portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

election fraud

Ohio Vote Fraud: More Bush "Voters" Than Residents

In last Tuesday's election, 29 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, reported votes cast IN EXCESS of the number of registered voters - at least 93,136 extra votes total. And the numbers are right there on the official Cuyahoga County Board of Elections website:
The Real Bush
The Real Bush

Ohio Vote Fraud: More Bush "Voters" Than Residents

In Ohio, the Republicans adhere strictly to the infamous vote fraud motto: Vote Early and Vote Often.

Cuyahooga county is only one of 48 counties connected with voter fraud in Ohio and Florida.

You may have seen the associated press story about the precinct in Cuyahoga county that had less than 1,000 voters, and gave Bush almost 4,000 extra votes.

But that turns out to be only the tip of a very ugly iceberg. The evidence discovered by some remarkably careful sleuthing would convince any reasonable court to invalidate the entire Ohio election.

In last Tuesday's election, 29 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, reported votes cast IN EXCESS of the number of registered voters - at least 93,136 extra votes total. And the numbers are right there on the official Cuyahoga County Board of Elections website:

Bay Village - 13,710 registered voters / 18,663 ballots cast
Beachwood - 9,943 registered voters / 13,939 ballots cast
Bedford - 9,942 registered voters / 14,465 ballots cast
Bedford Heights - 8,142 registered voters / 13,512 ballots cast
Brooklyn - 8,016 registered voters / 12,303 ballots cast
Brooklyn Heights - 1,144 registered voters / 1,869 ballots cast
Chagrin Falls Village - 3,557 registered voters / 4,860 ballots cast
Cuyahoga Heights - 570 registered voters / 1,382 ballots cast
Fairview Park - 13,342 registered voters / 18,472 ballots cast
Highland Hills Village - 760 registered voters / 8,822 ballots cast
Independence - 5,735 registered voters / 6,226 ballots cast
Mayfield Village - 2,764 registered voters / 3,145 ballots cast
Middleburg Heights - 12,173 registered voters / 14,854 ballots cast
Moreland Hills Village - 2,990 registered voters / 4,616 ballots cast
North Olmstead - 25,794 registered voters / 25,887 ballots cast
Olmstead Falls - 6,538 registered voters / 7,328 ballots cast
Pepper Pike - 5,131 registered voters / 6,479 ballots cast
Rocky River - 16,600 registered voters / 20,070 ballots cast
Solon (WD6) - 2,292 registered voters / 4,300 ballots cast
South Euclid - 16,902 registered voters / 16,917 ballots cast
Strongsville (WD3) - 7,806 registered voters / 12,108 ballots cast
University Heights - 10,072 registered voters / 11,982 ballots cast
Valley View Village - 1,787 registered voters / 3,409 ballots cast
Warrensville Heights - 10,562 registered voters / 15,039 ballots cast
Woodmere Village - 558 registered voters / 8,854 ballots cast
Bedford (CSD) - 22,777 registered voters / 27,856 ballots cast
Independence (LSD) - 5,735 registered voters / 6,226 ballots cast
Orange (CSD) - 11,640 registered voters / 22,931 ballots cast
Warrensville (CSD) - 12,218 registered voters / 15,822 ballots cast
The Republicans are so BUSTED.

is the official website of the Cuyahoga county election board,
providing irrefutable evidence that the vote was off by at least 93,000.

Kerry lost Ohio by approximately 130,000, so this is not an insignificant figure that can be ignored, particularly when there are numerous other indications of voter fraud in Ohio and elsewhere. I think the only possible alternative is to invalidate the entire Ohio election, if not the entire national election.
I'd say the game's up.America, it looks pretty much like you've been had.

Teed Rockwell, Philosophy Dept., Sonoma State University
Thanks 16.Nov.2004 17:54


This is just what I needed for my homework assignment.

Looks like Ohio is the new Florida. *sigh*

Correction 09.Mar.2005 10:46

Teed Rockwell

                 I have received several messages in response to an email I sent out about apparent evidence of voter fraud on the Cuyahoga county website in Ohio.  This email has been heavily edited and posted on several websites. I'm glad people are doing this sort of thing, but it does mean I should clarify certain things that were left out of my original message. I've also learned some things which greatly alter the significance of that data.
First of all, I did not do these tabulations myself. I received this information in a forwarded email.  Before I forwarded it myself, I went to the Cuyahoga election website myself and confirmed that several of the figures in the email were accurate. I think the person who did this hard careful work deserves credit for it, but I have not been able to trace the message I received back to the original source.
                  Secondly, the Cuyahoga election officials now claim that this discrepancy appeared on the website because of a software glitch, and does not appear in the actual counted totals. The following website contains a plausible explanation for the glitch by someone who talked directly to the folks in Cuyahoga. This site has lots of other investigations of voting irregularities, and is well worth a visit.
The Cuyahoga site has apparently since revised its figures to reflect the official totals, so you can no longer find the discrepancies I described in my original post. It now seems most likely to me that the discrepancies originally posted on the Cuyahoga website were merely evidence of incompetence, not fraud, and it was incompetence that apparently had no impact on the tabulation of votes. (Although there was a very similar error involving absentee ballots in Craven County, NC which did affect the vote tabulation. see  http://www.newbernsj.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=18297&Section=Local I would not write off the possibility that if we had not called attention to this problem in Cuyahoga, it might very well have affected the final result the way it did it Craven County.)
Some people have remarked that the fact that Cuyahoga voted overwhelmingly for Kerry shows that an altered vote there couldn't have benefited Bush. Not So.  Around 230 thousand people were reported as voting for Bush in Cuyahoga, so it is possible that if there were evidence of fraud there, the bogus votes could have almost doubled Bush's total. But as you can see, the point is moot, because the figures I described in that first message don't provide evidence for fraud.
The original assumption of fraud was perfectly reasonable. Everyone acknowledgesthat a precinct in Franklin County gave Bush thousands of extra votes, which have now been officially removed from the Ohio total. The Franklin County discrepancy was discovered exactly the same way: by Bloggers who checked public records and compared registered voter totals to final counts. It seemed reasonable to many people that the discrepancies on the Cuyahoga site were the same problem, but on a greater scale. But many reasonable assumptions are wrong, and it looks like this was one of them.
                  So where does voter fraud investigation stand now? As far as I can tell, we've got a lot of smoke, (which may mean there is fire), but no smoking gun. Before I give you my personal evaluation of this evidence, however, I think we need to make an important distinction between degrees of proof.

1)Proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
This is what you need to convict someone of a criminal offense, and arguably what you need to invalidate an election. I don't think anyone thinks we have that yet.
2) A preponderance of the evidence
This what is required to win a civil lawsuit. It means it is more likely than not that the wrongful action was performed.  I think there is already a preponderance of the evidence that this election should be invalidated, but I realize that this is a point on which honest people may differ.
3) Evidence that further investigation is warranted.
You don't need proof or a preponderance of the evidence to justify starting an investigation. Otherwise there would be no need to have the investigation. I think if you examine the evidence you will agree that there are facts here that must not be ignored. Careful investigation requires going down promising paths that often turn out to be blind alleys, and the discovery of a few blind alleys doesn't invalidate any other evidence. There is lots of new evidence coming in every day, and it is not surprising that some of it may be misleading until it is more closely analyzed. We need to be willing to debunk the misleading evidence, because it weakens the impact of the substantial amount of strong evidence.
So take a look at the links and arguments below and see what you think. If I can find anything else that looks especially convincing, or a good debunking of a story which has been misleading people, I will send it your way. I won't do this very often, if at all. But if you don't want to receive any more posts from me on this subject, let me know and I'll take you off this list.
The best centralized link site I have found so far is:
Based on what I have discovered from using this site and other sources, this seems to be the state of the evidence.
                 The discrepancies between the exit polls and the final result cannot be dismissed by saying "hey, everybody knows polls aren't accurate all the time". Exit polls have proven time and time again to be accurate to less than 1 percent.  In countries where there is doubt about the honesty of a government, (such as in the former Soviet Georgia a few years ago.) disparities between election results and exit polls are often used as a basis for invalidating elections. These polls aren't perfect, but they deviate from accuracy according to certain statistical laws. According to the Steven Freeman, a statistician at the University of Pennsylvania, the chances of the exit polls in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania all being this wrong for purely statistical reasons are 250 million to one. (see  http://www.solarbus.org/stealyourelection/articles/exit-poll-discrepancy-1110.pdf ) This does not prove that the election was fraudulent. If just shows that these results cannot be explained as a purely chance deviation. If there were another explanation, backed by good evidence, there would be reason to discount the claims of fraud. But as Freeman points out, the only other explanation given so far is that Bush supporters might have been less willing to talk to pollsters than Kerry supporters. There is, however, no evidence supporting this claim, and lots of evidence that voter fraud took place. You can't use the final vote itself as evidence; that would be begging the question. So given that an explanation is needed, we must accept the explanation with the best evidence.
Here is a small sample of the evidence for fraud:
1)The manufacturers of the voting machines  are all heavy contributors to the Bush campaign. The president of the Diebold voting machine company said in a Republican fund raising letter that he would deliver the state of Ohio to Bush. Several of the programmers who wrote the code for Diebold Voting Machines are convicted felons (which means that if they lived in Florida, they would be legally barred from voting on the machines they had programmed.)
2)These machines repeatedly make huge errors which benefit Bush.
A) Almost 4,000 extra votes awarded to Bush.
B) Ohio Votes for a straight Democratic ticket are given to the Libertarians.
 C)Members of Congress have received numerous reports from voters in Florida and Ohio who repeatedly tried to vote for Kerry on an electronic machine, and had their votes changed into votes for Bush.
D) In Guilford country, NC, a recount discovered 22,000 votes which should have gone to John Kerry.
E) When www.BlackBoxVoting.org's Beth Harris subpoenaed voting records in Volusia County, Florida, she was given copies that were not signed by the poll workers. She later found the signed originals in the trashcan outside the elections warehouse. The originals had fewer votes for Bush than the versions she had been given.
I have seen no accounts of any errors which benefited Kerry.
When you combine even these few examples with the discrepancies in the exit polls, there is no reason to assume that these are isolated incidents. The most plausible explanation is that this sort of thing happened in all of the swing states, and this is why the swing states had these discrepancies in the final results. ( http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=11-19-04&storyID=20131)
There is also a strong correlation between states that had electronic voting and states that gave more votes to Bush in the final results.
This seems to me like a preponderance of the evidence that this election was fraudulent. But the evidence is still coming in, if you're not yet convinced. I suggest you keep an eye on it and give money to organizations like  www.blackboxvoting.org which are continuing this investigation. This problem is too important to be ignored.
If you want to get the topic of rigged elections discussed by the people who can do the most about it, then send a message to the Democrats on the house judiciary who are actively trying to investigate this problem. The media cannot ignore discoveries by elected congresspeople.
Here's the message I sent:
The evidence supporting the existence of voting fraud is too strong to ignore. It must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Bush won this election fairly. If he did not, this country is no longer a democracy.
Teed Rockwell
Philosophy Department
Sonoma State University