Putin’s party wins ‘dirty’ parliamentary election

[Gunny]

MSNBC News Services
updated 1 hour, 29 minutes ago

MOSCOW - President Vladimir Putin's party won more than 60 percent of the vote in Russia's parliamentary election Sunday, the Central Election Commission said after more than half the votes had been counted, but watchdogs decried a Kremlin campaign that relied on a combination of persuasion and intimidation to ensure victory for United Russia.

The result is expected to allow Putin to claim he has a mandate to retain ultimate political power even after he steps down as president next year, as required by the constitution.

Election monitors reported widespread cases of ballot fraud, and the Communist Party, which is likely to be the biggest opposition force in the next parliament, said it would contest the election in the courts. Russians across the country also complained of being pressured to vote.

more ...http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22061094/

Putin and Chavez sure know to win those elections.

 

[Annie]

But it's really looking like Chavez may not be able to overcome the deficits. Really long post, but the updates are what I've 'quoted'. Lots of links:

CHAVEZ WINS!!! (4:30 PM CST)
Aljazeera reports:

Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, is heading for victory in a referendum on allowing him to remain in power as long as he keeps winning elections, two government-linked sources said citing exit polls.​

Reuters reports that "Government Sources" have confirmed that Chavez has won.
Sky News and China News are reporting the win for Chavez.
Ahmadinejad ought to be calling soon for congrats.

Daniel in Venzuela says it is not yet over- the mess is growing.
Miguel is reporting that the Chavistas have withdrawn their congratulatory ad for the papers tomorrow.

UPDATE: (8:00 PM CST) Chavez has not yet congratulated himself- Stange.
Daniel adds that the delay in announcing the result is scandalous.

UPDATE 2: (8:20 CST) Students are congregating in the Plaza Brion(?) in Caracas. Vice-president Jorge Rodriguez says that the electoral event passed with normality in spite of some attempts to affect the process(?)

...

 

[Gunny]

But it's really looking like Chavez may not be able to overcome the deficits. Really long post, but the updates are what I've 'quoted'. Lots of links:

So, I was half-right.

 

[Paulie]

So vote-rigging is automatically to be taken into consideration in any other country but the US?

If the US is suspected of vote tampering, especially since so much of it has been outsourced to private corporations, it's kooky?

 

[Gunny]

So vote-rigging is automatically to be taken into consideration in any other country but the US?

If the US is suspected of vote tampering, especially since so much of it has been outsourced to private corporations, it's kooky?

Too many hands involved in our elections, and the government itself overseas but does not conduct elections here.

I'm quite sure there is voter fraud at some level. There is ALWAYS that 10% that will try anything. Then there's the Al Gore system of any mark on the page that isn't a clear crater next to Bush's name is a vote for him.

All in all though, it's my opinion that it's kept to a minimum. Nothing is perfect.

 

[Paulie]

Too many hands involved in our elections, and the government itself overseas but does not conduct elections here.

I'm quite sure there is voter fraud at some level. There is ALWAYS that 10% that will try anything. Then there's the Al Gore system of any mark on the page that isn't a clear crater next to Bush's name is a vote for him.

All in all though, it's my opinion that it's kept to a minimum. Nothing is perfect.

When our ballots leave their precincts, they're taken into private to be counted. What assurances do we have that that specific process isn't being compromised?

There's an idea that I have found online, to combat this, in a sense.

Print and Distribute: The Vote Verification Affidavit.

These affidavits are meant to be used wherever computers are used. When the political establishment slaps us in the face by HIDING OUR BALLOTS by using computers - then citizens need to use this vote verification affidavit. Print out the affidavit, get it notarized the next day after you vote (whether in person on election day or by absentee ballot), and then mail it into the address at the bottom of the vote verification affidavit. Thus, the election boards using computers - will never know when we will produce more affidavits for a candidate than they have published in the EASILY RIGGED computer count. Every American who is forced to vote in an area that counts by computer - should use this affidavit.

This is an example of one for the Iowa caucus: http://takebackamerica2008.com/docs/Vote%20Verification%20Affidavit%20Iowa%20Final.pdf

The votes should be counted in public, in front of everyone. Since they're not, this is a way to combat the potential fraud. Notarized affidavits hold up in court, so this is a fool-proof way of being able to combat potential fraud. Courts couldn't say they won't hear the case, if they are already being shown more affidavits of a candidate's vote count, then what the "official" vote count done in private, ended up being.

You can call me crazy, but I don't feel free and a part of a democratic republic, when our ballots are counted in private, and outsourced to easily hackable computers and corporate America.

The only real way to hold en election is to count votes manually in public. SO FUCKING WHAT if that would be time consuming. How much time to people spend watching stupid TV shows, to put people's personal time-consumption into comparison.

Do you agree?

 

[Gunny]

When our ballots leave their precincts, they're taken into private to be counted. What assurances do we have that that specific process isn't being compromised?

There's an idea that I have found online, to combat this, in a sense.



This is an example of one for the Iowa caucus: http://takebackamerica2008.com/docs/Vote%20Verification%20Affidavit%20Iowa%20Final.pdf

The votes should be counted in public, in front of everyone. Since they're not, this is a way to combat the potential fraud. Notarized affidavits hold up in court, so this is a fool-proof way of being able to combat potential fraud. Courts couldn't say they won't hear the case, if they are already being shown more affidavits of a candidate's vote count, then what the "official" vote count done in private, ended up being.

You can call me crazy, but I don't feel free and a part of a democratic republic, when our ballots are counted in private, and outsourced to easily hackable computers and corporate America.

The only real way to hold en election is to count votes manually in public. SO FUCKING WHAT if that would be time consuming. How much time to people spend watching stupid TV shows, to put people's personal time-consumption into comparison.

Do you agree?

So you're saying get rid of the computers? I agree with you on that. I also agree on your last. I don't care how much it inconveniences anyone anymore than I care that your vote doesn't count if you're too stupid to fill out the form correctly.

Unfortunately, too many bleeding hearts are crying the vote is more important than the rules. Not in my book, it isn't.

However, I do not agree with public counting. One, it compromises privacy. Two, there is far greater likelihood, IMO, for compromise the more hands that can touch.

Having representatives from each party is just about the only way the count can be observed. There is no third party in existence in the world that does not have a vested interest in one direction or the other in who wins.

 

[Annie]

So you're saying get rid of the computers? I agree with you on that. I also agree on your last. I don't care how much it inconveniences anyone anymore than I care that your vote doesn't count if you're too stupid to fill out the form correctly.

Unfortunately, too many bleeding hearts are crying the vote is more important than the rules. Not in my book, it isn't.

However, I do not agree with public counting. One, it compromises privacy. Two, there is far greater likelihood, IMO, for compromise the more hands that can touch.

Having representatives from each party is just about the only way the count can be observed. There is no third party in existence in the world that does not have a vested interest in one direction or the other in who wins.

Agreed, all parties involved have representatives there when the ballot boxes are opened, through the counting. I've done this several times and usually there are three or four at a table. From the moment those boxes are opened, all parties are represented and there must be consensus on the vote, otherwise they go to a higher level to look at-BEFORE they may be called 'spoiled.'

I've said it many times I have no problem with making all ballots paper and using Sharpies. I also think voters should be required to show a picture id.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

Putin is scum, i hope he meets his end soon.