As Rep. James Clyburn has charged, there’s every reason to believe that Alvin Greene, the so-called “candidate from nowhere” who (miraculously) won the Democratic primary in South Carolina, was/is no real Democrat but a plant by the Republicans, so as to have a very easy man for the incumbent, Sen. Jim DeMint, to knock off in the next election.
To see how dubious a “Democrat” Greene is, watch his interview with Keith Olbermann:
Now, we can speculate as to exactly why DeMint would need to have a wretched candidate to run against, as he would seem to have a lot of popular support down there. (Maybe there’s some icky scandal brewing?) But that question is the least important one at issue here–and so’s the possibility that Greene was planted by the GOP.
No, the most important question, as Jonathan Simon notes below, is how Greene won at all. With DRE machines deployed statewide (and op-scans used to “count” the absentee ballots), stealing Greene that race would be a cinch, nor is there any reason whatsoever to believe the numbers tossed out by ES&S, the right-wing private company that makes and maintains both thoese DRE’s and op-scans.
In other words, James Clyburn’s wholly rational suspicions tell us only half the story. However, that half is the safer half, as far as the media’s concerned–because the media will not report the evidence of fraud in our elections. It’s therefore typical that, as you’ll see below, Jonathan’s comment on the likelihood of fraud in Greene’s (amazing) “win” was blocked by the wise moderators at AOL’s “Politics Daily.”
So if we don’t discuss this sort of thing, it will just keep on happening.
Let’s assume Greene was a plant, how does that get him 59% of the votes statewide? He was a complete unknown to all voters, D and R. There was no campaign, period, certainly not to Democratic voters, and no evidence at all of one to GOP voters urging them to crossover vote in the D primary (the strategy that was credited with some bizarre results in D primaries in 2008).
So, whether Greene was or a plant or not can’t really be the issue: you can plant a guy in a race but you can’t get him 59% of the vote–unless you’re rigging the machines. Same with the other non-campaigner, Frasier, who got 56%.
The machines are ES&S no-paper-trail DREs, 100% pure, unadulterated faith-based voting. The only question that I want to ask is why James Clyburn and Keith Olbermann and everybody else are focusing on the candidates, when it is so blatantly obvious that they should be talking about the DRE machines. Time to impound a few of those suckers, assuming the code is not self-deleting.
BTW, AOL “Politics Daily” moderators apparently thought my Comment questioning the veracity of the DRE counts was “not a constructive contribution” to the dialogue and accordingly blocked it from publication.
Don’t know whether to cry or laugh. I wonder why the riggers decided to go this far out on the limb: inebriation, stupidity, hubris, or just because they know they can?