How many Presidential Elections were stolen?

[Bo]

Let's see here:

1884, 1916, possibly 2000, maybe 1960 but I still think it's unlikely

1824-No candidate won a majority of EVs. The House had every right to decide the winner and I don't see how it's illegal for Clay to make a deal with Adams.
1876-Many blacks were illegally disenfrachised throughout the South. Without that Hayes's victory margin would have been larger.
1888-Ditto 1876

[Bo]

1960, 2008, and perhaps 1968 if you consider Nixon making a secret deal with the Vietnamese to not make the peace deal in the final days of the 1968 campaign.

lol at 2008

[Bo]

Where's the "0" option?

There isn't one, because 0 isn't the correct answer.

[Bo]

Where's the "0" option?

There isn't one, because 0 isn't the correct answer.

*facepalm*

Why then do we have 10 other options, when at least 9 of them are also incorrect?

Anyway, the point isn't that 0 elections were stolen, but it should be included as an option, because many people, I'm certain, do believe that all of the elections were fair.

Even if you ignore 2000 and 1960, 1884 and 1916 were not fair and were thus rigged.

[Bo]

1876 and 2000.

We need to drop the myth of 1960. For the umpteenth time, even if we assume that the Cook County machine "stole" at least 110,000 votes (or more accurately, 110k more votes than any downstate GOP machines may've "stolen" for Nixon) to flip Illinois, Kennedy still would've won a majority in the Electoral College without Illinois.

Many conservatives claim that TX was also stolen since there were funky numbers in some counties along the Mexican border, and they claim it was because LBJ's political machine allowed many illegals to vote for JFK, thus giving him the state. Nixon would have won if IL and TX flipped.

[Bo]

From a Republican perspective, 1884 and 1960.

In 1884, the Democrats won New York by 1,047 votes which turned the election from Blaine to Cleveland.  Tammany Hall did a better job padding New York City results than did upstate Republicans.  

In 1960, the Dailey machine stole Illinois (9,142 votes), Johnson's cronies easily came up with enough fictious votes in Texas (46,257 votes, not a tall order in Texas), and Missouri (9,980 votes), where the St Louis machine produced the needed margin.

If you're going to talk about 1884 (which I agree with), don't forget the many black voters were illegally disenfrachised throughout the South. Also, the same point applies for 1916.

[Bo]

1824  (Although Jackson got his revenge)
1876
2000

Also, by this, I don't mean the election was rigged, I mean that the results were unfair and the wrong candidate won under bizarre circumstances.

I don't consider 1888 stolen.  Harrison nearly won many more states.

What about 2000 was stolen?

Stolen, once again, not rigged.

Bush won Florida under controversial circumstances, and Gore won the popular vote by 500,000...that's the city of Atlanta.  That's Luxembourg.

Winning the PV is irrelevant. The EV really matters. Even though I agree that the SC shouldn't have stopped that FL recount in 2000.

[Bo]

1824, 1876, 1960,2000, 2004. 2004 There was probably as much voter fraud there than in other election. There are reports that Kerry had as many as 5 million votes taken from him. There were large discrapencies in Ohio. Bush was reported as getting more votes in some counties than there were that people actually voted. There were reports of voting machines in heavily democratic areas actually going in reverse. Thats why I will always refer to him as Governor Bush because thats the only office he legally won lol.

Don't bet on 2004, Cpeeks, especially re: Ohio. I've actually read several of the reports and statistical studies claiming the GOP stole Ohio in 2004---Robert Kennedy, Jr.'s Rolling Stone article being the most famous--and they're just plain wrong. The reasons are varied, but well summarized in this article in the liberal on-line magazine, Salon.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy

A little bit of local perspective: The analysis of RFK's claim Kerry "couldn't possibly" have run so far behind Democratic down ticket votes in several rural west OH counties (including mine) that voted overwhelmingly for Bush is spot on. Not only did the Democratic Supreme Court candidates Kennedy compares to Kerry run without their party label listed (as in all OH state judicial races) but I assure you candidates running as "generic Democrat" were infinitely more palatable to voters here than the vilified "flip flopping, baby killing, cafeteria Catholic, faux war hero, tax and spend Massachusetts liberal" that Kerry was perceived as in November 2004.

Maybe cpeeks is referencing the movie Hacking Democracy.

[Bo]

1824
1876
1888
1960-It sure is nice to have Richard Daley's political machine backing you up in Chicago.
2000-It is unquestionable that the people of Florida preferred Gore, even if the vote total didn't reflect that. Think about this. How many Palm Beach Jewish Democrats would have voted for Gore if the ballot wasn't a piece of sh**t? How many poor and minority voters would have had their votes counted if the optical scan machines they voted with had been set to reject voters' ballots if they made an error? How many African Americans lost their vote due to a racist "felon scrub list"? Surely, the total is more than 537. Besides, the people of the United States voted for Gore. The Electoral College voted for Bush.

Probably not 2004. I like Greg Palast, but Armed Madhouse was more comic than objective.

Two voters thought over 10 elections were stolen? Lol

1824-Not stolen
1876-Not stolen
1888-Probably not stolen
1960-Illinois was probably stolen for JFK, but JFK still wins without IL. Thus, probably not stolen.
2000-Possibly stolen. BTW, the popular vote is irrelevant and neither Gore nor Bush won a majority of the PV.

[Bo]

Kennedy stole his election and Obama stole his with ACORN.

JFK would have won even without IL. There has been no proof that Obama "stole" his election. Bush in 2000 is a different matter, though. Jeb and his buddies removed a lot of blacks and other minorities from the voter rolls when those minorities were eligible to vote.

[Bo]

Kennedy stole his election and Obama stole his with ACORN.

JFK would have won even without IL. There has been no proof that Obama "stole" his election. Bush in 2000 is a different matter, though. Jeb and his buddies removed a lot of blacks and other minorities from the voter rolls when those minorities were eligible to vote.

What about LBJ stealing Texas? Without IL + TX = Kennedy would have lost.

The margin in TX was likely too large for the election to be stolen there.

[Bo]

10 plus, definatley

Name 11 of those elections, then.

[Bo]

1876 and 1960.

Let's face it, if people had "voting rights" back in 1876 then there is no way Louisiana, Florida, or South Carolina would go for the Hayes.

In 1960 Kennedy made a deal with Daley to help him carry Illinois, simple. 

1876--Whites were allowed to vote throughout the South in 1876. Blacks weren't. Whites were Democrats back then. Blacks were Republicans.
1960--JFK would have won even without IL. Look at the EV totals.