Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => General Topics => Topic started by: 240 is Back on October 29, 2006, 09:53:33 PM
-
I did not know what to think of this article, but I fig'd those who followed the 2004 Ohio election maching irregularities might take interest.
The CTers could say this is a pre-emptive statement to get "in front of" any election day disasters- Meaning, if polls completely don't match the winners (if 55% of peole leaving say they voted dem, and the repubs inexplicably win 60% of the vote, as happened in several places in 2004)
The Neocons could say it's just a coincidence. And they could very much be right. I don't know much about this one, but wanted to share :)
U.S. Investigates Voting Machines’ Venezuela Ties
TIM GOLDEN / NY Times | October 29 2006
The federal government is investigating the takeover last year of a leading American manufacturer of electronic voting systems by a small software company that has been linked to the leftist Venezuelan government of President Hugo Chávez.
The inquiry is focusing on the Venezuelan owners of the software company, the Smartmatic Corporation, and is trying to determine whether the government in Caracas has any control or influence over the firm’s operations, government officials and others familiar with the investigation said.
The inquiry on the eve of the midterm elections is being conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or Cfius, the same panel of 12 government agencies that reviewed the abortive attempt by a company in Dubai to take over operations at six American ports earlier this year.
The committee’s formal inquiry into Smartmatic and its subsidiary, Sequoia Voting Systems of Oakland, Calif., was first reported Saturday in The Miami Herald.
Officials of both Smartmatic and the Venezuelan government strongly denied yesterday that President Chávez’s administration, which has been bitterly at odds with Washington, has any role in Smartmatic.
“The government of Venezuela doesn’t have anything to do with the company aside from contracting it for our electoral process,” the Venezuelan ambassador in Washington, Bernardo Alvarez, said last night.
Smartmatic was a little-known firm with no experience in voting technology before it was chosen by the Venezuelan authorities to replace the country’s elections machinery ahead of a contentious referendum that confirmed Mr. Chávez as president in August 2004.
Seven months before that voting contract was awarded, a Venezuelan government financing agency invested more than $200,000 into a smaller technology company, owned by some of the same people as Smartmatic, that joined with Smartmatic as a minor partner in the bid.
In return, the government agency was given a 28 percent stake in the smaller company and a seat on its board, which was occupied by a senior government official who had previously advised Mr. Chávez on elections technology. But Venezuelan officials later insisted that the money was merely a small-business loan and that it was repaid before the referendum.
With a windfall of some $120 million from its first three contracts with Venezuela, Smartmatic then bought the much larger and more established Sequoia Voting Systems, which now has voting equipment installed in 17 states and the District of Columbia.
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/October2006/291006Machines.htm
-
el diablo
-
Interesting old news... Lou was covering this all daily months ago and he still attacks most voting machines daily. This voting machine crap has GOT TO GO...
http://mysite.verizon.net/resq4lzq/cvi/id223.html
Just imagine, the possibilities are huge with these fucking machines.... Republican can change elections, Dems could too this way, BUT consider, this also makes it easier for foreign governments to change our elections... Russian hackers, oh there are some of the best hacking in the world there... Iran? China? NOT COOL... THESE FUCKING MACHINES HAVE TO GO... NO SEQUOIA, DO DIEBOLD, FUCK ALL THAT SHIT...
-
el diablo
It still smells like sulfer!!! ;D
(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=16562_georgebushstinks.jpg)
-
I cannot understand why 100% of Americans do not want to do back to completely paper votes.
I cannot understand it. There is such a potential for cheating by both sides and more.
-
I cannot understand why 100% of Americans do not want to do back to completely paper votes.
I cannot understand it. There is such a potential for cheating by both sides and more.
Enter Rush and Company... Stir in easily molded minds... Let me ask you this 240,... When was the last time you heard on Fox News the coverage of the serious and troublesome side of e-voting? I mean it's a daily on CNN. HBO has a special on it... various FSTV programing covers it semi-regular... Democracy Now... Do they have someone on Fox News alterting people to the stealing of our democracy? In fact I hear the opposite from Fox News listeners... They'll just say some shit like, "oh if a republican wins he stole it ::) " At most, I'm guessing fox may have covered the chavez thing. For people to care they have to know and there are a lot of right wing extremists on the radio and TV who make it out to be a sin for tuning into a show like Democracy Now.
-
Republicans - the elections could be rigged JUST AS EASILY by democrats!
Don't you want to ensure every vote is counted?
-
I cannot understand why 100% of Americans do not want to do back to completely paper votes.
I cannot understand it. There is such a potential for cheating by both sides and more.
Convenience. Involving more people in the democratic process. Accuracy. Easier recounts. I could probably come up with several more reasons, but I see no reason why voting shouldn't catch up with the times. Our entire society is becoming more and more paperless. It's a good thing. Till an earthquake shuts down your power . . . .
-
Convenience. Involving more people in the democratic process. Accuracy. Easier recounts. I could probably come up with several more reasons, but I see no reason why voting shouldn't catch up with the times. Our entire society is becoming more and more paperless. It's a good thing. Till an earthquake shuts down your power . . . .
A princeton kid came in and completely fixed a polling station in about 60 seconds.
They are very vulnerable. To outsiders and insiders.
hagel... he was behind in pre-voting polls. He was behind in exit polls. yet he won twice, easily, then it came out that he was on the board of one of the firm who ran that state's election until he decided to run. You're very naive if that doesn't smell fishy to you. no wait, you're a damn SUCKER if that doesn't smell fishy to ya lol...
In Ohio, you had a kid who worked for the repubs, come out and PASS A POLYGRAPH saying he was paid to write software to reverse ohio election results. Then the detective investigating the case in FL (who promised to break the case open shortly) was found just over state lines (in GA, no autopsy required) with his wrists tied and then slit. Called a suicide, and claims made that both crime scene cameras alfunctioned. Then, a good cop leaked it, showed the guy all fucking beat up, bleeding out in a tub in a GA hotel room.
BB, no offense, but you're really a naive guy. Maybe it feels good to deny the scary shit, but seriously, there's no conspiracy shit here. It's plainly obvious. E-voting has been compromised. Anyone who just says "It's more convenient and easier and threfore is a good thing", in light of these facts, is either very stupid, or very scared to face the truth. And you don't seem like a stupid man to me, BB.
-
A princeton kid came in and completely fixed a polling station in about 60 seconds.
They are very vulnerable. To outsiders and insiders.
hagel... he was behind in pre-voting polls. He was behind in exit polls. yet he won twice, easily, then it came out that he was on the board of one of the firm who ran that state's election until he decided to run. You're very naive if that doesn't smell fishy to you. no wait, you're a damn SUCKER if that doesn't smell fishy to ya lol...
In Ohio, you had a kid who worked for the repubs, come out and PASS A POLYGRAPH saying he was paid to write software to reverse ohio election results. Then the detective investigating the case in FL (who promised to break the case open shortly) was found just over state lines (in GA, no autopsy required) with his wrists tied and then slit. Called a suicide, and claims made that both crime scene cameras alfunctioned. Then, a good cop leaked it, showed the guy all fucking beat up, bleeding out in a tub in a GA hotel room.
BB, no offense, but you're really a naive guy. Maybe it feels good to deny the scary shit, but seriously, there's no conspiracy shit here. It's plainly obvious. E-voting has been compromised. Anyone who just says "It's more convenient and easier and threfore is a good thing", in light of these facts, is either very stupid, or very scared to face the truth. And you don't seem like a stupid man to me, BB.
240 it is okay if someone disagrees with you. Really. You don't have to label them. You don't have to try and insult them. You shouldn't feel threatened. It isn't your way or the highway. Debate is a good thing. One of the most profound things I've read is Stephen Covey's chapter talking about seeking first to understand, then to be to understood in his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. I highly recommend it.
Now, I wonder if there has ever been any fraud involving paper votes?
-
240 it is okay if someone disagrees with you. Really. You don't have to label them. You don't have to try and insult them. You shouldn't feel threatened. It isn't your way or the highway. Debate is a good thing. One of the most profound things I've read is Stephen Covey's chapter talking about seeking first to understand, then to be to understood in his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. I highly recommend it.
Now, I wonder if there has ever been any fraud involving paper votes?
It's ok if you've earned it ;)
-
The voting process in USA needs to be reformed. So those who are behind a change are definitely right in that regard.
But I doubt that e-voting is the way to go.
With paper voting, the reliability is the highest, and re-counts are always possible.
The efficiency can always be bettered, in many European countries the final results are available three-four hours after the voting closes.
Paper voting doesn't have to be difficult, or a complicated counting process.
YIP
Zack
-
It's ok if you've earned it ;)
Well in that case: thank you, potty mouth. :)
-
Well in that case: thank you, potty mouth. :)
Potty Mouth :o Oh no.... ;D
-
"DELAND, Fla., Nov. 11 - Something very strange happened on election night to Deborah Tannenbaum, a Democratic Party official in Volusia County. At 10 p.m., she called the county elections department and learned that Al Gore was leading George W. Bush 83,000 votes to 62,000. But when she checked the county's Web site for an update half an hour later, she found a startling development: Gore's count had dropped by 16,000 votes, while an obscure Socialist candidate had picked up 10,000--all because of a single precinct with only 600 voters."
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0310/S00211.htm
-
http://www.votersunite.org/info/Dieboldinthenews.pdf#search='diebold%20florida%20results'
-
The voting process in USA needs to be reformed. So those who are behind a change are definitely right in that regard.
But I doubt that e-voting is the way to go.
With paper voting, the reliability is the highest, and re-counts are always possible.
The efficiency can always be bettered, in many European countries the final results are available three-four hours after the voting closes.
Paper voting doesn't have to be difficult, or a complicated counting process.
YIP
Zack
We e-voted for the first time in our last election. I really like it.
-
it doesnt matter what medoum is used, the results can still be manipulated by whoever is in charge just as easily. its like the crooked politicial said in gangs of new york - "the voters dont determine the winner-the vote counters do"
-
Analysis Finds E-Voting Machines Vulnerable
By Andrea Stone
USA Today
Monday 26 June 2006
Washington - Most of the electronic voting machines widely adopted since the disputed 2000 presidential election "pose a real danger to the integrity of national, state and local elections," a report out Tuesday concludes.
There are more than 120 security threats to the three most commonly purchased electronic voting systems, the study by the Brennan Center for Justice says. For what it calls the most comprehensive review of its kind, the New York City-based non-partisan think tank convened a task force of election officials, computer scientists and security experts to study e-voting vulnerabilities.
The study, which took more than a year to complete, examined optical scanners and touch-screen machines with and without paper trails. Together, the three systems account for 80% of the voting machines that will be used in this November's election.
While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked, Lawrence Norden, who chaired the task force and heads the Brennan Center's voting-technology assessment project, says there have been similar software attacks on computerized gambling slot machines.
"It is unrealistic to think this isn't something to worry about" in terms of future elections, he says.
The report comes during primary season amid growing concerns about potential errors and tampering. Lawsuits have been filed in at least six states to block the purchase or use of computerized machines.
Election officials in California and Pennsylvania recently issued urgent warnings to local polling supervisors about potential software problems in touch-screen voting machines after a test in Utah uncovered vulnerabilities in machines made by Diebold Election Systems.
North Canton, Ohio-based Diebold did not return calls for comment. The company, a major manufacturer of e-voting machines, said earlier this month that security flaws cited in its machines were theoretical and would be addressed this year.
The new threat analysis does not address specific machines or companies. Instead, it "confirms the suspicions about electronic voting machines that people may have had from individual reports" of problems, Norden says.
Among the findings:
Using corrupt software to switch votes from one candidate to another is the easiest way to attack all three systems. A would-be hacker would have to overcome many hurdles to do this, the report says, but none "is insurmountable."
The most vulnerable voting machines use wireless components open to attack by "virtually any member of the public with some knowledge and a personal digital assistant." Only New York, Minnesota and California ban wireless components.
Even electronic systems that use voter-verified paper records are subject to attack unless they are regularly audited.
Most states have not implemented election procedures or countermeasures to detect software attacks.
"There are plenty of vulnerabilities that can and should be fixed before the November election," says David Jefferson, a Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory computer scientist who served on the task force. "Whether they will or not remains to be seen."
The report said state election officials could improve voting-machine security if they conduct routine audits comparing voter- verified paper trails to the electronic record and ban wireless components in voting machines.
"A voting system that is not auditable contains the seeds of destruction for a democracy," says Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., a chief sponsor of a bill to improve electronic-voting security.
-
While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked, Lawrence Norden, who chaired the task force and heads the Brennan Center's voting-technology assessment project, says there have been similar software attacks on computerized gambling slot machines.
:-\
-
it doesnt matter what medoum is used, the results can still be manipulated by whoever is in charge just as easily. its like the crooked politicial said in gangs of new york - "the voters dont determine the winner-the vote counters do"
See what I mean 240, answers like this... elections could be rigged before, so hell, why not make it easier for those rigging the election... We can go to the moon but here on planet earth, we're more interested in making a voting system that leaves us comfortably numb than one that's fool proof ::) WTF??? What are our guys fighting for again? Yea, I'll submitt that their deaths are in vain if we are willing to just say fuck it to a system that pisses all over the most valuable thing we have in our democracy--our vote. The republicans are willing to turn a blind eye because they are the recent beneficiaries of the system... But again, this is foolish... This system is open for manipulation by other government in a snap... Come on, this is a no brainer... e-voting... bad.... Paper...Goood... Just because there was a fucked paper system in florida doesn't mean they were all fucked... Here in Colorado, I enjoyed a very simple system that wouldn't have had anyone fucking with chads in a recount... What did we do this year? Got rid of a system everyone was happy with in favor of e-voting machines... A system that at least half the population is NOT happy with... Brilliant ::)
-
:-\
I hope that's not all you read ::) Study up and get a more complete picture please...
-
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
-
I hope that's not all you read ::) Study up and get a more complete picture please...
I read the whole thing. It sounds like some people are concerned about potential, not actual, fraud. Legitimate concern. Does that mean we don't take steps to get more people involved in the process and make things easier for long-time, consistent voters (like me)? No. Identify the potential problems and come up with a solution.
Oh, and don't pretend like we haven't had voter fraud since the process began. My dad volunteered at the polls for decades. He told me lots of stories. I remember one involving L.A. mayor Tom Bradley (a black guy) running for governor against Deukmejian (a white guy). The "race card" was being played on both sides all over the place. They were wheeling people out of nursing homes to the polls. Bradley lost a close race. I don't know if voter fraud determined the outcome, but it certainly played a role.
-
I don't understand this. There is an option which allows for e-voting, with a paper backup so that recounts are possible.
How can anyone be against this? You have ease of voting, the counting is instant... but a paper trail remains. This means, if exit polls say that Joe Smith has 60% of the popular vote, then suddenly the other guy wins with 60% of the vote, a recount can be done in days using the paper trail.
Why would anyone not like this option?
-
I read the whole thing. It sounds like some people are concerned about potential, not actual, fraud. Legitimate concern. Does that mean we don't take steps to get more people involved in the process and make things easier for long-time, consistent voters (like me)? No. Identify the potential problems and come up with a solution.
Oh, and don't pretend like we haven't had voter fraud since the process began. My dad volunteered at the polls for decades. He told me lots of stories. I remember one involving L.A. mayor Tom Bradley (a black guy) running for governor against Deukmejian (a white guy). The "race card" was being played on both sides all over the place. They were wheeling people out of nursing homes to the polls. Bradley lost a close race. I don't know voter fraud determined the outcome, but it certainly played a role.
Go back to reading to your 5th graders and ignore the problem then ::)
-
Go back to reading to your 5th graders and ignore the problem then ::)
Funny you should say that. I'm doing an extra session this Thursday. :)
In the meantime, I'll keep ignoring the hypothetical problem, while you keep sounding like Chicken Little. ::)
"While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked . . . ."
-
I don't understand this. There is an option which allows for e-voting, with a paper backup so that recounts are possible.
How can anyone be against this? You have ease of voting, the counting is instant... but a paper trail remains. This means, if exit polls say that Joe Smith has 60% of the popular vote, then suddenly the other guy wins with 60% of the vote, a recount can be done in days using the paper trail.
Why would anyone not like this option?
If exits poll have Joe Smith leading with 50,5 %, and the final results are giving the other guy 51% of the votes, would there be a recount then?
YIP
Zack
-
Exit polls are not perfect, but they are very very close. I worked as a poll supervisor in the 2004 elections, and they grab someone every couple of people. If you have two million people voting in a state, and you get an equal amount from each demo and get 10% of the pop, you're going to accurately predict things.
maybe make it the financial responsibility of the declared loser to pay for the recount, and it must be done in two weeks?
Either way, if it's close, or if it's a major statistical anomaly compared with pre and exit polls, it should be analyzed.
BB, your calling the emachine issues a 'hypothetical' makes me not want to even debate this with you. I am sad that you have not reserached this stuff. It's not a liberal thing either- there are liberals, repubs, and mods calling for this. I am sad that you do not value your vote. I value mine.
-
Exit polls are not perfect, but they are very very close. I worked as a poll supervisor in the 2004 elections, and they grab someone every couple of people. If you have two million people voting in a state, and you get an equal amount from each demo and get 10% of the pop, you're going to accurately predict things.
maybe make it the financial responsibility of the declared loser to pay for the recount, and it must be done in two weeks?
Either way, if it's close, or if it's a major statistical anomaly compared with pre and exit polls, it should be analyzed.
BB, your calling the emachine issues a 'hypothetical' makes me not want to even debate this with you. I am sad that you have not reserached this stuff. It's not a liberal thing either- there are liberals, repubs, and mods calling for this. I am sad that you do not value your vote. I value mine.
I never said I don't value my vote. Never called this a "liberal thing" either.
If you know of some study comparing paper voting fraud to e-voting fraud I'd be happy to hear about it. I'll read it, assuming it's not from some "alternative news" site. What you're doing is completely ignoring the fact that voter fraud has been going on for years. It doesn't matter what system you use, people will find a way to cheat.
What's sad is that you're not interested in getting more people involved in the democratic process by increasing the number of voters. Voter turnout in this country is embarrassing. I'm all in favor of anything that will get more people to the polls.
"While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked . . . ."
-
There WOULD have been documentation, if the investigating detective hadn't driven himself over state lines to GA, met in a hotel room with several men, bruised himself badly, then binded his own wrists before slitting them.
This man vowed to break open the story then was killed in GA where autopsies are not mandatory, as they are in FL.
Also the repubs are suing to have the 2004 records destroyed, and the dems are suing to have them preserved, so they can sue agian. to have them physically counted. If the repubs didn't cheat, what possible objection would they have to a recount?
BB, most rational people would see the sitation and say "Of course a paper trail is a good thing". You wish to eliminate a safeguard which costs you nothing. It makes no sense. unless it's just you pandering to the repub party line, there can be no common sense reason to disregard a safeguard.
-
There WOULD have been documentation, if the investigating detective hadn't driven himself over state lines to GA, met in a hotel room with several men, bruised himself badly, then binded his own wrists before slitting them.
This man vowed to break open the story then was killed in GA where autopsies are not mandatory, as they are in FL.
Also the repubs are suing to have the 2004 records destroyed, and the dems are suing to have them preserved, so they can sue agian. to have them physically counted. If the repubs didn't cheat, what possible objection would they have to a recount?
BB, most rational people would see the sitation and say "Of course a paper trail is a good thing". You wish to eliminate a safeguard which costs you nothing. It makes no sense. unless it's just you pandering to the repub party line, there can be no common sense reason to disregard a safeguard.
I see. So the person who would have blown open voter fraud was murdered. [sigh]
E-voting is not a Republican "party line" issue, or it would have never happened in ultra liberal Hawaii.
-
So let me get this straight... Beach is focused on his lollypop, "While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked . . . ." Despite much of the worries being based on the fact that an election can be easily change WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE, beach is happy to sit here with his lollypop and point to the fact that someone said there hasn't been a documented case... ::) Oh boy.... Do I need to say more :-\
-
So let me get this straight... Beach is focused on his lollypop, "While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked . . . ." Despite much of the worries being based on the fact that an election can be easily change WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE, beach is happy to sit here with his lollypop and point to the fact that someone said there hasn't been a documented case... ::) Oh boy.... Do I need to say more :-\
Actually, Beach likes to keep quoting from the article Berserker posted, which clearly shows the sky is not yet falling. But Berserker cannot grasp this concept, because he is too busy trying to alert the neighborhood that the sky is falling.
-
Actually, Beach likes to keep quoting from the article Berserker posted, which clearly shows the sky is not yet falling. But Berserker cannot grasp this concept, because he is too busy trying to alert the neighborhood that the sky is falling.
Actually Beach is myopic and cant get his eyes off of one line to see the whole picture... Actually Beach just completely failed to address the point I just made to be a fucking smart ass punk bitch so that's what he gets in return... No go kill yourself with Nordic you fucking douchbag... ;D
-
Click to enlarge
(http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5xf6FEdFNQoACoijzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12h9bmlm0/EXP=1162372730/**http%3a//dragonballyee.blogs.com/philly/files/rr_exit_polls.gif) (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5xf6FEdFNQoACoijzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12h9bmlm0/EXP=1162372730/**http%3a//dragonballyee.blogs.com/philly/files/rr_exit_polls.gif)
-
(http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5mxFFkdFqxgBHmyjzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12eq2ue8k/EXP=1162373061/**http%3a//www.openedsource.net/blog/archives/ohioexitpoll.jpg)
-
(http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/0411/db76fccd6387b5abb3d3.jpeg)
-
Discrepancies map
Voting locations that used electronic or other types of voting machines that did not issue a paper receipt or offer auditability correlate geographically with areas that had discrepancies in Bush's favor between exit poll numbers and actual results. Exit polling data in these areas show significantly higher support for Kerry than actual results (potentially outside the margin of error). From a statistical perspective, this may be indicative of vote rigging, because the likelihood of this happening by chance is extremely low. A study of 16 states by a former MIT mathematics professor places the likelihood at 1 in 50,000
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/73/2004_us_popular_vote2.png/580px-2004_us_popular_vote2.png)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7d/2004_us_discrepancy_12_22.jpg)
-
Below is a link to a Research Paper, conducted by an expert Researcher, on the extremely low possibility of the inaccuracy of the Exit polls that indicated John Kerry would win the recent Presidential Election.
Dr. Steven Freeman of the Univ. of Pennsylvania has recently released a research paper that puts the chance of exit poll statistical anomalies being off, to the degree that reported Computer voting totals suggest, at a mere 1 in 250 Million.
In "The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy," Dr. Steven F. Freeman, who has a PH. D from MIT and whose expertise lies in Research Methods, states :
"As much as we can say in social science that something is impossible, it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error."
The odds of those exit poll statistical anomalies occurring by chance are 250,000,000 to one.
The 12 page Research paper can be read in it's entirety at :
http://www.ilcaonline.org/freeman.pdf
A brief article on this research paper can be found on The Washington Monthly magazine at :
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/20...
Professor Freeman concludes the research paper with this:
"Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion, but the election's unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis, one that is the responsibility of the media, academia, polling agencies, and the public to investigate."
-
The National Election Data Archive Project reported their findings on 26 states’ exit polls that had incorrectly predicted Kerry wins-- the odds against this degree of unprecedented poll failure happening, they determined, were 16.5 million to 1
-
“Is it a coincidence that within the last 5 or 6 years the Exit Polls have all of a sudden gotten unreliable and wrong, which just happens to coincide with the introduction of electronic voting machines?”
-Chuck Herrin, IT Auditor
-
Berserker,
Very good examples. I really hope people look at that Ohio and Florida data, and see what has happened. Unfortunately, many find such thing unsettling, and will be happy to dismiss it and go about their sheeplike day.
Aside from the regulars who will ignore this proof, I hope some of the lurkers will look at what Berserker has shared. Elections are being stolen in swing states. Such a sad day in America.
-
"Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion . . . ."
;D
-
;D
So sad... no cure for walleye vision
(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=16613_geek.jpg)
-
So sad... no cure for walleye vision
(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=16613_geek.jpg)
"but the election's unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis"
;D
-
Beach Bum, your argument is the equivalent of giving a new handgun to every violent offender as he is released from prison, since it's only a *hypothesis* that any of them will use this gun for crime. It's like giving every newly released pedophile a new job as a kindergarden teacher, since it's only a *hypothesis* that any of them will abuse the position of power.
In addition to the incredibly silly notion that we can trust those in power to honestly manage the election which continue their power, berserker has presented examples which succinctly show that the hypothesis has been proven! States with e-voting have monster anomalies in actual results vs. polled results! The hypo has been proven, my friend.
-
The hypo has been proven, my friend.
"While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked . . . ."
:-\
-
No documentation of machines being cracked open and a disk popped in.
Monster evidence of e-voting results not accurately reflecting voter actions.
BeachBum, tell me, if the roles were reversed, and most people polled said they voted for Bush, and Kerry won the state and the general election, would you be equally as flippant and casual about it? This is not a partisan issue. it's a constitutional issue. It's sad that you, an otherwise rational man, would blow off very compelling evidence of voter fraud, as long as it benefits you. Ii guess once the Democrats learn to fix elections, and hilary/obama get 8 years in office, you'll start giving a shit.
-
No documentation of machines being cracked open and a disk popped in.
Monster evidence of e-voting results not accurately reflecting voter actions.
BeachBum, tell me, if the roles were reversed, and most people polled said they voted for Bush, and Kerry won the state and the general election, would you be equally as flippant and casual about it? This is not a partisan issue. it's a constitutional issue. It's sad that you, an otherwise rational man, would blow off very compelling evidence of voter fraud, as long as it benefits you. Ii guess once the Democrats learn to fix elections, and hilary/obama get 8 years in office, you'll start giving a shit.
If you look at my posts, what I've expressed is a desire to get more voters involved in the process. If you knew your history you'd know that higher voter turnout has traditionally favored Democrats. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. It's about helping ensure we don't have one of the worst voter turnouts in the industrialized world.
And Hillary will not be president of these United States in this lifetime.
-
If you look at my posts, what I've expressed is a desire to get more voters involved in the process.
That's like saying we should lower gas prices before we invent cars.
If the results will be rigged anyway, there is no point in anyone voting.
If you knew your history you'd know that higher voter turnout has traditionally favored Democrats. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. It's about helping ensure we don't have one of the worst voter turnouts in the industrialized world.
I agree voter turnout should be an important issue. But focusing energies on that before were fixed what is a very easily manipulated system is pointless.
-
If you look at my posts, .
Why... You clearly DO NOT do the same with other people's posts... You only look at one sentence and make your own thesis from it... Brilliant... ::)
-
I don't understand this. There is an option which allows for e-voting, with a paper backup so that recounts are possible.
How can anyone be against this? You have ease of voting, the counting is instant... but a paper trail remains. This means, if exit polls say that Joe Smith has 60% of the popular vote, then suddenly the other guy wins with 60% of the vote, a recount can be done in days using the paper trail.
Why would anyone not like this option?
I don't know for sure, but I heard someone talking on FNC that people could sell there votes since there was proof they voted a certain way on paper. ???
-
If that is the biggest worry the opposition has - that people illegally selling their votes will somehow be inconvenienced - I think they just strengthened the argument for going back to paper backups.
-
I think voting on paper is a no brainer. Giant sky scrapers can be imploded by flying planes into them and we can't even count paper ballots??? ::)
-
Why... You clearly DO NOT do the same with other people's posts... You only look at one sentence and make your own thesis from it... Brilliant... ::)
No I don't!
"Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion . . . ."
;D