October 07, 2004

Foreign monitors to observe U.S. elections

NEW YORK — A 55-nation body charged with overseeing fair elections and human rights in its member states expects to send as many as 100 monitors to observe the U.S. elections on Nov. 2, saying numerous "weaknesses and vulnerabilities" might delay the outcome or even compromise the results.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) explained its decision to send teams of professional foreign observers to the United States to watch the voting, saying irregularities with voting machines and procedures could jeopardize public confidence.

I don't remember asking for help... how about we give them da' boot?

Posted by Muddy at October 7, 2004 05:56 PM | TrackBack



Comments

Hey, baby...where did you get this one? I read an article like this one back in the summer but in the one *I* read, they were sending "observers" to oversee U.S voting for *overseas* voters - which is just as offensive, disgusting...not to mention rediculous. Or did I just read things wrong? Because wouldn't sending "observers" *here* be...oh, I don't know...unconstitutional?

Posted by: mrs. muddy at October 7, 2004 06:23 PM

This is complete and utter Bull Shit! What chances do we even have in stopping this!?

Posted by: mrs. muddy at October 7, 2004 06:48 PM

It was 3 democrats who asked for it. Frankly, I think it is insulting and a load of crap. The only thing irregular about florida was that people there were to stupid to know how to use the damned ballot. That's not mentioning that studies showed that alot of voters in heavily republican areas in western florida decided not to vote after the race for Florida was called early (and incorrectly) before their polls closed. Then the Gore campaign wanted to recount votes with non-uniform standards and also did not want military/absentee ballots counted (wonder why...) so they can kiss my white ascot if they want to talk about voting irregularities.

Also, while I'll give you that the diebold machines are inherently insecure, no known case of fraud has occurred with them, it would still be pretty difficult and the Democrats have a far longer and larger history of voter fraud than the republicans do.

Posted by: skywalker at October 7, 2004 08:59 PM

Just wait. When Bush wins this thing there are going to be SO many lawsuits flying around that it wont be funny.

The 2000 election has changed a few things. Now everytime the DEMS dont get what they want they are gonna start suing. Just wait and see...

Posted by: cwilli at October 8, 2004 01:22 PM

"Now everytime the DEMS dont get what they want they are gonna start suing."

Yep! And the sad thing is, is that at one time, weren't they a *respectable* party? Now, the front runners of the party are whiny little p%@@& when they don't get what they want.

Posted by: mrs. muddy at October 8, 2004 01:51 PM

I remember as recently as 1992, you could not get elected to a state or local office in Georgia unless you were a democrat. People that would otherwise run as republicans would run as democrats and most of the time, races were decided in the primaries because of it. In 1994, Newt Gingrich changed that. In most parts of Georgia, it's hard to get elected as a democrat now. Gerry mandering distorts that a little (you should see the district I'm in...it looks like a tapeworm!)

Posted by: skywalker at October 8, 2004 02:35 PM

Where's the shame. Many european countries have agreed to be observed before. Or is there something to hide ? Why are not you proud to show the world how your system work ?

What again and again is this double standard : we americans can oversee your democratic elections in iraq, venezuela, afganhistan ... But you can not oversee ours ...
If you want people to let you do your own business ... well let the other mind their own and don't go preaching around.
On the other side, if you're real about the US being such a wonderful democracy ... Then let everybody see it ...

Posted by: DF at October 12, 2004 12:22 PM

DF:
No, there's nothing to hide...at least not on my part.

"Why are not you proud to show the world how your system work?"

Pride has nothing to do wiht it. We shouldn't "have" to "prove" ourselves either...which is what is boils down to. They're *our* elections. OUR buisness and no one elses.

"Many european countries have agreed to be observed before."

I don't care. european countries are *european* countries. What those countries do? Is of no concern to me. If inviting every Tom, Dick and Harry to oversee your elections make you guys happy and it's what you want....go for it. It's your business to run things the way you wish. I just don't want our country to be involved in that same BS.

As far as the U.S overseeing elections in Iraq and Afganastan...you're talking about countries that are just getting back on their feet. We're not going to help them gain their freedom just to up and abandon them during a crucial time for them. They are working on forming a brand new government. They are going to need help. If they don't want it, all they have to do is say the word. As far as other countries go that we've had a hand in before? Personally, that's non of our buisness and I don't know *whY* we "needed" to help. But, of course, there;s always more to the story and I just personally don't know what the full story is.


"...if you're real about the US being such a wonderful democracy ... Then let everybody see it"

yes, we're real about the US being a wonderful country but we can live by example. No one needs to take a part in our election process. We don't need babysitters to make sure everything "runs smoothly"...but now I'm just sounding repetitive.

BTW, If all of that makes me sound like *I'm* throwing around a "double standard"....so be it.

Posted by: mrs. muddy at October 12, 2004 01:44 PM

I just don't see the big deal in there.

In France anyway anybody can come and observe the counting of the votes. ANYBODY. In fact when you turn up for the vote, people at the counter ask you if you agree to come up later in the evening to count the votes. Anybody includes an international observer. (in fact 18+ french citizens only can count the vote, but anybody can watch them counting). And whatever such observers may say, is unimportant because the thing is the all process is public and everybody has a say in it. They say something. OK. IT's added to the list.

So I think you're making a big deal of nothing. The real problem to be adressed is : is the electoral system fair. if not, how to make it more so ? Not who may or may not have an advice on the fairness of the system.

If frauds have been proven in the past (and there have been frauds) then what do YOU do about it ? Because whatever opinion outside observers may have it will be up to you to implement it.

Posted by: DF at October 13, 2004 05:44 AM

In the US, anyone can come up and observe the counting of the votes too.

The system is plenty fair: anyone 18 or older who is not in prison and who is not a felon (well in most states, in some states felons can vote) can vote in one state.

The problem is that you get fraud. For instance, in 2000, the democrats were bussing college students from Minnesota to Iowa on election day. These students all voted in Minnesota and then they would go to Iowa, where you can legally register to vote the same day as you vote, they gave them fake addresses and they voted in Iowa too. When they were called on it, the people blowing the whistle were accused of trying to "Supress the black vote." So, no one would listen to them

In Kentucky this year, more people in one town have registered as Democrats than actually live in the town!

In Ohio, the Democrats were caught double registering people, with the fake names being the names of dead people.

In California, during the mid-90s, a white woman lost a House Election, she then changed her name to Loretta Sanchez, illegally regstered a bunch of illegal aliens to vote and they all voted and won. When republicans called her on her fraud, she calimed they were being racists and from there on, no one would listen to them.

The problem is that people are coming to observe the elections..they can observe all they want. The problem is that people are coming due to 3 people who are whining about the Florida election. They claim that Republicans "intimidated" black voters in Florida in 2000. An investigative team was sent to Florida to investigate claims. They even held hearings to have peope come in and testify about their "intimidation." The result? They could find no one who was intimidated. Aside from that, big deal! If you're "initimidated, shy of having a gun put to your head, just tell them to screw off and go vote.

What I thought was funny was they said the intimidation was police doing random license and registration checks (a common technique to look for a criminal.) The Democrats said this initimidated black voters from voting across the state and that when the black voters would see this road blocks they would turn around and go home and note vote. Well, here's the problem with that: there are enough roads in this country that you can go around road blocks if you want to do so, if you're stupid enough to not vote because of a road block then I'm glad you're not voting because you're probably not voting with any information on the candidates (which is most people...), and records showed that only one county in the state had this going on because they had an escaped inmate and this county was a majority white county.

Basically fraud occurs all the time, Republicans always get called on it and caught and punished. Democrats get caught and accuse their accusers of being racists and the Democrats get off.

That's the big problem though: we need observers like we need a hole in the head but 3 whiny babies are asking for them in order to further the idea that people were intimidated in Florida. It's crap. It has nothing to do with a real need. It's also insulting.

Posted by: skywalker at October 13, 2004 08:37 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?