First, let's discuss what is not election fraud, before discussing why there is no scenario where discussing election fraud helps us.
Discouraging Democratic turnout (either by elected officials, such as Blackwell, or by private groups) is not election fraud. It's slimy and evil, but it's not really election fraud-it doesn't change the number of votes that were actually recorded.
Stating that electronic voting machines are prone to being hacked or are prone to errors is not election fraud (unless there is proof that they have actually been hacked). Just because a door is unlocked doesn't mean somebody broke in (in terms of unsecure voting machines which are easily hacked). And random errors should help both sides evenly. Of course, this is a problem that should be fixed, but poorly designed electronic voting machines are not election fraud.
Election fraud is when 200 people voted, and 105 voted for the Democratic canidate and 95 for the Republican canidate, but the official results show that 110 voted for the Republican canidate and 90 voted for the Democratic canidate. That is, election fraud is when the actual vote totals were changed.
There is zero proof that this occured anywhere. There's a lot of supposition and things that smell bad, but nothing close to proof, which would come in the form of documentary evidence that the vote totals were changed, or a whistleblower. I don't believe that the Republicans are such evil geniuses that they could actually hide this successfully. The last six months worth of blunders from thier side shows that they are mortal men, prone to making mistakes, just like everybody else.
Now, let's look at both possible scenarios:
Scenario #1: The elections are fixed and will be from now on. If this is true, we should be polishing our rifles to remove the fraudulent, unelected government via violent means, not discussing electoral strategies on a website (since the elections are fixed and will be from now on, violent revolution would be the only way to overcome this). The amount of proof needed to convince me to participate in this is extremely large, and the amount of actual proof that exists that this occured is not only quite small, but is completely nonexistant. If anybody actually has a whistle blower who says they participated in election fraud, or has documentary proof that the vote totals were changed, please point this out.
Scenario #2: There is no election fraud. In that case, discussing it merely depresses turnout amoungst the left, which hurts us in a fair election-because people on the left will say, "Oh, the elections are fixed anyways, why bother to vote?" In fact, if I were Karl Rove, I might attempt to encourage discussion of electoral fraud amoungst the left to generate just this reaction.
So, if scenario #1 is true, merely pointing out to the general public that there is election fraud helps us not at all-if the elections are fixed, pointing out that they are fixed doesn't unfix them. If scenario #2 is true, then telling the general public that there is election fraud (when there is in reality none) actually hurts us in a fair election-a lot. The RFK Jr. piece in Rolling Stone probably will cost us thousands of votes in the 2006 elections for this very reason.
We need to concentrate on winning elections in the system as it currently stands, since we can not change the system at all unless we win elections using the current system. Kos knows this, the Democratic establishment knows this.