Evan Thomas and the "Newsweek" reporting team offer a behind-the-scenes view of the 2004 election, detailing how George Bush won one of the most hotly-contested presidential races in modern times.

Report of an investigation into irregularities reported in the 2004 Presidential election in Ohio, compiled by the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee.

Set against the backdrop of the Iraq war, and a debate over moral values, the 2004 presidential campaign presented voters with a choice that reflected divisions within the country. This collection analyzes the election, and its consequences, examining the aspects of the election including the strategies and tactics of the Bush and Kerry campaigns.

This text shows the most critical state's voting process in the 2004 presidential election. It includes trucking receipts that show voting machines were pulled back from minority districts, ballots that contain evidence of tampering, and mathematical analysis demonstrating the statistical impossibility of voting totals.

From Kosovo to Kabul, the last decade witnessed growing interest in ?electoral engineering?. Reformers have sought to achieve either greater government accountability through majoritarian arrangements or wider parliamentary diversity through proportional formula. Underlying the normative debates are important claims about the impact and consequences of electoral reform for political representation and voting behavior. The study compares and evaluates two broad schools of thought, each offering contracting expectations. One popular approach claims that formal rules define electoral incentives facing parties, politicians and citizens. By changing these rules, rational choice institutionalism claims that we have the capacity to shape political behavior. Alternative cultural modernization theories differ in their emphasis on the primary motors driving human behavior, their expectations about the pace of change, and also their assumptions about the ability of formal institutional rules to alter, rather than adapt to, deeply embedded and habitual social norms and patterns of human behavior.

For Republicans, the 2004 presidential election was little short of miraculous: Behind in the Electoral College tally in the days leading up to the election, behind even on the very afternoon of the vote, the Bush ticket staged a stunning comeback. The exit polls, usually so reliable, turned out to be wrong by an unprecedented 5 percent in the swing states. Conservatives argued-and the media agreed-that "moral values" had made the difference. In his new book renowned critic and political commentator Mark Crispin Miller argues that it wasn't moral values that swung the election-it was theft. While the greatest body of evidence comes from the key state of Ohio-where the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee found an extraordinary onslaught of Republican-engineered vote suppression, election-day irregularities, old-fashioned intimidation tactics, and illegal counting procedures-similar practices (and occasionally worse ones) were applied in Florida, Oregon, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and even New York. A huge array of anomalies, improper practices, and blatant violations of the law all, by a truly remarkable coincidence, happened to swing in the Bush ticket's favor. This pattern-not one overwhelming fraud but thousands of little ones-is, in Miller's view, the new Republican electoral strategy. This incendiary new book presents massive documentation that the election was stolen and describes the mind-set, among both the major parties and the media, that could permit it to happen again.

Chiefly papers presented at a conference sponsored by the University of Notre Dame's Program in American Democracy in December 2005.