Advertisement
Flash back to 1984. Walter Mondale is pronounced the loser in that election several hours before the polls even OPEN much less before they close.
A later lawsuit by Democrats is WON because they are able to DOCUMENT that network coverage skewed the election results well in advance of poll closing in western MI, NM, IL (where lines were still in place).
Other data since then have indicated money was paid by the Reagan/Bush campaign to black ministers in New Jersey to NOT deliver voters to the polls in several precincts (as virtually admitted to by Ed Rollins in 1988, after NJ GOP Gov. Christie Whitman's campaign had been accused of that: "Oh, yes." said Rollins to a dinner group. "That was quite common up there. It's called "walking around money.;" the total context of his phrasing made it clear it had been practiced prior to the 1988 campaign; NJ reporter Ed Baumeister also noted that off-duty police officers had apparently been used to intimidate African-American voters in some precincts in NJ in 1988--and, by all indications, in 1984, since the practice seemed to have already been "in place" by 1988.)
Meanwhile, by November 1985, a meeting in Philadelphia, PA had established that the Pennsylvania area had been hit by a level of homelessness not seen since the 1930s Depression. It included, in that area, not just the "classic drifter" or junkie/alcoholic, but "families with children" who had been dispossessed of their homes over the previous year. It seems rather clear that the "low voter turnout" reported in PA, at least, was due to homelessness: literally, people were disenfranchised by having lost a residential address. Adding to the melee, the Reagan Admin. had gone out of its way to ensure that the "shadow market"--low-rent weekly housing--was no longer available around the nation.
Out west, also, in NEVADA: if you look at the _World Almanac_ Presidential elections sections in the 1987 and 1988 issues, you see a wide variance in the Reagan reported totals for Nevada. The opening listings (page 275 of the '87 edition) show Reagan's totals for NV were "188,770"; yet, over under the state listings, (page 291) it's "108,770". A quick 80,000 votes given to Reagan. In other words, with Mondale tallying over 91,000 votes, the Libertarian just under 2400 in that section, all those votes together add up to just a little over the total for Reagan ALONE on the opening section page listings. This pattern was repeated in all _World Almanac_ issues from 1985 until 1992, when the front page listing was displaced into the state listings.
Yesterday and today, judges are deciding against legal cases asking for voter enfranchisement in NV. They are rationalizing that there is "no preponderant evidence" that these cases demonstrate that the state would turn around on such a recount.
But, given NV's history in the World Almanacs--an 80,000 vote addition to Reagan's totals, based largely on ABC tallies, not on state ones--it seems odd that these judges aren't informed about this 80,000 vote glitch in NV even in 1984.
I wonder if Judge Breen, who issued this anti-vote count ruling, is familiar with this little item?
You can find more on these Nevada glitches and the homelessness problem in PA in 1984 at my website:
http://www.aristotle.net/~mstandridge
A later lawsuit by Democrats is WON because they are able to DOCUMENT that network coverage skewed the election results well in advance of poll closing in western MI, NM, IL (where lines were still in place).
Other data since then have indicated money was paid by the Reagan/Bush campaign to black ministers in New Jersey to NOT deliver voters to the polls in several precincts (as virtually admitted to by Ed Rollins in 1988, after NJ GOP Gov. Christie Whitman's campaign had been accused of that: "Oh, yes." said Rollins to a dinner group. "That was quite common up there. It's called "walking around money.;" the total context of his phrasing made it clear it had been practiced prior to the 1988 campaign; NJ reporter Ed Baumeister also noted that off-duty police officers had apparently been used to intimidate African-American voters in some precincts in NJ in 1988--and, by all indications, in 1984, since the practice seemed to have already been "in place" by 1988.)
Meanwhile, by November 1985, a meeting in Philadelphia, PA had established that the Pennsylvania area had been hit by a level of homelessness not seen since the 1930s Depression. It included, in that area, not just the "classic drifter" or junkie/alcoholic, but "families with children" who had been dispossessed of their homes over the previous year. It seems rather clear that the "low voter turnout" reported in PA, at least, was due to homelessness: literally, people were disenfranchised by having lost a residential address. Adding to the melee, the Reagan Admin. had gone out of its way to ensure that the "shadow market"--low-rent weekly housing--was no longer available around the nation.
Out west, also, in NEVADA: if you look at the _World Almanac_ Presidential elections sections in the 1987 and 1988 issues, you see a wide variance in the Reagan reported totals for Nevada. The opening listings (page 275 of the '87 edition) show Reagan's totals for NV were "188,770"; yet, over under the state listings, (page 291) it's "108,770". A quick 80,000 votes given to Reagan. In other words, with Mondale tallying over 91,000 votes, the Libertarian just under 2400 in that section, all those votes together add up to just a little over the total for Reagan ALONE on the opening section page listings. This pattern was repeated in all _World Almanac_ issues from 1985 until 1992, when the front page listing was displaced into the state listings.
Yesterday and today, judges are deciding against legal cases asking for voter enfranchisement in NV. They are rationalizing that there is "no preponderant evidence" that these cases demonstrate that the state would turn around on such a recount.
But, given NV's history in the World Almanacs--an 80,000 vote addition to Reagan's totals, based largely on ABC tallies, not on state ones--it seems odd that these judges aren't informed about this 80,000 vote glitch in NV even in 1984.
I wonder if Judge Breen, who issued this anti-vote count ruling, is familiar with this little item?
You can find more on these Nevada glitches and the homelessness problem in PA in 1984 at my website:
http://www.aristotle.net/~mstandridge