The actual difference in the presidential election is a few percentage points. Most of our races are no more than that.  At a local level, 50 votes can be the difference. At a state level maybe thousands. The point of the statistical analyses that Crispin Miller and others are trying to get into the national conscience, is that the number of people whose votes were suppressed or discounted FAR exceeds the number that Bush won by. More than enough that if they had even followed the state breakdown, Kerry would have won. They were all in heavily democratic districts.

It's true that some of the problems cited cannot be formulated as 'proof'. That was why they were used. Circumstantial evidence has led to many convictions, no doubt some of them capital punishment.

As someone above pointed out, there is a considerable amount of study and statistics on GOP and RW election fraud. I first learned about it in '88 from a seminar developed from information discovered by Citizens Network at Cornell U. They were working on nulear proliferation issues and discovered some very alarming trends and practices.

The first was that increasing numbers among the millitary brass were joining prayer groups openly and the message was very evangelical in 'end times' theology. If you have paid any attention to what is going on the millitary, you are aware that this is now causing legal challenges to the millitary from the enlisted level.

Further investigation revealed that the evangelical churches had become very active in under the radar campaigns to train their members in the election process to get more GOP evangelicals in any office at any level of government. We are talking massive, nationwide efforts with extended training for state level party members at national sites for several days. Basically what Obama has done openly.

Sarah Palin was chosen to get the evangelical base to get to work on the campaign so the counting could be manipulated - in all the places they have been doing it for decades.

You should listen to someone with creds and a staunch GOPer expose the situation. Watch the interviews from this year. (I can't get to the link on this computer, it is on You Tube - google spoonamore).

In 2006, Republican cyber security expert Stephen Spoonamore was interviewed by a major news outlet and he
blasted Diebold voting machines and the stealing of elections. The story was killed but now you can see that explosive interview thanks to VelvetRevolution

The fact of the matter is that Diebold's president promised Bush he'd do everything to give him a win, and gave it to him.

Monkeying with insecure computers, reprogramming them mid-day, running the Ohio results through the same servers as the RNC used for its own business and so on, made clear that they were acting in the same manner as, say, Edward G. Robinson's Johnny Rocco in Key Largo, who described how when he was a city boss prior to being deported, he enjoyed how they'd count the votes, then count them again and keep counting them until the numbers came out "right".

You can spin whatever conspiracy theories you want, but John Kerry lost fair and square. And whatever you think about Ohio in 2004, Bush was the legitimate winner in my view; he won the national popular vote. [emphasis added]

If Bush didn't win "fair and square" in 2000, he could not conceivably have won "fair and square" in 2004. The popular vote was not legitimately  derived. You can't cheat and steal in the first half of a game and come out a "fair and square" winner in the second half.

Or maybe you think 2000 was essentially legit.

As I recall, at the time Miller himself described his meeting with Kerry.  He gave him the book and said to Kerry something like, "You know, the election was stolen," and according to Miller, Kerry replied, "I know!"  This was a private conversation, later disavowed by the Kerry contingent.