1. What do you mean by proof? Do you mean 100% unquestioned evidence that proves conclusively that the there was election fraud? If that is what you are asking the answer is no. And no one has claimed that was the case. What we do have is credible evidence that there were highly unusual irregularities that are very suspicious.

2. I never claimed that the exit poll and voting procedures are identical in Ukraine and US. But there is reason to believe they are comparable. First, US media use exit polls from around the world to predict winners. That means the media considers them to be as accurate as US exit polls. Second, the Bush administration used exit polls to discredit the Ukraine election. So unless your argument is that Ukraine has more accurate procedures than the US, you are proving nothing.

3. That is not even a complete thought. It is not responsive to my argument and I am not even sure what you are trying to say with your response. If you elaborate I would love to respond.

4. It is clear you did not even read Robert Kennedy Jr.'s article because he referred to several mathematicians. It is no wonder you can't see any evidence of fraud, you haven't even bothered to look. Please read the article and we can discuss it.

The bottom line is this: Robert Kennedy has made some serious charges and they need to be addressed. I am not saying I fully believe what he wrote and I cannot have a true opinion because I have seen no attempt to try and explain away his arguments. But the longer his arguments go uncontested, the more it seems like they are true.

Did you read the article? I posted an article in the beginning of this thread so we can discuss it. I will repost it since it seems to have been overlooked. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...lection_stolen

My point is this problem is bigger than Republicans or Democrats. If the Republicans did steal the election as charged, that means the Democrats could do the same and I am not comfortable with that. Kennedy lays out his reasoning to believe the election was stolen, but even if you don't believe him, he explains how an election could potentially be stolen. There needs to be reforms that would prevent this fraud even if the Republicans did not commit it this time. We can't trust any politicians, Republican or Democrat, to not commit election fraud and need to act aggressively to stop and/or prevent it.

Please give me evidence that the discrepancy between exit polls and final outcome in 2004 were within the average margin of error. You are giving arguments as to why exit polls are not 100% accurate. We are not saying that they are. My argument is that for some mysterious reason the difference between exit polls and final outcome in 2004 were significantly larger than they have been in the past.

Additionally you are not addressing the other cases of voter fraud such as caging, excessively long lines in democratic areas, and why the RNC paid for hotel rooms for a group of texans who illegally called and "informed" people who had every right to vote that they were not allowed to vote and would be arrested if they did.

The bottom line is this: Robert Kennedy Jr is - first and foremost - a partisan hack! He's kind of like Michael Moore without the camera. EVERYTHING he says and does needs to be taken with a grain of salt, and understood in light of his STRONG political leanings.

Another way of looking at it is this: The fact that somebody says something does NOT make it fact.

Would you take it seriously if Rush Limbaugh was "blowing the whistle" on election fraud in King County, Washington?

Yes. I read the article. Of course I did. It contains nothing new.

What is it that you want to debate?

Why exits polls were accurate (as usual) in all places EXCEPT where diebold touchscreens were used. And by the way the touchscreens happened to be located in major swing states.

Equally, just because someone who is political said something does not make it untrue. If Robert Kennedy said the there are 50 states in the US would you "take it with a grain of salt". You are attacking the person and not the arguments. If Rush was blowing the whistle in King County I would look at his evidence and weigh it with opposing evidence and decide which was more persuasive. But I am unable to do that with you though because you continually avoid the arguments. I can agree that kennedy is political and biased but you need to prove that his arguments and evidence is invalid. So I ask again, what is your response to his specific claims?

I want to debate the merits of the specific arguments made by Kennedy and the merit of the evidence he presented.

What about it?

Kennedy makes this statement: That's just STUPID. If it was able to be proven, it would have been PROVEN immediately.

Another quote: The PENTAGON deals with MILITARY oversees votes. And guess what? Military personnel vote OVERWHELMINGLY REPUBLICAN - like blacks vote overwhelmingly Democrat. So... if this was a "conspiracy", it hurt Republicans, not Democrats. Furthermore, Kennedy gives no evidence to back up this claim.


Another Kennedy claim: IF this was true, there would be immediate arrests, charges and trials. I doubt it EVER happened. Where's the evidence? If you look closely, you'll notice that one of the people writing about this did so in September of 2004, the other person who wrote an article wrote it ON OCTOBER 27, 2004 - BEFORE THE ELECTION EVEN TOOK PLACE!





Much ado about nothing. I'll let you chew on those ones for a minute or two...