Voting Irregularities

If even a fraction of the stuff linked to here turns out to be correct, it's quite serious.

I previously commented that:

...this is the result - and we have to live with it

Despite some irregularities which need to be stamped on, and hard (e.g. lack of paper record in some states, misregistration of voters etc) - the vote seems to have been better than in 2000.

I hope that this statement was not premature - I'd not like to imagine that there could be a two term president who was never elected properly.

Nevertheless I don't quite see this being contested at this stage, but if it had come out earlier things may have been different.

Even if the reports do have substance, given that one party has the Whitehouse, the Senate and Congress, the chances of a thorough and authoritative investigation are slim.

Why can the US not see that the system needs to be bulletproof if it is to have legitimacy? Both those who supported the president elect, and those who didn't, should be able to see that the system was conducted fairly and without serious error. This is, unfortunately not the case.

The fact that the elections have problems is not exactly a surprise, indeed, I am surprised that the result is final now! We were considering having a sweepstake about how long the courtcases would go on for.