Greek-American blogger nicegreekboy commented on the electronic voting machines, which have already caused problems in early-voting-state North Carolina:

“These are used in multiple states, and all you seem to ever hear about them are problems. For one thing, computers crash. A lot. And these are some shitty, poorly kept-up computers. For another thing, there are fears that these things are very easy to hack…since they’re, you know, computers. Most of all, though, the biggest problems with electronic voting machines are sometimes caused by outside forces. For instance, in North Carolina, the state only offers machines; there are no paper ballots at polling places (there’s currently a push to get “emergency paper ballots,” but each polling place likely won’t get more than a 100). So, theoretically, if a polling place has its voting machines crash, then voters are up shit creek - they simply can’t vote. And if there are only 100 emergency paper ballots, a huge number of people still won’t get to vote.”

While Canadian blogger, L-girl, believes the election will be rigged.

“The 2000 election was stolen.



The 2004 election was stolen.

There were huge questions about the validity of both the 2002 and 2006 midterm elections.

And nothing has changed. As all problems left untended will, it has only gotten worse. There is evidence voting machines were tampered with in the primaries.

So why is everyone assuming the 2008 election will be fair? I’m still not convinced there will even be a 2008 election in the US. I'm not making a prediction; I'm not in that line of work. But let's put it this way: if the election goes ahead as it's supposed to, I'll be relieved. If it doesn't, I won't be surprised.


But if it's more expedient for the Cheney junta to hold elections, but keep them rigged, then they will.”

Fellow Canadian blogger, Paul Bryant, also comments on the U.S. voting system and lists five problems, including: the different ballot systems in each states and that there isn’t an independent voting commission. He writes about the Canadian voting system.

“The United States could learn from the Canadian election system. In Canada Federal elections are run by Elections Canada an independent body that decides on changes to the composition of ridings, how ballots are handled, identification required at the polls, campaign financing rules etc. Elections Canada is non-partisan and reports to Parliament. The Head and Deputy Head of Elections Canada cannot vote or be a member of a political party and are generally well regarded for their neutrality.”

While, Duncan McFarlane in the UK, writes about the past elections and states that voter irregularities are still considered a conspiracy “by most of the media.” McFarlane also comments on the distribution of the voting machines.

“Fewer voting machines were provided in districts with high numbers of low income, black or student (i.e Democrat) voters. In at least one Ohio precinct there were no working machines. Voters were told they’d be phoned to come back later. They weren’t. In some precincts they were offered provisional ballots – but under Ohio electoral law provisional ballots can’t be counted until 10 days after the election – long after the election had been ‘called’ for Bush (38,39,40,41).”

He then compares the election to the 2004 elections of Ukraine, where it was also suspected of being rigged.

“Perhaps its because the rigged results of the Ukrainian elections favoured Russian businesses at the expense of US and EU based ones – the US Presidential election results were those desired by the owners and chief executives of these companies – not least media conglomerates. The media is meant to provide viewers with the facts and let them decide – instead they present viewers and readers with a conclusion that’s good for business accompanied by as few facts as possible. So much for objectivity.”

Over in the Philippines, Mike comments on the mailed New York ballots that had “Osama” on the ballot instead of “Obama.”

“It is inexplicable for some that Osama Bin Laden, one of the world’s most wanted terrorists, and certainly New York’s most wanted fugitive in respect to the horrible terror attacks of the September 11, 2001, would be on a ballot in upstate New York where the stigma of 9/11 is still strong and some scars are still raw over post 9/11 alleged ‘crackdowns’ and law enforcement scrutiny of the large Muslim-American population in communities there.”

He further adds that the misspelling is offensive to the Democratic nominee.

“That’s both an insult and injury to a Senator who has earned the right to have his name spelled and put right on the ballot, even the electronic ones.”

Finally, blogger of American Buddhist Net, writes about the $100,000 reward offered by Velvet Revolution to anyone who can prove Karl Rove and Michael Connell rigged the 2004 election.

“I doubt that's enough. Maybe $10 million and a really good witness protection program would get results.”

Barack Obama seems to be the most common answer of the American media, which point out that Illinois senator’s momentum will be difficult to be overturned at this stage. In any case, maths is not Hillary’s Clinton ally, as in the last months she has witnessed her super delegates’ lead to dissipate. Barack Obama’s team estimate that he will “lock” his victory on 20th May, after the primaries in Kentucky and Oregon. He has already started to turn his shots against his big rival and Republicans candidate John Mc Cain. Many political analysts argue that the negative outcome for Hillary is unavoidable. Why then she insists on “staying aboard”? Does she want to fight bravely to the last minute or does she have her eyes on the vice-presidency?

In my opinion, the right choice would be senator Barak Obama. He seems to be a man with heart, who also is capable of managing foreign affairs in a more constructive way than Bush . As a Greek, I also know that he is very close to the Hellenic nation and the Hellenic community in America. So, for that and for many other reasons, he would be my choice, if I could vote in the States.

Hillary on the other hand could also be a good president but another Clinton in power seems too much to me. People should have the chances they deserve, apart from political families. And senator Obama seems to fulfill the dreams and expectations of many people in and outside the U.S. as a man who can govern with vision through humanity and peace.

Between Clinton and Obama, there is not a whole lot of difference in terms of policy for the important issues. However, Obama inspires me, while when I see Clinton I see a mule-minded bitch — much like of what I see in the mirror. A president should be open to more opinions than just his, so I think Obama is a better candidate in this regard.

Download and playback the video that Stanford’s professor and Creative Commons’s director Larry Lessig put together. Pretty interesting points on Clinton’s integrity and vision compared to Obama’s.