Front page
Silflay Hraka?

Bigwig is a systems administrator at a public university
Hrairoo is the proprietor of a quality used bookstore
Kehaar is.
Woundwort is a professor of counseling at a private university

The Hraka RSS feed

bigwig AT

Friends of Hraka
Daily Pundit
cut on the bias
Meryl Yourish
This Blog Is Full Of Crap
Winds of Change
A Small Victory
Silent Running
Dr. Weevil
Little Green Footballs
Fragments from Floyd
The Feces Flinging Monkey
the skwib
Dean's World
Little Tiny Lies
The Redsugar Muse
Natalie Solent
From the Mrs.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
On the Third Hand
Public Nuisance
Not a Fish
Electric Venom
Skippy, The Bush Kangaroo
Common Sense and Wonder
Neither Here Nor There
The Greatest Jeneration
Ipse Dixit
Blog On the Run
Redwood Dragon
Greeblie Blog
Have A Cuppa Tea
A Dog's Life
Iberian Notes
Midwest Conservative Journal
A Voyage to Arcturus
Trojan Horseshoes
In Context
The People's Republic of Seabrook
Country Store
Blog Critics
Chicago Boyz
Hippy Hill News
Kyle Still Free Press
The Devil's Excrement
The Fat Guy
War Liberal
Assume the Position
Balloon Juice
Iron Pen In A Velvet Glove
Freedom Lives
Where Worlds Collide
Knot by Numbers
How Appealing
South Knox Bubba
Heretical Ideas
The Kitchen Cabinet
Bo Cowgill
Raving Atheist
The Short Strange Trip
Shark Blog
Ron Bailey's Weblog
Cornfield Commentary
Northwest Notes
The Blog from the Core
The Talking Dog
WTF Is It Now??
Blue Streak
Smarter Harper's Index
nikita demosthenes
Bloviating Inanities
Sneakeasy's Joint
Ravenwood's Universe
The Eleven Day Empire
World Wide Rant
All American
The Rant
The Johnny Bacardi Show
The Head Heeb
Viking Pundit
Oscar Jr. Was Here
Just Some Poor Schmuck
Katy & Bruce Loebrich
But How's The Coffee?
Roscoe Ellis
Sasha Castel
Susskins Central Dispatch
Josh Heit
Aaron's Rantblog
As I was saying...
Blog O' Dob
Dr. Frank's Blogs Of War
Betsy's Page
A Knob for Brightness
Fresh Bilge
The Politburo Diktat
Drumwaster's rants
Curt's Page
The Razor
An Unsealed Room
The Legal Bean
Helloooo chapter two!
As I Was Saying...
SkeptiLog AGOG!
Tong family blog
Vox Beth
I was thinking
Judicious Asininity
This Woman's Work
Fragrant Lotus
Single Southern Guy
Jay Solo's Verbosity
Snooze Button Dreams
You Big Mouth, You!
From the Inside looking Out
Night of the Lepus
No Watermelons Allowed
From The Inside Looking Out
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
Suburban Blight
The SmarterCop
Dog of Flanders
From Behind the Wall of Sleep
Beaker's Corner
Bad State of Gruntledness
Who Tends The Fires
Granny Rant
Elegance Against Ignorance
Say What?
Blown Fuse
Wait 'til Next Year
The Pryhills
The Whomping Willow
The National Debate
The Skeptician
Zach Everson
Geekward Ho
Life in New Orleans
Rotten Miracles
The Biomes Blog
See What You Share
Blog d’Elisson
Your Philosophy Sucks
Watauga Rambler
Socialized Medicine
Verging on Pertinence
Read My Lips
The Flannel Avenger
Butch Howard's WebLog
Castle Argghhh!
Andrew Hofer
Moron Abroad
White Pebble
Darn Floor
Pajama Pundits
Goddess Training 101
A & W
Medical Madhouse
Slowly Going Sane
The Oubliette
American Future
Right Side Redux
See The Donkey
Newbie Trucker
The Right Scale
Running Scared
Ramblings Journal
Focus On Reality
Wyatt's Torch

October 20, 2004

How to Steal an Election

John Kerry has apparently decided that the problem with the Gore 2000 campaign is that Gore didn't plan sufficiently in his attempt to steal the election. The idea of hijacking an American election actually occurred to Gore fairly late in the game, and as a result, he was stuck in a losing battle to manufacture votes that did not exist and exclude votes that were legally cast.

As Kerry loves to say, he has a plan. In the minds of the Kerry camp, you don't steal an election on the cheap, and you don't do it without meticulous preparation. That's why Democratic Ripoff 2004 has been planned months, or perhaps years, in advance.

First, don't concede the election just because you lost it. That was Gore's first mistake. Claim victory, even in the face of obvious defeat. Screw the American public. We're talking about John Kerry here. The will of the American people is laughably insignificant compared to the wants and needs of "Le Roi".

Next, don't wait too long to file your lawsuits. There's a huge list of activist judges out there who are equally or more corrupt than the swamp scum coating the benches of the Florida Supreme Court. Get them into motion as soon as possible, while the polls are still open if you can.

Step three: Lawyers, Guns and Money. Since these are Democrats, drop the guns. There's plenty of lawyers and money, though. Six "swat teams" of lawyers and other human debris will be waiting for the call. These crews of rapid response weasels will be literally standing by next to fueled-up private jets, ready to fly to any battleground state in the union and commit political rape upon the constitution. Need to steal Ohio in a hurry? They've got a crew that will cover Columbus with more grease than a Dominos pizza, and just as fast.

Finally, let's not forget public opinion. The media can help you here. While 10,000 lawyers take turns wiping themselves with the constitution, a pretty significant public relations effort will be required to cover the attempted larceny. The plan right now is to do whatever it takes to steal everything in sight, and everything you do, every weasely evasion, every brazen perversion of this country's founding principles can be covered by accusing the Republicans of doing the exact things you are doing. If you need Ted Koppel to jump, he'll ask "how high?". If you need documentation for your lies, Dan Rather is your man.

Enjoy this most joyous of seasons. Vote early and often.

Posted by at October 20, 2004 05:48 PM | TrackBack
First time visitor to House Hraka? Wondering if everything we produce could possibly be as brilliant/stupid/evil/pedantic/insipid/inspired as the post you just read? Check out the Hraka Essentials, the (mostly) reader-selected guide to Hraka's best posts, and decide for yourself.

That's because "fool me twice -- you can't get fooled again!"

Posted by: Scorpio at October 20, 2004 06:53 PM

The Dems have roughly 40 suits already filed and underway, pre-emptively protesting the results of the election in a number of states on various grounds - disenfranchisement of minority felons, draconian laws that in their excessively literal fashion force people to vote only where they are registered; absentee ballot procedures that are insufficiently insecure, and so on. (BTW, as an aside, I'm pretty sure my absentee ballot was stolen in the mails and voted last time around. But I digress). I'm pretty confident that the goal is to have made enough charges that one of them will stick, and in losing a state here or there it will cost Bush a decisive amount of electoral votes. They don't need to win cases in all 50 states - they just need to win one or two cases in swing states like Ohio, Florida or Pennsylvania (states where they have cases pending).

The lawyer swat teams are only on hand in case a new opportunity arises for which no lawsuits have been filed.

And really, I agree with them. The Dems are completely right - George Bush took the presidency away from them last time. It belonged to the Dems, they stole it fair and square under the Florida Supreme Court rules. It was nasty of Mr. Bush to do that, so this time, the Dems are going to ensure that the election stays stolen. As Terry MacAuliffe would point out, this is actually quite benevolent of the Dems. As a good Catholic, Mr. Mac believes that one should help people avoid even the occasions of sin - and in denying Mr. Bush the Presidency, it will keep him from a position of power where he could do potentially do very bad things, like roger interns with expensive cigars, and so on.

Besides, this legal stuff is all irrelevant. The statutory law, the election regulations and the Constitution are all living documents, with no really fixed meaning. We need to adapt them to the changing mores of the age. The rule of law really means that I, as an attorney, should be able to supervise you, because the law means what my client wants it to mean under all the circumstances. Don't make me argue with you about this, or I'll ask the court to impose fees on you, at $200 an hour. You see, it was a typographical error when the Founding Fathers referred to the "rule of law." What they really meant was "the rule of lawyers," because, as everybody knows, when you attend law school and pass the bar, lawyers know better than you do how you ought to run your life, your local school district, and your government...

Posted by: Blackavar at October 21, 2004 08:07 AM

Ah! I get it. This is that "irony" stuff that was supposed to be dead after 9/11.

For a slightly more contextual take, consider David Neiwert's essay on the subject.

Posted by: Lex at October 21, 2004 04:58 PM

Lex, it's this simple.

National voting is a system of systems.

Things fall through the cracks even in the most perfectly designed system when you are looking to deal with 60 - 70 million "things' in this case, votes.

"Make every vote count" is a pretty good aspirational standard. "Count every vote" is a pretty good standard too, as an aspiration.

In practice, however, note every vote should count. There are miscast votes, fraudulent votes, and simple operator errors. Occasionally there are innocent mechanical errors - and maybe some not so innocent ones. (I remember on multiple occasions trying to vote Republican in New York, only to find that the levers didn't work for that row. Thanks Local 43! {who maintained the machines))

In short, "count every vote" if you want to apply that standard literally, is a damned impossible standard to meet when you are talking 70 million votes. "Try to count every vote within the limits of technology and presume you are getting something like statistical accuracy within an expected margin of error based on the limits of the system" is the workable system we've lived under for 230 years. It ain't good enough any more, apparently.

Want to get really serious about it? Let's break open every machine in New York and Massachusetts and Chicago. Problems with the voting machines there simply not registering Republican votes have gone on for years. Let's make those Republican votes count.

And let's allow Republican precincts to have 120% turnout, to let their dogs and kids and deceased reletives have a vote, as went on in Missouri the last time around in Dem districts in St. Louis.

Let's count em all. Hell, let's open a court case for everybody who has a sneaking suspicion there vote doesn't count. You know, I can't imagine why I didn't file a lawsuit against the Postal Service when I didn't get my absentee ballot in 2000... maybe I just wasn't being Democratic enough about it.

When you get right down to it, in managing a big system, you can make one of three choices in terms of a basic approach to quality assurance. You can let all errors slip, and not worry about it. Yep, somebody can game the system, and nobody will be able to correct it. That's what we had in the post-Civil War era, in the Hayes-Tilden election.

Or you can try to stop the really big errors, the really odious cheating, and hope most of the other stuff (errors, moron voters who can't pull a lever all the way down, crack for votes) sort of cancels itself out, the idea being with the parties roughly equal, they will match up pretty evenly in this area. (A decent approach for all involved, unless you are alleging the Republicans are way ahead in vote tampering, in which case you haven't a grasp on the facts or recent history, though you probably are boned up on paranoid conspiracy theories if that's how you feel).

Or, you can get really pecunious about it, and throw everything into a court to make sure every single vote cast, possibly cast, or contemplated to be cast, counts the way the voter intended it to count. The result here is that some lawyer shithead like me will argue over it with another lawyer shithead, and then a third lawyer shithead, a particularly esteemed one called "a judge" will decide which of us has made the better argument. I don't know why you think this will get a better result - I can tell you it's going to come down to arguing inanities like what it really means to "cast" a vote on a digital screen, whether voter intent should be measured by the vote they actually cast, versus the politician they think they preferred, and whether the 50% of the people out there who don't even know who is running (George Bush? Wasn't he president before? Kerry? I thought she was a gymnast?) should somehow have their intents measured.

On a meta-level, I am really surprised that the Dems have gone so readily into court this year, having said for years that the justice system is biased against the poor, and results are determined not on the basis of justice, but on how much lawyering you can buy. But then, with George Soros behind much of this mischief making, maybe it's not so surprising.

Personally, when it comes to national elections, I'm pretty happy to live and let live. I know the Dems get the better of it most of the time, but it's a huge system and likely impossible to manage with precision. I am of the opinion that the provisional ballot measures are going to cast this election into complete disarray, and only further the ongoing de-legitimizing of the electoral process. Democracy, like sausage, is something best enjoyed in the abstract and not the particulars; and if you get into the particulars youwill find the customers get turned off pretty quickly.

One other thing: when you are done de-legitimizing the electoral process, and when Mr. Kerry steals the election fair and square, do you expect Republicans are going to roll over? Or will you be happy to have "Kerry = Stalin" and "Selected not elected" feces flung back in your face for another four years? Will you be calling people on the other side of the political coin mean spirited and hateful for adopting the rhetoric your side has used quite effectively for the last four years? Just wondering.

And besides, shouldn't Niewart be out shooting up or robbing a local Bush-Cheney headquarters, or breaking some elderly Bush volunteer's arm in a "full throated protest of administration policies"? My understanding is that those are the accepted forms of advocating for Mr. Kerry this year.

If you really want to start getting shitt

Posted by: Blackavar at October 23, 2004 11:16 AM

Do you *seriously* think that Bush's team doesn't have a plan that could be described in exactly the same terms as the CNN story describes Kerry's?

Posted by: lazyman at October 24, 2004 09:38 PM
Post a comment Note: Comments with more than two dashes per line will be blocked as spam.

Remember personal info?