Browse By

Show Me The Proof Kerry Actually Won Ohio in 2004

I’ve just had the 672nd conversation with someone that ended in something like,

“And, you know, it’s been proven Kerry won Ohio in 2004. Why aren’t you doing anything about that, you asshole?”

OK. Fine. It’s Put Up or Shut Up Time.

Show me the proof that Kerry won Ohio in 2004.

Not conjecture. Not some incident that swayed ten votes. Not “it’s logical”. Not the unsupported conspiracy theory. Not the citation of Professor East Bumblefuck who ran his hypothetical mathematical analysis based on sixteen assumptions.

The proof.

Show me the proof that Kerry won Ohio in 2004.

You show me the proof, and I fall on my knees and beg forgiveness for being so needlessly rude.

You show me what you say is proof but is one of the above lines of bullshit, I write ASSHOLE in all caps.

You don’t show me the proof, and I ask you to fuck off, please. I’ve had enough of that line of wishful thinking bullshit.

And yeah, I’m in a piss-poor mood today. So what the fuck? Anger is an elixir. Swear all you want, too. Just show me the proof, or fuck off.

25 thoughts on “Show Me The Proof Kerry Actually Won Ohio in 2004”

  1. Jim says:

    Yeah, see, that’s what I thought.

  2. Scott says:
    I haven’t actually taken the time to go through this website, but when I get a few extra minutes I’ll have a look.
    (…so please withhold your wrath if it’s not as good as it looks…)

  3. Jim says:

    That website isn’t worth my wrath. It isn’t worth anything more than a yawn. Yeah, it’s a piece of crap all right.

    The closest I can come (and it’s not close) to what I asked for on that page is a link to “Real, Documented Facts About 2004 Election Fraud” leads to the front page of a poorly designed pseudo-electronic-conference with online papers about how some electronic voting systems are vulnerable. That’s it. I am fine with the idea that some electronic voting systems have security flaws. I buy that. That’s not proof that Kerry won Ohio in 2004. It’s not even close. It’s not even close to close.

    The biggest hint to me that gee, maybe we should distrust the website is the prominently placed memorial to a guy who died of cancer because the webmaster says he was secretly injected with cancer virus by government agents who knew this guy was getting too close to the truth! Dying by cancer’s not in itself funny at all, but man, that claim is delving so low into the deep well of crankitude that it comes out the other side of sad and bursts out as friggin’ hilarious.

    Thanks for the entertainment, but unless I missed something (which I’d like you to point out), survey definitely says XXX.

  4. Marley says:

    For me, the operative question is when we are content with the state of our democracy:

    1. When we can’t prove an election was fraudulent, or

    2. When we CAN prove an election WASN’T fraudulent.

    In my opinion, the second standard is what America should aim for. The best we can say for ’04 is the first. I don’t think that’s good enough.

    I haven’t seen any hard evidence that Kerry won Ohio in ’04 either. But when the way public votes are counted is the proprietary secret of a corporation like Diebold (the CEO of which promised to deliver Ohio to Bush), and there’s no paper trail, we can do better.

    We really ought to do everything we can to make sure democracy in America conforms to the highest standards possible before we try to export it to the rest of the world.

  5. Scott says:

    Thanks for doing the dirty work. I’ll probably still have a look, but… Yeah…I didn’t catch that memorium…that really kills it’s credibility.
    I can see your point, but I suspect you are setting the bar too high.
    “2. When we CAN prove an election WASN’T fraudulent.”
    Remember when Dubya said (paraphrase alert): “We know Saddam has WMD, it’s up to him to prove that he doesn’t.”
    I hate to lump your logic in with W, but you are both asking to prove a negative. I couldn’t believe it when nobody (that I heard) called W on his fallacious reasoning. “Do the logically impossible, or we’re going to invade you.”
    Don’t set the standard of democracy too high. “Prove that election wasn’t fraudulent, or it doesn’t count?” Let’s not reduce ourselves to Bush logic. Nothing will count.

  6. Scott says:

    Here’s another. It’s been around for a while, so most have probably seen it.
    To my mind, this counts as sufficient to raise rational doubt.
    I have reasonable doubts regarding the veracity of the 2000 and 04 elections. What degree of proof are you looking for. Are you looking for what I described above? You’re not going to find it.
    Do you have reasonable doubt?

  7. Marley says:

    You’re absolutely right, Scott. I think the bar ought to be very high for American democracy: I think it should be credible, transparent, and above suspicion.

    Should we make sure we’re more credible than Saddam Hussein was? I say yes. I want to be more sure the American election in 2008 is legitimate than I was in 2002 that Saddam Hussein had destroyed his WMD.

    There are a few simple steps we could take to vastly improve the credibility of the election process: a paper trail of electronic votes and a transparency in the way the votes are counted, for instance.

    Is that too much to ask of America?

  8. Jim says:

    I see nobody’s stepped up to the bar and offered proof that Kerry won Ohio in 2004.

  9. Scott says:

    Do YOU think/suspect/believe that Kerry won?
    Do YOU think that there is reasonable doubt?

  10. Jim says:


    Fair questions. No, I don’t think Kerry won, although I am open to havng my mind changed on the basis of clear evidence, which I haven’t seen although I’ve heard it alluded to repeatedly. And I’m agnostic on the issue of “reasonable doubt,” because that’s a standard for acquiting someone accused of a crime, not a standard for declaring a winner of an election. If you can say Kerry won Ohio because there’s a “reasonable doubt” Bush won, then you can say Bush won Ohio because there’s certainly a “reasonable doubt” that Kerry won. That gets us nowhere. I think this is a very different issue than what we had in Florida 2000, when the analyses timidly shoved into the back pages of the paper after 9-11-01 concluded that had all the votes been counted, Gore would have won Florida.

  11. Alan says:

    Have you seen this one, Jim? (Haven’t read it, so can’t offer an opinion as to whether it’s credible.)

    Media critic and political commentator Mark Crispin Miller reveals the evidence of widespread corruption in the 2004 presidential election in Ohio. This corruption–consisting of thousands of little frauds–appears to be the future Republican electoral strategy. The undeniable conclusion is that Bush and the Republicans stole the election–and if we don’t expose this theft, it will happen again. This audio is an unabridged reading of the Harper article, “None Dare Call It Stolen,” which was excerpted from the book, Fooled Again, published by Basic Books in the Fall of 2005.

  12. Alan says:

    Here’s a link to the Harper’s piece:

    and a link to the Amazon reviews for What went wrong in Ohio democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf

    (This is the Conyers Report which is supposed to be available online from the Judiciary Committee’s website at democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf
    but for some reason the link doesn’t work and I can’t seem to find the report with a search.)

    Now, I’m not saying this is absolute proof, but it’s a whole lot more than “some incident that swayed ten votes”. And as for “show me the proof, and I fall on my knees”, this reminds me of the joke the Brits tell about the Monica thing: “In England it is customary to greet the monarch on ONE knee.”

  13. Alan says:

    Oops, here’s a link that works to the house judiciary report and the amazon link to “what went wrong in Ohio” (both are the Conyers report):

  14. Jim says:

    Alan, I’ll be on the road for a few days, so I can’t respond right away, but I will read these and get back to you in a bit.

    However, I’ve read some of Mark Crispin Miller’s other stuff, and let’s just say his standard of proof in the past has been too loose for my comfort.

    I will read it nonetheless and get back to you, although as I said probably not for a little while.

  15. Alan says:

    Safe journey.

    You would probably find the House judiciary report worth looking at, Jim. Part of it focusses on questionable activities of Ohio Secretary of State J Kenneth Blackwell who, besides having a statutory duty to investigate election misconduct, also was the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio. Most disturbing is the apparent intention to steal votes and subvert the election. One reviewer points out that the report deals too much with proving misconduct in one election, and not enough in recommending changes for future elections.

    No, it’s not proof, but the request for further congressional hearings and information that can only be obtained by subpeona is unlikely to go any further with the Republican majority.

    For what it’s worth, you have a standing invitation to attend church whenever you’re in this neck of the woods.

  16. Jim says:

    Well, if it’s not proof that Kerry won Ohio, then it doesn’t satisfy what I’m looking for in the context of this thread. I will still read it, but it doesn’t look like it will fit the bill.

  17. Jim says:

    So, I’ve gotten around to reading the two sets of links to which you refer, and my reactions are:

    1. The Mark Crispin Miller piece is essentially a piece of reporting on the Conyers report, and it is itself a summary, so on to the Conyers report.

    2. Rep. Conyers’ report contains instances of irregularities and as a distinctly smaller subset of those irregularities, a few instances of shenanigans. But it does not contain proof that Kerry won Ohio. Conyers himself states this when he describes his grave doubts. The irregularities “raise grave
    doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards.” That’s very different than grave doubts regarding whether Bush won Ohio, which is itself very different than proof Kerry won Ohio. The Conyers report is interesting for other reasons, though, many as you say having to do with the candidacy of severe nut case and sloppy insider Ken Blackwell for Governor of Ohio.

  18. Alan says:

    It seems the report just listed everything that was off kilter. Some of the instances it was hard to determine whether the ‘shenanigans’ actually changed the number of votes, but in other cases, it looks like hundreds of thousands of votes were stolen. What was the margin, in the millions of votes, right? So, yes, you can’t say for certain whether it changed the election outcome. The report also seemed rather partisan, which of course you would expect from a voting fraud report. They sort of just listed everything from really petty stuff about some cabinet being unlocked, to major examples of official deception that make Nixon’s ‘dirty tricks’ look like the campfire girls.

    I didn’t realize Blackwell was African-American. in chicago there was a guy running in the primary who was a wife-beater and an idiot and had all kind of police reports to his place, but he was black and the blacks all were going to vote for him anyhow. Then Obama got lots of media attention, so suddenly there was a better black candidate. Maybe that’s what’s wrong with Ohio.

    Another thing keeps bothering me about Ohio. School vouchers. Apparently Ohio has some program, but I’ve only heard it mentioned a couple times in passing. There has been some talk about Britian being a target for internal terrorists becasue of the rigid class structure. But the U.S. opens its schools and tries to assimilate the Arabs–here they hang with the Mexican street gangs–so no homegrown terrorists here. How will school vouchers change that, creating a two-tier system for rich and poor?

    Blackwell reminds me of that old SNL routine with the Mexican baseball player with the bad English, who always said “Baseball has been very good to me.” When someone would ask him an awkward political question, he would think about it, then respond again, “baseball has been very good to me”. Blackwell was a dem., worked for Carter, had no policy positions when he ran for office, and then met Kemp. Now he says “GOP has been very good to me.” but it seems that decent honest conservatives like Voinavich and DeWine–if you ignore their politics, they do work on policy–are getting pulled further to the crackpot right than they want to be pulled.

    And the mainline churches are late on the uptake that their churches aren’t going to be considered real religions in the new world Order. Maybe it’s time for Certain Unnamed Atheist Progressives to swallow their discomfort and make that progressive alliance between Jesus and Cthulhu.

  19. Pingback: Irregular Times: News Unfit for Print » Unpacking the Ron Paul New Hampshire Vote Fraud Story
  20. Trackback: Irregular Times: News Unfit for Print » Unpacking the Ron Paul New Hampshire Vote Fraud Story
  21. Chris says:

    This is for Jimbo, the instigator of “Show me the proof Kerry won Ohio”; If one of you other commentors already said as much or directed Jimbo via links to the following, forgive me, HOWEVER, I believe you all have missed the truth here; The PROOF, at least as close as anyone not connected to DIEBOLD can explain it, is that incredibly MINOR CANDIDATES (i.e. people who’s names not only do I have no present recollection of– I do not live in Ohio, only born there, but virtually NOBODY IN THE STATE OF OHIO WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED) received (at least one did) MORE VOTES THAN THE CANDIDATE FOR ONE OF THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES, or, if that is not exactly true, RECEIVED WAAAAAAY MORE VOTES THAN THE LAWS OF PROBABILITY WOULD ALLOW–THIS IS A FORM OF VOTE DUMPING–i.e. DIEBOLD dumped KERRY VOTES to other, lesser, virtually unknown candidates, as I remember it, from parties so marginalized as to be, for all intents and purposes, unbeknownst to even exist, or ring any sort of bell, once said voters entered the booth and looked at their choices….THAT IS HOW THEY STOLE THE ELECTION FOR BUSH…to ask for proof how KERRY WON is wrong from the jump…the question is how did Joe Schmo running as the candidate for a party with less recognition and recall than even the GREEN party could receive so many votes…pull your head out of the sand, JIMBO–Kerry sucked, is a BLUE BLOOD, who’s only job it was was to co-opt JOHN DEAN’S message, wait for the elite owned media to capture the first soundbyte of the ‘hot-head’ Dean sounding a little too hot to run the country (YE-HAH!) run lamely, allow himself to be swiftboated without a fight, and PROVED (TO ME, AT LEAST) his allegiance to the black nobility by NOT EVEN FIGHTING THE RESULTS, AS DID THAT OTHER FALSE CHAMP OF THE PEOPLE, AL GORE (I ask you, ONE AND ALL, how on EARTH could GORE fail to vett (sp?) his VP nominee thoroughly enough to discover he WASN”T EVEN A DEMOCRAT? Liebermann…I’m a dem, I’m a Repub. funded Independent, “she’s my sister, she’s my daughter, she’s my sister and my daughter” (Faye Dunaway, Chinatown)…WAKE UP, PEEPS…THEY are herding us toward a crashed economy, third world status, and a GLOBAL servitude…too many bodies on the planet, and too little resources…Peace.

  22. Pingback: Irregular Times: News Unfit for Print » Different Outsider Groups at Obama and Clinton Rallies
  23. Trackback: Irregular Times: News Unfit for Print » Different Outsider Groups at Obama and Clinton Rallies
  24. John Stracke says:

    Not what you’re looking for, but a related story:

  25. Joe says:

    DIEBOLD makes the voting machines. DIEBOLD was/is a huge source of funds for the RNC and Bush’s re-election campaign.

    Jim, the perfect crime IS hard or impossible to prove.

  26. Scott says:

    Sorry if this is a repeat post, I just posted the link, but it didn’t appear, so I may have hit a wrong button or something. Either way, too friggin’ funny.

  27. Junga says:

    Joe, if you can’t prove the perfect crime, how do you know it’s really a crime at all?

    You don’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!