There is little doubt key Democrats know that votes in 2004 and earlier elections
were stolen. The fact that few in Congress are complaining about fraud is an
indication of the totality to which both parties accept the status quo of a
money based elections system. Neither party wants to further undermine public
confidence in the American "democratic" process (over 80 millions
eligible voters refused to vote in 2004). Instead we will likely see the quiet
passing of legislation that will correct the most blatant problems. Future
elections in the US will continue as an equal opportunity for both parties to
maintain a national democratic charade in which money counts more than truth.