Author Topic: Weird voting machine US/Venez connection (Read 4630 times)

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #25 on:** October 30, 2006, 04:49:41 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on October 30, 2006, 04:25:28 PM

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

Dos Equis · « **Reply #26 on:** October 30, 2006, 04:54:03 PM »

Quote from: Berserker on October 30, 2006, 04:49:41 PM

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 . . . ."

Hedgehog · « **Reply #27 on:** October 30, 2006, 05:45:54 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on October 30, 2006, 04:33:10 PM

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

240 is Back · « **Reply #28 on:** October 30, 2006, 09:44:28 PM »

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.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #29 on:** October 30, 2006, 10:46:08 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on October 30, 2006, 09:44:28 PM

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 . . . ."

240 is Back · « **Reply #30 on:** October 30, 2006, 11:01:35 PM »

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.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #31 on:** October 30, 2006, 11:44:31 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on October 30, 2006, 11:01:35 PM

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.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #32 on:** October 30, 2006, 11:46:57 PM »

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 $:-\$

Dos Equis · « **Reply #33 on:** October 31, 2006, 12:54:30 AM »

Quote from: Berserker on October 30, 2006, 11:46:57 PM

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.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #34 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:12:49 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on October 31, 2006, 12:54:30 AM

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...

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #35 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:21:02 AM »

Click to enlarge

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #36 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:26:24 AM »

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #37 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:31:47 AM »

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #38 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:38:01 AM »

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

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #39 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:44:49 AM »

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."

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #40 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:46:29 AM »

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

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #41 on:** October 31, 2006, 01:51:30 AM »

“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

240 is Back · « **Reply #42 on:** October 31, 2006, 07:32:21 AM »

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.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #43 on:** October 31, 2006, 07:54:12 AM »

Quote from: Berserker on October 31, 2006, 01:44:49 AM

"Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion . . . ."

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #44 on:** October 31, 2006, 08:04:58 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on October 31, 2006, 07:54:12 AM

So sad... no cure for walleye vision

Dos Equis · « **Reply #45 on:** October 31, 2006, 09:25:52 AM »

Quote from: Berserker on October 31, 2006, 08:04:58 AM

So sad... no cure for walleye vision

"but the election's unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis"

240 is Back · « **Reply #46 on:** October 31, 2006, 10:16:44 AM »

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.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #47 on:** October 31, 2006, 10:18:25 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on October 31, 2006, 10:16:44 AM

The hypo has been proven, my friend.

"While there have been no documented cases of these voting machines being hacked . . . ."

$:-\$

240 is Back · « **Reply #48 on:** October 31, 2006, 10:22:01 AM »

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.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #49 on:** October 31, 2006, 10:32:50 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on October 31, 2006, 10:22:01 AM

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.