Is Sarah Palin a Cover Story to Steal the Election?


I found a scary article over at Mark Crispin Miller’s blog. In “Why They Chose Sarah Palin”, Mark asserts that Palin is just a convenient cover to mask voter fraud. He alleges that there aren’t enough fundies to explain Bush’s 2004 reelection. Bush’s disapproval rating was too high, and the numbers don’t add up. Instead, the election was stolen through tampering with the electronic voting machines (among other techniques). As the media were trying to come up with an explanation for how the pre-election polling could have been so wrong, the Bushkavites advanced the story that his win was due to a last-minute surge by the so-called “values voters”. McCain’s pick of Sarah Palin is intended to cover the same vote tampering in this election.

I don’t know how true this is. The vast majority of mainstream news outlets are all owned by just a few giant corporations, so no investigative reporting ever comes out of them anymore. That just leaves the smaller independents, who usually don’t have the resources to do all of the digging required to break these stories. Even when they do, it doesn’t get covered by the mainstream media, so the vast unwashed masses never find out and vote accordingly.

17 Responses to “Is Sarah Palin a Cover Story to Steal the Election?”

  1. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I love a good conspiracy story, but the polls never showed a landslide for Kerry. It was close right up to the last day. What gets the conspiracy theorists going is that exit polling showed Kerry with a slim (but not insignificant) lead. Exit polls, however, are generally not as scientific as regular polls — and no poll can ever be 100% accurate. What concerned me more about ’04 was not exit poll irregularities, but the blatant efforts to suppress certain demographics and other voting fraud carried on by Bush lackies. These are well documented and are hardly the realm of “outlandish conspiracy theory.”

    Unlike the author, I do think there are a lot of “[lack of] values voters.” I see them every day. They are HIGHLY motivated, from what I’ve seen. Whereas liberals… God must be damning us… We are like herding cats. If we don’t get what we want, rather than taking one for the team and going onboard with the Brand Name Liberal (Gore, Kerry, Obama), too many of us sit home or vote 3rd party, pout, stomp our feed, and then complain for the next four years about how bad things are. WTF is wrong with us?

  2. Matt Says:

    From various sources I”ve read, there was certainly vote tampering or a lot of feet-stomping and whining by electronic voting companies with certain ideologically aligned CEO’s who didn’t want computer scientists checking out their machines for flaws.
    Also, after 2000 the media reported in a print-report that was never published in a newspaper (just a big policy rundown amongst themselves of the job they did), they say that something like 2 million ballots for every 100 million voters are not counted for various reasons that the media did not deem important to check in on.

  3. Anfractuous Says:

    Perhaps you’ve noticed the spate of recent “news” stories about how 1/3 of white voters will not vote for Obama because of race? (Varying percentages are given, so I don’t vouch for the veracity of this number.) Also being reported is that the polls don’t support this. Therefore, their conclusion? People lie to pollsters; people say they’ll vote for Obama, but then don’t do it in the secrecy of the voting booth.

    I’ve also wondered why so much attention is being paid to white women voters. We’ve never heard this demographic mentioned before. I realize that this group may be more significant with a black candidate, but they’ve always been a separate demographic from women voters of color. Oddly, white male voters don’t seem to exist. Or am I just imagining it?

    In any case, it appears to me that the media would be ecstatic if they can stir up some conflict over race. I know conflict is “good news” to them, but perhaps they’re receiving talking points to give cover to any irregularities in the voting come November.

    With all the bizarre revelations about things this administration has done in the past few years, becoming a conspiracy theorist doesn’t seem all that illogical. Hmmm.

    One more thing… Parrotlover77 says, “Exit polls, however, are generally not as scientific as regular polls”

    How can you say that asking people who they actually voted for is less scientific than asking them who they might vote for? The wording makes a huge difference when polling to discover people’s preferences or intentions. It seems to me that reporting the choice they actually, physically made must be more accurate than asking what choice people might make in the future.

    Just asking.

  4. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Also being reported is that the polls don’t support this. Therefore, their conclusion? People lie to pollsters; people say they’ll vote for Obama, but then don’t do it in the secrecy of the voting booth.

    I never understood that conclusion. It’s not like the presidency is between Obama and some white supremecist. Say what you want about McCain (and I have plenty of negatives things to say) — he’s not a racist. So why on earth would anybody lie to pollsters? Why would they be motivated to tell the pollster that they will vote for Obama when they are not? That makes no sense whatsoever. Of course lots of things make no sense and I’m sure somebody out there is doing just that, but I doubt a statistically significant number here. I don’t buy it. In this case, republican voter fraud is the horse and “secret closet racists” is the zebra.

    How can you say that asking people who they actually voted for is less scientific than asking them who they might vote for?

    It depends who is doing the exit polling, but there are many factors that can mess up a good statistically random sample (time constraints, chosen districts, willingness to participate, etc.). The only way to get an effectively accurate exit poll is to take a much greater sample size than most pollers are willing to do (for cost reasons). IANAS (statistician), but there is quite a bit of criticism on exit polls in general due to their potential inaccuracy and several countries have actually banned the practice due to the possibility of exit polling data released too early influencing the election before polls close. For example, an exit poll shows candidate X is winning, so disappointed candidate Y supporters who have not voted don’t bother to vote since “it won’t count anyway.”

    Polls are useful tools, but they always have the possibility of being wrong. A poll’s “margin of error” does not mean it’s impossible for the actual results to be outside the range, it only means it’s unlikely to be.

  5. Barbara Says:

    Say what you want about McCain (and I have plenty of negatives things to say) — he’s not a racist.

    He’s certainly shown some indication of what might be racism in the past. The MLK holiday debacle, the reference to Asians as “gooks”, the anti-Muslim comments he’s made, and his use of the term “tar-baby”.

    I just don’t think you can be a little racist, you either are or you aren’t.

  6. Ron Britton Says:

    I just don’t think you can be a little racist, you either are or you aren’t.

    I disagree with that. I know lots of people who are a little bit racist.

  7. Barbara Says:

    Maybe it’s just a difference in how we define the word. I consider “racist” any belief that a person’s race/ethnicity determines their intelligence, function, ability. So, if you believe ( even just a little ) that Asians are smarter than Caucasians or African Americans are less intelligent that is different than a small prejudice against a specific group which may or may not be a racr/ethnicity ( redheads are fiesty, Germans are clean freaks )
    I’m not saying McCain is racist, just that some of his comments lead me to think he might be and once you cross that line, there’s no return.

  8. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Barbara – I read your point loud and clear and I should have been more clear in my comment. I don’t think McCain is racist towards African Americans. Being opposed to MLK Day does not a racist make, even though it is insensitive to the memory of an American civil rights hero who happens to be African American. There are reasons outside of “I hate those blackies” to oppose a holiday. It was a dumb decision, certainly, in how it made him look, but I just don’t see it as racist as much as I see it as Republican.

    My original point with all this was that there should be no reason to be afraid to tell a pollster you prefer McCain over Obama. If McCain was clearly a racist, then it would make you look racist for voting for him over Obama, and that would be motiviation for lying to a pollster. However, McCain isn’t seen that way, so what would the motivation be for lying?

  9. Brian Says:

    A few years ago I read Miller’s “Bush Dyslexicon”. In it he offers up the story of British journalist Greg Palast who had done some digging into the illegal purging of around 64,000 people (mostly Democrats) from the voter rolls. The story broke a few days before the 2000 election on Salon and the British press. CBS was offered the story of a lifetime about the Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, brother of George Bush, and his scheme to illegally disenfranchise voters who would be highly unlikely to vote for anyone other than Al Gore. CBS told Palast that his story didn’t hold up. When asked why, they said they called Jeb Bush’s office to ask about the story and were told there was nothing to it. Having exhausted every last possible avenue of journalistic skill, CBS shrugged its shoulders and let it die. The rest, of course, is history.

    I’m normally not one to embrace any conspiracy theory. For one, in order to be true they usually have to involve an inordinate number of people, all of which must possess an almost unheard of ability to keep their mouths shut forever. Also, the conspiracy leaders would need to possess inhuman intelligence and foresight to account for every possible contingency which might expose the fraud. Does anyone really think Republicans are capable of this, especially Grandpa McCain?

    I’m not suggesting that there are not elements of the Republican establishment that have ever or would ever try to tamper with an election. I think the story I referenced above sounds very credible. However, I think that is representative of how neutered the media has become, not how skillful Republicans have become at Machiavellian tactics. Remember, it never would have worked if Gore would have carried his home state of Tennessee. I think the Republicans have tried, and will again try this year, to pull some shit because they think they can get away with it, but I don’t think they are capable of such a grand and foolproof conspiracy. If they were really so damned smart, why is McCain their nominee?

  10. Ron Britton Says:


    I’m not advocating any grand conspiracy theory. The race is so close that all they have to do is throw the election in a few places. There are many documented cases of the voting machines coming up with completely bogus numbers. Some is due to bad programming and poor testing (never ascribe to evil intent what can be better explained by incompetence). However, there is very little oversight on those machines, so they could easily be thrown in a few regions.

    If Bush truly fell short in 2004 by many millions of votes, that would be too hard to make up by voter fraud, because too many people would have to be involved, as you mentioned.

    Besides, I oversimplified in my article summary. You’ll note I said:

    …the election was stolen through tampering with the electronic voting machines (among other techniques).

    Those other techniques were the various disenfranchisement techniques that we’ve discussed and are well documented elsewhere.

    There appear to be a lot of the same disenfranchisement stunts going on in this election. Get ready for a really bad next four years.

  11. Brian Says:


    I agree completely that the GOP will not simply roll over and take their well-deserved lumps this year without trying illegal tactics usually found in banana republics. Michigan is far closer right now than it has any right to be, yet the media is ominously subdued in its coverage of the Republican scheme to oust people who had their homes fucking foreclosed on from the voter rolls because they no longer have a valid address. I unfortunately live in one of the reddest parts of Ohio (Boehner is my congressman) so I’m sure I’ll have no long lines to contend with on election day, but I wonder about the heavily Democratic precincts in Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and other large cities. How many machines will be available there? I guarantee the lines will be much longer. Will the news coverage mention it? I’m not holding my breath.

    My ire is directed at the media. There is no excuse for shit like this to occur in the world’s “foremost” democracy and not be exposed for the scam that it is by the fourth estate. Yes, I know there has been some light shone on this problem occasionally, notably the HBO documentary a couple years ago about how easily hacked electronic voting machines are. But I fear it isn’t enough.

    I think this is all going to come down to how large Obama’s margin is on 4 Nov. If he’s got a 5-6 point lead, I think he’ll be all right. If its any closer, then our collective fears may come true. McCain knows if he wins, it will be by the thinnest of margins. He’s got the stupid demographic wrapped up, which will keep him at least at 40-45%. If he can change the subject often enough with his smoke and mirrors, he may very well fool enough people who are lazy enough to not pay attention, be they voters or reporters. And we all hold our breath……

  12. Parrotlover77 Says:

    It’s too early to see how it will affect the polls, but the media is really tearing McCain a new one for this “emergency campaign shutdown” stunt. I am relatively certain it will backfire on him. The degree with which it will backfire remains to be seen. If it’s only one or two percent, that’s easy enough to make up before Nov 4. If it’s greater than five percent, we might be looking at the first time this election is reaching a tilting point that would be incredibly hard to change before Nov 4.

    I loved KO’s comment last night on Countdown — something to the effect of “McCain’s campaign has officially jumped the shark” in reference to cancelling on Letterman to “rush back to washington” all the while walking down the street to interview with Couric.

  13. Brian Says:

    It does seem as if the McCain campaign succeeds on a regular basis at making itself seem more and more bizarre than the day before. Their incompetence is only exceeded by their incompetence. It’s 10:40am EST as I write this, and still no one can say whether McCain will show up for the debate tonight or not! I know the financial crisis must be dealt with quickly, but I wonder how much a man who claimed not to know much about the economy can really contribute. Indeed, it seems his presence in Washington yesterday may have sabotaged a deal that was essentially done.

    His running mate claimed that when Vladimir Putin flies over to America, he has to fly over Alaska, so she therefore has foreign policy chops. Its hard to be charitable to such a blatant insult to my intelligence. This woman makes Dan Quayle look like Winston Frakking Churchill.

    I hope PL is right and this thing is reaching an irrevocable tipping point in Obama’s favor. Never in my lifetime have I seen a candidate for president seem so unfit for the job, which says everything given who sits in the Oval Office today.

  14. vjack Says:

    What concerns me is that voter fraud becomes progressively easier the closer an election is projected to be. In very close elections, such as the one we are about to face in November, there is a real risk that tampering could provide McCain with enough of a boost to win.

  15. Parrotlover77 Says:

    The debate is on (as if McCain was ever going to miss it unless Obama also cancelled). Currently Gallup Daily puts Obama and McCain dead even (wtf?) but before you fall out of your chair, consider how the Daily is calculated. It’s an average of the last three poll-days weekdays. Obama had an end-of-week surge last week and that was kicked out for yesterday’s release (M-W polls only — Friday was purged). Monday and Tuesday, when McCain was starting this stunt, he looked oh-so-very-serious and that may have impressed a few indies who don’t follow as closely as we do. Wednesday, even Gallup admitted McCain didn’t look so hot in the poll numbers. By the time Thursday and Friday are factored in, and then his (hopefully) epic fail at the debates, we may again see an Obama surge in the +5% range. We’ll see. Maybe McCain has really really been practicing his pronunciation of NEW-KEW-LAR since this country seems enamored with that word.

    vjack – voter suppression concerns me greatly. To really feel comfortable about this election, we need a solid 5% edge for Obama.

    Back in my home state, a Republican may win the governorship. I am shedding tears. At least he doesn’t seem to be a neocon. SIGH. Well, still time for Bev to kick it up! At least I have Brad Miller as my House rep. He kicks major ass.

  16. Sue Blue Says:

    Out here in wonderful Washington, we’ve got the Repub who just won’t stay dead…Dino Rossi. Not wanting his apparently retarded constituency to get a whiff of the stench of his dying party on him, he’s chosen to call himself a member of the “GOP” party. As if people here are too stupid to realize they’re one and the same. Could he get any more condescending? Even dumber, a whole herd of Repub hopefuls have followed his lead in this stupid scam. What I can’t figure out is why anyone, anywhere, with the brains to breathe and walk at the same time, would even consider voting for any Republican, let alone Crazy McSame and that blow-up doll he’s dragging around as a running mate. But they will. Or the machines will.

  17. Parrotlover77 Says:

    The GOP Party vs Republican Party thing comes about directly due to focus groups. Believe it or not, there are quite a few people (or at least “enough” people) who don’t realize the GOP is the Republican Party.

    Anyway, onto good news!

    The latest polls in my state of NC is showing Obama with a two-point lead!

    Two points is not a lot of points, but consider the state: North Fricking Carolina. We haven’t been blue in like forevers. Also consider: three weeks ago, McCain led by FIVE. That’s a seven-point swing.

    I hope it holds — or expands — by Nov 4. If NC can go blue, Obama will be unstoppable on election day.

    It seems the southeast is wising up. South Carolina is the only solid red state. Georgia is a close second, but Atlanta’s growth directly affects the rest of the state’s redness.

    Maybe eventually the southeast can seceed from the rest of the south. If VA, NC, and FL get bluer, I don’t want to be lumped in with AL, TN, and KY anymore.

    The day the last American flying the rebel flag dies will be a happy day.