What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.439 Comments
- bzs2101, on 11/06/2008, -32/+353The turnout numbers in Alaska sound very suspicious. I really hope there's an investigation. Thankfully, the presidential race was a landslide and this irregularity doesn't affect the outcome, but the senate and congressional races hang in the balance.
Democracy has been undermined enough with the stolen elections in 2000 and 2004. I hope Alaskans rise up to demand some answers. - Pokerdork, on 11/07/2008, -6/+211I live in Anchorage. In 2004, my District's vote count was at 223% as I recall. The Lt. Gov, whose main job is to run the Division of Elections for the State of Alaska, ignored all requests about the discrepancies.
What is wrong with my beloved State? We're really not crazy up here, it just seems that way!!! - Alheithinn, on 11/06/2008, -16/+210The numbers are not at all believable. The most polarizing election in modern American history and nobody voted? It's impossible to believe that voting was down by 11% when this election brought record turn outs everywhere else. I, too, hope for an investigation, though this article says nothing about previous Democrat attempts to pry lose voting records. I don't hold out much hope for Alaska while Palin's regime remains in power. Clearly, these people were taking their inspiration from the Bush Administration.
- ScienceDoc, on 11/06/2008, -10/+162We need to fix the election system, now.
- cydweli, on 11/07/2008, -8/+140My goodness...What is the world coming to when you can't peacefully rig an election in the US ?
- paintgrl, on 11/06/2008, -15/+120Believe it or not I have read the voting turn out was lower then 2004 in my home state of California. However, politics in Alaska have been corrupt for a very long time. Alaska is really the country of mavericks and wing-nuts.
- elshizzo, on 11/07/2008, -4/+92The polls showed Berkowitz and Begich had CONSISTENTLY led their perspective races in the polls by almost double digits. Considering how accurate the polls have been in basically every other state, for Alaska polls to be off by more than double digits, I call SHENANIGANS
- STBAT25, on 11/07/2008, -2/+66"The dead have risen and they're voting Republican!" Bart Simpson
- pdinatale, on 11/07/2008, -4/+67Shenanigans!
- GoKings, on 11/07/2008, -5/+66FiveThirtyEight.Com which is almost always spot on with predictions (go ahead and look at the projected electoral map and the real one) has a story about it.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/what-in-hel ... - Rowan187, on 11/07/2008, -4/+55Alaskan here, There's still 60,000 absentee ballots and 9,000 early ballots that need to be counted. Stevens is only ahead by 3,500 votes, and most of those absentee ballots should be college kids that know that Stevens is a retard.
- treas, on 11/07/2008, -7/+51election 2000: supreme court rules that floridian's votes do not count and declare George W. Bush the winner, putting a hault to all recount activities.
election 2004: John Kerry was a ***** candidate, he just flat out lost. - inactive, on 11/07/2008, -10/+48Things that make you go "Hmmmm."
- yunus, on 11/07/2008, -3/+352004 Alaskans might have felt there vote counted. In this election the outcome was more obvious as soon as Pennsylvania was decided, add in the 4 hour time difference from east coast to Alaska time and you have many people who probably decided not to vote because they knew the results at around 5pm their time, while the polls were still open.
- sullivanst, on 11/06/2008, -2/+30The senate race is of some import, with the possibility of 60 still in the balance (OR-Sen now having been called for Jeff Merkeley, MN-Sen being recounted, and GA-Sen looking like a run-off).
Of course, if Stevens is certified the winner, he'll be expelled anyway, and a special election will ensue (Alaska state law having been amended after Palin's predecessor appointed his daughter to fill his own Senate seat, which he vacated to become Governor). Polling before the Republican primary showed that none of the other contenders performed at all well in matchups against Begich. - Weatherwaxx, on 11/07/2008, -12/+39I think there were a lot congressional seats lost due to Republican dirty tricks in close elections. The Democrats don't have a filibuster-proof majority, so we can expect the kind of obstructive behavior we saw in Clinton's second term.
Dirty business as usual... - inactive, on 11/07/2008, -2/+28Election 2000... well the alleged theft there is well documented. Election 2004 was stolen when the Democrats disqualified a more or less viable candidate for having a silly scream at a rally, and nominated some clown from Mass. who was basically DOA in a national election.
- pintomp3, on 11/07/2008, -5/+30@bentman: bush's campaign co-chair oversaw the elections in florida, in his brother's state. people appointed by his daddy on the supreme court decided to halt the recount in a decision that cannot be cited as precedent. that election made a mockery of our democratic system.
- heystoopid, on 11/07/2008, -4/+28Voting republican Zombies from the grave yard have struck again .
- Bartboy919, on 11/07/2008, -1/+23I disagree, The democrats are THIS close to having 60 seats in the senate. The ability to stop a filibuster is a great ability, and this country isn't going to rebound with republicans trying to block important legislation by reading from the dictionary or Bible.
- davdev, on 11/07/2008, -0/+22Your wrong about Obama/Bush, but right about Kerry/McCain.
In 2004, Bush had 62,028,285 vs 59,028,109 for Kerry
In 2008, Obama had 63,093,832 vs 55,851,014
So Obama had a little more than 1 Million more votes than Bush, but Kerry had about 3 million more than Mccain
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html - Mordisquitos, on 11/07/2008, -2/+23Actually, that makes a lot of sense.
- medfreak, on 11/07/2008, -3/+23I think you need a huge lesson in comprehension. Can you read?
- sneaker98, on 11/07/2008, -6/+25How has a >100% voter turnout rate gone unnoticed?
- Bloodwine, on 11/07/2008, -42/+60No no no no no no no. Election is over. Please go away now, HuffPo. I don't ever want to see you again. Ever. Shoo Shoo.
- treas, on 11/07/2008, -2/+20we still are debating the outcome of that election, as a result of the supreme court's actions - so either way it seems we'd be debating the result of the election.
;) - daveerickson, on 11/07/2008, -11/+28how much money did Obama earn as a US Senator for the last 20+ months? Was he actually doing his Senatorial duties?
I guess he will submit his receipts for travel ling (sic) expenses for him and his family. - MindyB, on 11/07/2008, -3/+19The problem with our national elections is that every state has its own system and its own goofy way of counting votes, making the election results more prone to funny business, mistakes and miscounts. I think that for national elections, the federal government needs to dictate the rules of the elections--such as having a completely uniform system of voting, same voting machines, etc.--have paper printouts to make sure there is a proper checks and balances, and have international polls and election watchers (just like every other country has). For national elections, there should also be one database with all the active registered voters. This is the only way we will reduce or even eliminate the crazy antics performed in many states.
In order to preserve State's rights, States keep control over their own elections--if they want to use the same federal system that's fine, and if they want to use stone age systems that's fine too--the residents of those states should be the ones to decide that, since elections are about the choices of the residents. - Hamletlere, on 11/07/2008, -3/+19Sure, I'd like to have Dems in complete control. Maybe THAT would convince the Republicans to stop pandering to the far religious right, become more moderate, and become fiscally conservative again. Then they might have a chance for my vote.
- natalvc, on 11/07/2008, -3/+19lol you idiot.
It's not a "female-pissed-because-the-female-running-mate-didn't-win article" but a "female-pissed-because-the-democrats-didn't-win-in-alaska-and-the-numbers-just-don't-make-sense" article - Twoje, on 11/07/2008, -2/+18See, THIS is where you would use "loose"
- heronimous, on 11/07/2008, -0/+14yeh here's hoping with a democrat majority you finally see reason in the US and among other things:
- move voting from Tues to a weekend day (when working people can more readily vote)
- change to a paper ballot system (no more diebold machines or punchcards) - aduzik, on 11/07/2008, -3/+16The outcome of the Presidential race was never in question. But explain why total voter turnout would be the lowest of any presidential election in Alaska history, even with the state's own governor on the ticket? Why would Alaskans turn out to vote for Bush in 2004, but not their own governor in 2008?
Don Young went from polling 8 points behind Berkowitz to winning by 8 points? Not a chance. Something is rotten in the state of Alaska. - josephbloseph, on 11/07/2008, -3/+16@NachoBusiness
Kerry is a solid politician, just not terribly charismatic in his presidential campaign. One or two of those political comedy shows commented on how impassioned he appeared when speaking for Obama during the 2008 campaign, asking where /that/ Kerry was 4 years ago. - ScottyAnimal, on 11/07/2008, -3/+16Saturday, Donny, is Shabbos, the Jewish day of rest. That means that I don't work, I don't get in a car, I don't ***** ride in a car, I don't pick up the phone, I don't turn on the oven, and I sure as ***** don't ***** roll! Shomer shabbos!
- mal1964, on 11/07/2008, -8/+21" Thankfully,the presidential race was a landslide and this irregularity doesn't affect the outcome,"
Its been a red state since probably before you were born - kefkaantakrist, on 11/07/2008, -0/+12I'm always amused when people trash Kerry. It is always difficult to beat an incumbent, as the race in Alaska this year (where Ted Stevens won in spite of his FELONY) shows. Yet Kerry came within 2.5 pct. points of winning the popular vote and if either Florida or Ohio -two states in which election irregularities have been claimed- had gone the other way he would have won the electoral count.
Keep in mind, also, that this was at a time when Bush was still fairly well liked - it wasn't until after the election that Bush really started his downward spiral in the public opinion.
So even though he lost, I still think Kerry did a hell of a job chiseling away at a fairly popular president, and I think, at least partly, his criticism planted the seeds of discontent with Bush and ultimately helped the Dems win in '06 and '08. - inactive, on 11/07/2008, -14/+26Please secede!
- chrissku, on 11/07/2008, -5/+17Rachel Maddow talked about this last night. I say we keep as much information pertaining to this as we can find on the front page to raise awareness.
- ripple123, on 11/07/2008, -4/+15um.. its not a smear campaign if the allegations have been proven in a court of law...
- davdev, on 11/07/2008, -0/+11Actually in looking into this further, my numbers for 2008 are off. Politico has it as 64,908,616 to 57,083,284.
So Obama got more than 2.5 million more votes than Bush in 2004 with McCain about 2 Million less than Kerry - scojac, on 11/07/2008, -2/+13@mvader:
What the ***** are you talking about?
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Nov05/0,4670,Vote ...
And don't try to accuse me of liberal media bias - it's Fox News, bastion of the right and mouthpiece of the Bush administration. - davdev, on 11/07/2008, -0/+11Not legally.
When I vote, my name only appears in the book for the district in which I am registered. I could go to another polling station, but couldn't vote because my name is not in the book - sindex, on 11/07/2008, -5/+15So the above Republicans can't read? Is that what I'm seeing here? This article isn't saying, "whine whine I don't like Ted Stevens and don't want him elected." This article isn't saying, "I'm crying salty tears because Begich and Berkowitz may not win." It's saying the total numbers in Alaska appear to be wrong. An 11% decrease in voter turn out? The exact same spread as 2004, despite polls showing a much different margin (and I admit we all know are largely *****, but still that seems strange). Diebold (or someone working with their machines) has a proven history of tampering with votes from the 2004 election. More people turned out to vote than were registered to vote in 2004? That's impossible without fraud. It took 2+ years to look at those results back then? Ugh...
Despite being on HuffPo, an admittedly overzealous occasional cesspool of crybaby liberals, Shannyn Moore's point is that regardless of what happens to the numbers, in favor of Democrats or Republicans, this should be investigated. This is bigger than elections - this is about making sure people's votes count. This is about preserving the Republic.
Something does seem very strange 'up there in Alaksa.' - inactive, on 11/07/2008, -5/+15Nice copy & paste job. I read that comment on three different blogs. When I see the hate that is coming from Republicans a day after elections it makes me think you guys need even bigger ass whooping.
- shauncorleone, on 11/07/2008, -3/+13How much money are you earning at your job while on Digg? Are you actually doing your job duties?
- pagit, on 11/07/2008, -19/+29how much money did Palin earn as governor of Alaska between August 29, 2008 and Nov 4th 2008 ? Was she actually doing governor duties?
I guess she will submit her receipts for travel ling expenses for her and her family -
Show 51 - 100 of 452 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is