Make a difference in the Vote. A non-partisan anti-Bush site.

Spread the word and make a difference.

T h i s i s a n o n – p a r t I s a n a n t i – B u s h s i t e .

Electronic voting machines that leave no paper trail

(Click here for an alternative text to use as a letter that contains the same, and more facts.)

One thing that seems very strange is the amount which the exit polls differed from the actual results, especially in Ohio. (link) (How exit polls were different than vote results for states using voting machines with no paper trail.)

Ohio used Diebold voting machines in many areas. These voting machines leave no paper trail. Earlier in the campaign, the Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell, a GOP fundraiser, actually promised to deliver Ohio to Bush. He regretted having said that later. (link)

Election News: Presidential candidate Ralf Nader has funded official recounts in both New Hampshire and Ohio. New Hampshire has already been won by Kerry, but any insight to a possible fraud there opens the door for investigations in other states.

Electronic Voting Machines: A Scientific Analysis.

How Kerry won Ohio.

Study on how exit polls were steadily different than actual

results for states using voting machines with no paper trail.

Quotes about different inaccuracies and substantial errors in electronic voting machines.

An in-depth report on the differences between exit polls and results.

The Popular Vote:

Bush: 51% Kerry: 48%

The Electoral College:

Bush: 286 Kerry: 252

Unfortunately, even actual elections yield a three percent error.

For a map of who won which county, look at electoral-vote.com.

Don’t let the map deceive you, the blue (Kerry) counties are vastly very densely populated.

For a map shaded to show the degree in which each candidate won counties, click here.

Here is a map that shows the influence of each state in the Electoral College by changing their size.

Updates:

11/10: I am leaving the posters up because I have found them all to still be relevant. I will edit a few of them slightly to keep them as such.

Click on the pictures to view the printable versions… it works. (We have no idea why the mouse doesn’t turn into a hand when you hover over the pictures, but it works, so just click. Also dial up connections may take a few seconds to load the printable versions.)

All the facts are pretty much in the poster, and it goes without saying that Bush dropped the ball on this issue. It’s already so easy to get guns at gun shows, and terrorists have been doing this for years. Now, they can buy not just guns, but assault rifles. Weapons worthy of combat. Weapons many times more powerful than what cops carry on them or in their squad cars. A responsible president would have had this bill renewed before it even expired. But now, even if it does get renewed, there has already been more than enough time for terrorists to stock up on assault weapons, and they probably have. Bush likes to say “on the offence” with terrorism as he has said again and again. It seems that is all he is and all he understands. This is further evidenced by the fact that almost all of the incoming cargo to the US is uninspected. The quotes in the poster are from the third debate, and were somewhat shortened to fit on the page, but no meaning in either quote was compromised. See the transcript here on CNN.com. (This link will take you right to the question.)

This point cannot be stressed enough. Incase you don’t already know, Bush defines himself as a “Compassionate Conservative”. With all the changes and overhauls on foreign affairs, personal rights and the economy that Bush has inflicted, he cannot in a right mind be considered the conservative he claims he is; being so quick to go to war as a first, rather than last result, proves his lack of compassion. One needs only a dictionary to prove that Bush knows not what he speaks of. Bush’s term could easily and indisputably be described with one word: Change. There is no word in the English language more contrary to “Conservatism.” Bush throws the traditional values of the conservists right out the window (read this article about it), and is hence sometimes called a “neo-conservist”. (Another article; “Is Bush a Conservative?”) Because of this, people who consider themselves Conservists and Republican should seriously consider a vote for Kerry this election, and hope for a more respectable candidate next election. Here is a very interesting site dedicated to Conservatives who have already realized this. And here is yet another site of the same nature, which contains some links to other sites like it. Here’s more: Republicans for Kerry. And last but not least: Bush relatives for Kerry. Everywhere Republicans are making the switch for at least one election. How much more convincing to you need?

View the current National debt, which is an accumulation of each yearly unpaid deficit.

Bush took a ten year projected surplus of 5.6 TRILLION dollars, yes, TRILLION, and turned it into a ten year projected deficit of 2.6 trillion dollars. A lot of this money was actually spent on tax cuts, the large majority of which go to the richest one or two percent of America. This not only depletes the national budget by not feeding it, but Bush also took money straight out of it to actually give money back to the people. That’s all good and fine, but it did little to fix the recession that was largely caused by his reckless spending. (Another poster, on its way, will tell of just how these tax breaks to the rich work.) And let’s not forget how much of a threat Iraq has just been proven not to be, though we knew it all along. That could have saved that 120 billion (the official Bush approved number), which could have gone to use to protect us here at home, as outlined here. (Give it a minute on dial up.)

Clinton, on the left, was impeached for lying about having sex with an intern. The interesting thing about both these quotes is that they probably aren’t flat out lies, but they both slide closely and gracefully past the truth. While Clinton did in fact not have sex with said woman, there was oral sex. And while Saddam did in fact fail to account for “vast quantities” of chemical weapons, it was because he didn’t have any. The second line, however, leans more towards a lie. While Saddam certainly did finance terror, there is absolutely no proof that Saddam had even a small connection to any terrorist attacks that took place on American soil. The acts of travesty that Saddam was a part of were all on his own people. And further more, since the Gulf war, there has only been once such incident worth mentioning, and it involved tear gas for lack of having anything better. (Tear gas is non-lethal, and is even used by American police departments.) The solid difference between the two lies is that one caused the loss of well over 1000 American lives.

The great thing about this poster is the essential facts lie completely within it. But never the less, here is a link to the CNN.com page where I took this. The article is a fact check page concerning the third presidential debate. While on it, feel free to read the other facts which are also clarified.

Read the Patriot Act. It might take a minute on dial up.

The Patriot Act is a dangerous act to have passed because parts of it have vast potential for misuse. Without warrant, or even any solid just cause, authorities can pry into your personal business in many ways. These ways include: Phone tapping, e-mail interception, voice mail interception, and even intercepting oral communications. It also allows former employers to include “suspicions of Illegal activity” in job references. (We wouldn’t mention that if it wasn’t for the “suspicion” part. That is just begging to be misused.)

Read it yourself, it can be found here. (Give it a few minutes if on dial up.)

This poster strays from the issues a bit, but it works very well if you hang it up next to the “Weapons Ban” poster, as it reviles hypocrisy within the Bush administration. It also gives chilling insight into how the Bush camp has swayed many voters to their side, and explains why they have such a strong following. It also effectively shows why the anti-Bush/Kerry following is very strong as well. The point is, don’t be swayed by fear of terrorists attacks. This is where most anti-Bush sites step into Bush-bashing that has no real facts to back it up, but let’s just say this: America has the most powerful army in the world. We have won every war we have declared, and lost only one major conflict (Vietnam). No matter who is president, we will always have the capability to protect ourselves at home (much thanks to alert citizens). So because of that, don’t let the fear of terrorism at home sway your vote, because it will be an ever-constant issue no matter who is president. Instead, look at the other issues. The issues the candidates directly control. And those issues, we believe, speak for themselves.

George W. Bush was actually considered “AWOL”, but most people don’t know what that means, so we opted for the use of the term “abandoned”. What AWOL stands for is “Absent With Out Leave”. He was absent long enough that had he been in a combat situation he would have officially been a deserter. It’s funny that people criticize Kerry’s Military record based on flat-out lies that are contrary to official records while Bush’s official record cites him as AWOL. Those facts alone say more than does accusing Bush of draft-dodging. Have questions about Kerry’s Military record? You’re in luck; here are all his official records. Here is another site that gives an analysis of Bush’s record. It’s obviously partisan, but it has the facts to back it up.

The death toll here is as of 9/ 30/ 04. Check the current numbers. The poster it self has been updated as of 10 /14. (1092)

The Bush quote is from the first Presidential debate which occurred the same day. All other information is on the poster because the numbers alone are something people can look at differently. Bush sometimes justifies the war by saying we freed the Iraqis, but this is hardly in AMERICA’S best interest. If Bush is out for the best interest of the safety of America, why did he wage pre-emptive war on a country that posed a rapidly diminishing threat at best? (According to the recently released report.) Why did he take the focus off of Bin Laden? There are 10 times more troops in Iraq than Afghanistan, even though it’s been proven Sadam had nothing to do with the 911 attacks. One television ad that says “He didn’t start this war, but he’ll end it” doesn’t make much sense until you realize it’s referring to a war that we’ve made minimal progress on since being distracted by this needless one.

Here are some of the more interesting ideas of were you could hang any of these:

Telephone poles, super market bulletin boards, trains (subways, Els, inside and outside the trains), in the displays of empty free employment ad/apartment finder paper dispensers, office bulletin boards (don’t get caught), cars’ windshields… more as we come up with them.

Here’s our banner:

If you would like to put it in your blog or on your site, here is the code with some accompanying text:

http://antibush.fateback.com

This is a site with posters that you can print and hang up to help influence the vote.

The posters include the address to the site so people can get the posters themselves

and learn more information on the issues they address.

Help us change some minds and change our leadership.

Email us at antibush.fateback@gmail.com

We’d love to hear if you’ve been hanging up any of the posters or if we have made a difference in the way you think.

	free hosting image hosting hosting reseller online album e-shop famous people