Lets hope that this is true. Bushit will finally get what he dweserves. Maybe he should than go hunting with his Dick.

the excitement got the better of me, I submitted without checking for typos.

...I can't help but remain skeptical in light of the GOP's recent track record of voter suppression and efforts to rig the e-vote.

Maybe it's tinfoil hat'ish, but I too worry about them fixing the results, ever-so-marginally, in critical venues. Ever been hustled by a good pool shark? Cat always seems to be just one ball better than you. But, as you're getting your wallet cleaned out, you keep thinking you're still in the game. He's just lucky.

Rove fully understands the stakes. I've not the slightest doubt he'll command whatever illegal and unethical shit it takes to prevail.

I love electoral-vote.com. It is a great site for tracking nationwide trends and polls, and the new animated map is nifty. They currently have the new House numbers at 220 Dem/213 Rep, with 2 even ties. That's the good news. We'd still have to win back both house and senate to impeach and convict Bush, but at least we might get some semblance of checks and balances if Dems capture the house.

The bad news is that two new polls show Lieberman with a substantial lead over Ned Lamont in Connecticut. Sad, sad, sad. What the hell are they thinking up there? Lieberman jumped ship from barely democrat to independent because he lost the democratic primary, thus confirming the Freeper's favorite nickname for him. When the primary voters had a choice between Lamont and Lieberman, Lieberman lost. But now that his name is on the general election ticket as an independent, he's winning?! I don't get it- unless Joe is capturing votes from the poor Republican candidate in that race who is limping along with just 4%.

This is useless and offers false comfort. The Republicans are going to steal this election in every district they haven't gerrymandered. You are focusing on the wrong story.

As Bruce Reed noted recently over on Slate ( http://www.slate.com/id/2151365/ ) Dems may be leading in national polls, but redistricting may keep the House in Republican hands.

In the the GOP's recent grand tradition of lying, cheating and stealing, they've made sure there are so many safe GOP seats, that even with a significant majority of the country against them, they may STILL keep hold of the government, in line with their 50 + 1 strategy.

Redistricting as a form of political cheating is an abomination, and both parties should be spanked for it. If the dems in my fair state had not been so intent on embarrassing the Terminator, we might have had more competitive districts, and elected even more dems to the house. But local party power took precedent, as it usually does.

Man. I am so sick of the motherfuckers. A pox on both their houses. I will vote democrat this fall, but holding my nose.

The 2008 election should be enough to paralyze anyone's olfactory nerve, I'm betting.

Little doubt actually exists that more people will vote for Democrats than Republicans in November. The question is whether the amount by which Democrats win will be sufficient to overcome structural barriers that favor Republicans. All Americans should be deeply troubled by the prospect that a majority of Americans could vote for Democrats, but Republicans could maintain control of both houses of Congress. If Democrats do not win by a sufficient margin to change the composition of at least one house of Congress, we will have no choice but to acknowledge the utter loss of democracy (with a little "d") in the United States; the country will no longer stand as a beacon for democracy in the world. In a democracy, regardless of how it structures itself, the party that wins the most votes should have some say in political decision making. After the November 4, it may be that the party that wins the most votes will remain without a voice and without power. Reporters frequently acknowledge this fact. Indeed, the other morning on NPR, Cokie Roberts opined that she did not know whether the margin by which Democrats win the popular vote will be sufficient to overcome the structural barriers established by Republican controlled redistricting. Neither she nor the interviewer nor anyone else I have heard questions or bemoans the potential loss of democracy in this country. Through our arrogant belief that we will always remain a free and democratic society, we allow democracy and freedom to slip away with nary a protest from either the American people or the media.

Too many of those races are in places like Ohio and Florida, places where shady tactics and E-voting make the polls meaningless.

November, 2004.

Kerry was practically declared the winner with a 51/48 margin from exit polls.

Then we were told "People lie when they fill out exit poll forms" as the votes suddenly turned around.

I trust no polls. As long as the other guys are marketing the voting machines, polls are meaningless.

No matter what local polls show, or what analysts say about the 2006 election, the election results, even in a small but important district that uses electronic voting machines, can be switched by an undetectable worm or virus in that system. And since that system does not provide verifiable paper ballots to augment the election results by a verifiable record, no one can ever detect flaws or verify how the voters actually voted.

A perfect system for those who want to tilt the voting results to their advantage. And since most of the election results that were in contrast to the Exit Polls benefited Republicans, one can only conclude that the manufacturers of the electronic/paperless voting machines, like Diebold, who gave huge campaign donations to the Republicans, were implicit in swaying/corrupting the vote COUNT so that Republicans would win.

That's not a conspiracy theory. That is FACT.

We know Bush didn't win in 2000, since Gore got half a million more popular votes than Bush, and the Repblican appointed majority in the Supreme Court ruled in opposition to all their decisions in favor of state's rights, and overuled the Florida Supreme Court to stop the vote recount in Florida, in order to appoint Bush to the Presidency.

The 2004 election was decided by the fraud of G Bush's corporate budies and huge contributors, who blatently produced no paper trail electonic voting machines, and also the machines that would count those votes.

Was it Stalin who said that it doesn't matter who casts the votes, but it's the matter of those who COUNT them, who will determine who is elected?