jump to navigation

Filibuster Proof Senate still a Possibility for Dems November 7, 2008

Posted by trouble97018 in '08 Election, Democrats, News, Politics, Voting.
trackback

Courtesy Bradblog:

In case you haven’t been able to keep up with the barrage of reporting here over the last 48 hours — concerning serious election irregularities in various races around the country — allow me to connect at least the dots that may well add up to a filibuster-proof Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate.

Now that challenger Jeff Merkley (D) has been declared the winner (at least by the media) over incumbent Sen. Gordon Smith (R) in Oregon, the Democrats have currently been named the winner in enough elections U.S. Senate races that they will have at least 57 seats when President-elect Barack Obama takes office next January.

There remains, however, three U.S. Senate races still in serious contention, all of which, there is very good reason to believe, may end up going to the Democratic candidate if serious attention is given to issues of election integrity in each of those races. Setting aside whether or not a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate is a good or bad thing, the undecided races at this hour — in Alaska, Minnesota and Georgia — are quickly summarized below, along with links to more detailed coverage, for your convenience…

ALASKA: Ted Stevens (R-incumbent) v. Mark Begich (D)

Despite Stevens’ felony conviction on 7 counts, just days before the election, and some pre-election polls showing a likely victory for Begich, the final results — overseen by Gov. Sarah Palin’s friend and Lt. Governor — are being slow-walked and are revealing enormous irregularities, including a so-far inexplicable 11% decline in the turnout rate from the 2004 election.

While Alaska votes on paper, they are tabulated on faulty, hackable, and often inaccurate Diebold op-scanners (more details on that below). The state has also been a long-time Diebold “company town”, as it’s one of the few places where the Democratic Party has actually fought for election integrity by suing the state for database records of how voters voted, following reported turnout rates of more than 200% in some areas in the state’s highly questionable 2004 election.

See our latest coverage here and from last night here.

Article Continues @ Sourced Site.

Advertisements

Comments»

No comments yet — be the first.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: