US monitors voting...heh
 

Ok... let me say,

I am for Bush winning both the elections he did. There was debate, yes. What I do believe is we have some serious flaws in our voting system... which leads to...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/11/24/ukraine/index.html

How can we monitor anyone else??? And set consequences on the results??? Blew my mind.

Dude,

Its US policy to do as we say, not as we do.
Our rigged elections are more legit than your rigged elections. Only we can pull a Diebold those pinko commie bastards can't get away with the same **** we can, bomb em, killem all, right?

I read somewhere that the higher ups at Diebold and ES&S are connected with the CIA. That they rigged elections all over the world "testing" electronic voting, including parts of Centeral America. Of course you have to catch them first, and it's all a mater of National Security don't cha know.

How do you guys reconcile the fact that the final vote was nearly identical to the previous days polls done by various private papers/firms/Universities,colleges, etc.? Is it your belief that they are ALL in on it (whatever it is)?

Are you talking about the US election?

We're talking about foreign elections and US involvement. I don't really think that it's up for debate that we've been highly involved in choosing regimes all over the world, directly, indirectly, economically.

Oh, I was combining this with Kachs' previous and current Diebold conspriracy.

As far as foreign elections, sure. Especially during the Cold War.

Our government has fixed elections both here and abroad. Beats the heck out of shooting them in the head (The Kennedy's).:cool:

I would be interested in your answer to my question above.

Good post Mike. It really makes you wonder why we would care who is their president.

Is there any other reports on the new guy and why our "intelligence" thinks he's so bad?

I have to agree with lendaddy on that one. IF America hated Bush so much, then the polls would have shown it, and do you really think that if Florida lost to Bush 4 years ago, then why would they have given it to him this year?

kach22i, its definatly a plausable government conspericy. If its all rigged, they why bother to vote? Better yet, why even live in the US?

I've read dozens of articles/studies that have said the exact opposite...........................that's why I ignored this. The UCLA study say's Bush winning was a million to one based on their data..........................I suggest you look it up.

I think Keith Olbermann provided a link a couple of days ago:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

Her are the polls from right before the election, do you have some I don't know about?


GW/Battleground 10/31 - 11/1 50% 46% Bush +4
Rasmussen 10/30 - 11/1 50.2% 48.5% Bush +1.7
TIPP 10/30 - 11/1 46.9% 44.3% Bush +2.6
FOX News 10/30 - 10/31 46% 48% Kerry +2
CNN/USAT/Gallup 10/29 - 10/31 49% 47% Bush +2
CBS/NY Times 10/28 - 10/30 50% 47% Bush +3
ARG 10/28 - 10/30 48% 49% Kerry +1
Newsweek 10/27 - 10/29 51% 45% Bush +6

This thread went straight the direction I should have guessed... but proved my point completely.

How can we monitor others when we can't agree on our own elections???

disregard following troll statement:
Bush Decisively won both elections, those who can't admit thier defeat are just sore losers. All our Republican data says so. :p

Funny.;)