Common key opens Diebold voting machine [Archive]

K0RGR

10-02-2006, 02:21 PM

Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 02 2006,05:25)]Should they go back to punch cards?
Until they have an electronic version with some form of built in accountability and verifiability - you betcha! At least you can argue about the 'hanging chads' with punch cards. If somebody has put the whammy on these Diebold machines, there is no way to ever know.

Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan, and that undoubtedly has more than a little to do with the purchase of these machines in so many red states, it doesn't matter who's in power if we can't verify the results of elections. In this case, the tiny savings in the cost of publishing paper ballots is piddling compared to the cost of confidence in the American voting process.

I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines, but there have been reports of Diebold technicians showing up to work on them during elections, with no accountability of their actions at all. This is absolutely intolerable.

This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections. The recently-passed Federal bill requiring picture ID for all voters clearly discriminates against the poor and the elderly, but may eliminate charges of 'dead voters'. A means must be found to issue the required picture IDs to elderly shutins who can't go to the driver's license bureau. I think this little bit of trickery will backfire on the GOP , by the way. Far more of the elderly vote Repulbican these days, and they've just cut off a huge number of them.

KA8DKT

10-02-2006, 02:55 PM

Quote[/b] ]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan, and that undoubtedly has more than a little to do with the purchase of these machines in so many red states, it doesn't matter who's in power if we can't verify the results of elections. #In this case, the #tiny savings in the cost of publishing paper ballots is piddling compared to the cost of confidence in the American voting process.

And he publicly promised to hand the election to bush. #And it was he that said that his machines were so reliable that a paper receipt was not necessary.

Quote[/b] ]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines, but there have been reports of Diebold technicians showing up to work on them during elections, with no accountability of their actions at all. This is absolutely intolerable. #

And there might not ever be, since even a novice programmer can write code that will do its job and completely eradicate any evidence of its presence.

Quote[/b] ]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.

When the GOP was asked about the fact that the Diebold machine election results were completely different than the results of the exit polls, the GOP representative suggested eliminating exit polls. #Note that the UN and most countries (including the U.S., up until now) consider exit polling the gold standard for detecting election fraud. #It was an estimate based on exit polling results that made the NBC(?) announce that Al Gore had won the 2000 election. #The news networks had been using exit poll results to offer their early predictions for many, many years with complete accuracy.
#
There are going to be errors in the voting and vote counting process no matter what method is used to vote, and we all agree that they can happen. #But those errors will most likely be divided between the various candidates in a random distribution. #In Ohio, a key state in the last Presidential election, every significant error made in the election process seemed to favor only one side.

-gary

KA8DKT

10-03-2006, 03:52 PM

Many who follow this link won't like the writer of the article, but it is well worth reading anyway. #Especially so since much of what is told here is well documented, if not well publicized.
Link to Voting Machine Article (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11717105/robert_f_kennedy_jr__will_the_next_election_be_hac ked/print)
-gary

KD6NIG

10-03-2006, 04:08 PM

You know, we can file income taxes online, do banking online, etc etc.

Why not just set up some kind of voting thing online?

Well, first we'd have to debate who would control it, they'd have to have equal dem/rep guards, technicians, and others in the datacenter, etc.

But you'd think that if they could send you some kind of ID number through the mail to file taxes, they could do it for voting too.

Course with the way the internet is today, someone would crack it, etc. But if you somehow centralized it all either by internet or having some kind of kiosk system that non internet users could use.....

Then you wouldn't need machines. Each state would only need a central website and kiosks in public places for those who don't have internet. The feds would have a central website also for federal elections.

The other option would be calling in your vote, state of California used to have a tax filing system like that also.

If the internet or telephone is safe enough for financial information to file taxes, it could probably be used for voting.

One other thing-if you did that, have a WINDOW for voting of say, a week. Besides, the news outlets would love that-they could mispredict a winner for an entire week!

KA8DKT

10-03-2006, 06:28 PM

Many have speculated that Internet voting might be a cure for the apparent ills of the electoral process. #Unfortunately, any electronic voting scheme is subject to easy manipulation by whoever is in charge of the servers and the counting software.

Currently in most states the person ultimately in charge of collecting and counting the votes is the state's Secretary of State. #Unfortunately that person is appointed to the job by the Governor and party in power. #In the cases of both Florida and Ohio not only were the Secretaries of State Republicans, but were also people with specific political ambitions and connections to a principal in the election, namely george w. bush. #

In Ohio, Secretary of State Blackwell was not only bush's re-election committee chairman in Ohio, he was also planning on running for Governor. #Now, this year he will be in charge of counting the votes in his own election.

In year 2000 Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris also held a high position in the bush re-election campaign and also wanted to run for Governor.

In all the above cases, in critical states, the senior person in charge of gathering and counting the votes had significant conflict of interest problems. #Not surprisingly, both states had significant problems with their vote count.

It seems illogical, but it turns out that the good old paper ballots and mechanical voting machines are the most reliable and accurate, and the most difficult to compromise. #In both cases the cast ballots can be physically locked down and easily (if tediously) recounted whenever necessary.

-gary

10-03-2006, 07:00 PM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,07:21)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 02 2006,05:25)]Should they go back to punch cards?

This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections. The recently-passed Federal bill requiring picture ID for all voters clearly discriminates against the poor and the elderly, but may eliminate charges of 'dead voters'. #A means must be found to issue the required picture IDs to elderly shutins who can't go to the driver's license bureau. I think this little bit of trickery will backfire on the GOP , by the way. Far more of the elderly vote Repulbican these days, and they've just cut off a huge number of them.
Your logic is faulty here. They can't get to the DMV once every 5 years but can get out to vote?

The poor? They can't afford the $10 every 5 years for an ID card? Come on.... 99% of those who we call poor smoke, have cable TV, etc and will drive.

Those were strawman arguements to protect voter fraud schemes, illegals who vote etc.

WA3WDR

10-03-2006, 07:03 PM

Republican solution to election dilemma:
(1) Confuse all issues until voters are totally randomized.
(2) Win election by fudging the vote with election machines.

Simple. Easy.

K0RGR

10-03-2006, 08:22 PM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 03 2006,12:00)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,07:21)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 02 2006,05:25)]Should they go back to punch cards?

This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections. The recently-passed Federal bill requiring picture ID for all voters clearly discriminates against the poor and the elderly, but may eliminate charges of 'dead voters'. A means must be found to issue the required picture IDs to elderly shutins who can't go to the driver's license bureau. I think this little bit of trickery will backfire on the GOP , by the way. Far more of the elderly vote Repulbican these days, and they've just cut off a huge number of them.
Your logic is faulty here. They can't get to the DMV once every 5 years but can get out to vote?

The poor? They can't afford the $10 every 5 years for an ID card? Come on.... 99% of those who we call poor smoke, have cable TV, etc and will drive.

Those were strawman arguements to protect voter fraud schemes, illegals who vote etc.
This is a poll tax - plain and simple - previously declared unconstitutional back when the Supreme Court wasn't controlled by the same party that is being strongly accused of usurping the elections.

People in rest homes usually don't have driver's licenses, and don't go to the DMV.

N2RJ

10-03-2006, 09:25 PM

Problem is we're all about instant gratification.

In a third world banana republic it can take a few days to count all of the votes by hand.

My dad was an election worker in Trinidad, and counting ballots there was not like counting money. You had to take out each ballot, show the witnesses then record the vote. It took a few days to get the official results, especially in cases where some disgruntled candidate lost his deposit and demanded a recount.

They tried voting machines but outlawed them after one election. The ruling party used them to cheat. So they were permanently outlawed and never seen again. Good riddance!

So are we willing to wait a few days to manually count the votes here in America? Last I heard we have 300 million people. No idea how many are citizens and eligible to vote, and how many will actually vote in an election. Last Presidential election, how many people voted?

And what will happen if a bunch of losers demand a recount?

N2RJ

10-03-2006, 09:30 PM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,09:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections. The recently-passed Federal bill requiring picture ID for all voters clearly discriminates against the poor and the elderly, but may eliminate charges of 'dead voters'. #A means must be found to issue the required picture IDs to elderly shutins who can't go to the driver's license bureau. I think this little bit of trickery will backfire on the GOP , by the way. Far more of the elderly vote Repulbican these days, and they've just cut off a huge number of them.
They should require proof of citizenship, not just proof of ID.

Many people have used the "discrimination against the poor" excuse because they know darn well that illegals and people otherwise ineligible to vote have been helping put corrupt and inept politicians from their party into office. #The only poor being discriminated against are the "poor" illegals and people otherwise ineligible to vote.

n4sva

10-03-2006, 09:33 PM

Maybe they should use this in Dan Rostenkowski's old district-where they voted "early and often"

N2RJ

10-03-2006, 09:34 PM

Quote[/b] (KA8DKT @ Oct. 03 2006,13:28)]Many have speculated that Internet voting might be a cure for the apparent ills of the electoral process. #
Yeah, right.

Ever browse DU or Freep?

Thanks to them and others like them, online polls are pretty useless.

Even if you have security up the wazoo, it won't work because:

People will find it too complicated and they will have to keep regular voting available anyway.

or

Some ingenious person will write a worm to hijack your machine and set it up to vote automatically for their candidate, or set up a phishing scam targeted at voters. The latter may all that is needed really. People are gullible.

n2nh

10-04-2006, 04:51 AM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan,
A lot to overlook. Especially when he predicted he would bring Ohio in for Bush prior to the election. I'm certain there would be a witch hunt going on for decades if this had happened to the neo-cons. I mean, we're still hearing about Johnson, Truman and FDR.

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines,
AHEM. * Proof * (and it's been available for over a year.) (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)
*More Proof* (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121604Z.shtml)

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.
Having major problems with a major election isn't a "Little Evil." It's disenfranchising American Citizens of their Democratic and Constitutional right to vote and have it count. As long as we continue to view this as just another small problem, it will become a right that we lose for ourselves and our children. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

10-04-2006, 11:16 AM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 03 2006,13:22)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 03 2006,12:00)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,07:21)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 02 2006,05:25)]Should they go back to punch cards?

This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections. The recently-passed Federal bill requiring picture ID for all voters clearly discriminates against the poor and the elderly, but may eliminate charges of 'dead voters'. #A means must be found to issue the required picture IDs to elderly shutins who can't go to the driver's license bureau. I think this little bit of trickery will backfire on the GOP , by the way. Far more of the elderly vote Repulbican these days, and they've just cut off a huge number of them.
Your logic is faulty here. They can't get to the DMV once every 5 years but can get out to vote?

The poor? They can't afford the $10 every 5 years for an ID card? Come on.... 99% of those who we call poor smoke, have cable TV, etc and will drive.

Those were strawman arguements to protect voter fraud schemes, illegals who vote etc.
This is a poll tax - plain and simple - previously declared unconstitutional back when the Supreme Court wasn't controlled by the same party that is being strongly accused of usurping the elections.

People in rest homes usually don't have driver's licenses, and don't go to the DMV.
No, it is not a poll tax, no more than requring persons woting to wear clothes is not forcing them to pay the textile establishment in order to vote.

NC charges $10 for a 5 year ID card, a card needed for many more things in life. How many people vote who do not have a bank account, drive, cash checks etc? Very, very few, so having some form of ID is incedental to living in this country anyway. A few folks in nursing homes, and even then the nursing homes provide van service for things like this, or even the political partys can much as they provide it on the day of the polls. If they can make it to the polls, they can make it to the DMV.

I say pass it and let the dems try to get it called a poll tax... and watch the court have some common sense and say that a $2 a year ID used for so many more things than voting, not primarily used or needed for voting, is far from a "poll tax", but a simple measure of election security.

But once again gasping at straws, gotta kep those illegals and dead folks voting. My grandfather was a Democratic precinct captain in Chicago, I know how it was done and how dirty they played to keep the dems in power there.... one aspect of my family history I am not proud of.

10-04-2006, 11:26 AM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Oct. 03 2006,21:51)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan,
A lot to overlook. #Especially when he predicted he would bring Ohio in for Bush prior to the election. #I'm certain there would be a witch hunt going on for decades if this had happened to the neo-cons. #I mean, we're still hearing about Johnson, Truman and FDR.

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines,
AHEM. * Proof * (and it's been available for over a year.) (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)
*More Proof* (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121604Z.shtml)

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.
Having major problems with a major election isn't a "Little Evil." #It's disenfranchising American Citizens of their Democratic and Constitutional right to vote and have it count. #As long as we continue to view this as just another small problem, it will become a right that we lose for ourselves and our children. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
All I see from that is that a rep from the company came in to work on the machines, poll workers let him, but no evidince of any kind of fraud was actually found...only supposition. Oh and he had a "heavy coat" and suggested a cheat sheet that they did not use.

No hard numbers, no data, and the write up goes on to allege more than the actual affidavit.

Sorry, but if you want to prove fraud show me real numbers that have been tampered with, not "a guy with a heavy coat took apart our computer while we let him and suggested we may want to use a cheat sheet".

ei5ja

10-04-2006, 12:00 PM

We had electronic voting machines here on trial basis, in a select number of constituencies.
They were challenged in the Supreme court on the issue of paper receipt of votes.
The supreme court found that, on balance, they were prone to corruption without a printout.
The machine are now languishing in warehouses, generating profits for the warehouse owners where charges have long since exceeded the original cost of the machines.
Bring back hanging! #(chads, that is http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif )
73 Ed

ei5ja

10-04-2006, 12:03 PM

Sri. Dble post http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

K0RGR

10-04-2006, 03:22 PM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 04 2006,04:26)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Oct. 03 2006,21:51)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan,
A lot to overlook. Especially when he predicted he would bring Ohio in for Bush prior to the election. I'm certain there would be a witch hunt going on for decades if this had happened to the neo-cons. I mean, we're still hearing about Johnson, Truman and FDR.

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines,
AHEM. * Proof * (and it's been available for over a year.) (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)
*More Proof* (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121604Z.shtml)

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.
Having major problems with a major election isn't a "Little Evil." It's disenfranchising American Citizens of their Democratic and Constitutional right to vote and have it count. As long as we continue to view this as just another small problem, it will become a right that we lose for ourselves and our children. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
All I see from that is that a rep from the company came in to work on the machines, poll workers let him, but no evidince of any kind of fraud was actually found...only supposition. Oh and he had a "heavy coat" and suggested a cheat sheet that they did not use.

No hard numbers, no data, and the write up goes on to allege more than the actual affidavit.

Sorry, but if you want to prove fraud show me real numbers that have been tampered with, not "a guy with a heavy coat took apart our computer while we let him and suggested we may want to use a cheat sheet".
We do not have to prove anything. You have to prove that the elections were legitimate. There is absolutely no way to prove that. Direct evidence of tampering with the machines should be sufficient to nullify that election - it doesn't matter what they were doing.

I say that an election that cannot be verified does not have to be honored. If the Republicans pull off a string of 'miraculous victories' in November, I say we march in the streets.

And yes, I agree that it's not a small matter. We become more of a 'Banana Republic' every day.

KD6NIG

10-04-2006, 04:03 PM

I don't see why an ID card is an issue.

For example. Here in California those who qualify for Medi-Cal or other healthcare assistance are issued an ID. Ok, its not as advanced or fancy as a drivers licence or state issued ID card, but its simple really-if you're under a certian income level....waive the fee. Sure, you have to prove it. Sure, it will cost some money, but come on-they are cranking out ID cards for other stuff every day.

If you want to drive, then you don't waive the fee. But for PHOTO ID, you should be able to obtain this with no fee, provided you can prove you cannot afford the fee.

Heck, it may reduce the amount of welfare fraud also if you have to not only slide your benefits card (which, by the way, has a nice magnetic stripe on it, so its not cheap either) then your state issued photo id afterward.

Right now anyone with that card and pin could easily obtain someone elses benefits for them without them knowing, if they were unable to (I'm thinking the elderly on assistance, for example, having someone pick up groceries for them, and the person also grabbing a few items for themselves, for example).

It wouldn't just help in voting.

But since we hand out cards like that and stuff already, I would think the additional cost to ensure secure voting wouldn't be chastised by many. We're already doing it for many other things.

Heck, the police departments would probably like it also, would be easier to identify people than guessing or taking someones word for what they are saying, and finding out later they aren't that person and having to release them (or having to find them again because they find out they were someone who had a warrant!)

Its either that or the social security card becomes a national ID, but either way, its not like we aren't giving those who are down on thier luck or whatever stuff already. I don't think another $10-20 for a free state issued ID card isn't going to kill us.

10-04-2006, 04:17 PM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 04 2006,08:22)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 04 2006,04:26)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Oct. 03 2006,21:51)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan,
A lot to overlook. #Especially when he predicted he would bring Ohio in for Bush prior to the election. #I'm certain there would be a witch hunt going on for decades if this had happened to the neo-cons. #I mean, we're still hearing about Johnson, Truman and FDR.

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines,
AHEM. * Proof * (and it's been available for over a year.) (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)
*More Proof* (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121604Z.shtml)

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.
Having major problems with a major election isn't a "Little Evil." #It's disenfranchising American Citizens of their Democratic and Constitutional right to vote and have it count. #As long as we continue to view this as just another small problem, it will become a right that we lose for ourselves and our children. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
All I see from that is that a rep from the company came in to work on the machines, poll workers let him, but no evidince of any kind of fraud was actually found...only supposition. Oh and he had a "heavy coat" and suggested a cheat sheet that they did not use.

No hard numbers, no data, and the write up goes on to allege more than the actual affidavit.

Sorry, but if you want to prove fraud show me real numbers that have been tampered with, not "a guy with a heavy coat took apart our computer while we let him and suggested we may want to use a cheat sheet".
We do not have to prove anything. You have to prove that the elections were legitimate. There is absolutely no way to prove that. Direct evidence of tampering with the machines should be sufficient to nullify that election - it doesn't matter what they were doing.

I say that an election that cannot be verified does not have to be honored. If the Republicans pull off a string of 'miraculous victories' in November, I say we march in the streets.

And yes, I agree that it's not a small matter. We become more of a 'Banana Republic' every day.
I disagree. Every election has observers at every polling place and counting station from both partys, with full access and the ability to stop anyone at any time if they question thier actions. Then the questionable activity can be halted and investigated.

This did not happen. Instead the poll observers signed off that they saw no problems, then only as it appeared thier side was losing did they first come foward with these weak at best arguements.

Why did they not stop the suspicious behavior that was so bad they wrote it up later?
Why did they sign off to certify the election?
Why did they not raise the flag before it was vertified?

Sorry, but observers from both parties were there and the election was certified by them.

KA8DKT

10-04-2006, 07:12 PM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 04 2006,12:17)][quote=K0RGR,Oct. 04 2006,08:22]
I disagree. Every election has observers at every polling place and counting station from both partys, with full access and the ability to stop anyone at any time if they question thier actions. Then the questionable activity can be halted and investigated.

This did not happen. Instead the poll observers signed off that they saw no problems, then only as it appeared thier side was losing did they first come foward with these weak at best arguements.

Why did they not stop the suspicious behavior that was so bad they wrote it up later?
Why did they sign off to certify the election?
Why did they not raise the flag before it was vertified?

Sorry, but observers from both parties were there and the election was certified by them.
Well, that's the way it is supposed to work. #In several cases there were no poll observers, and the votes were counted in secret. #In one state, at least some of the votes were counted by the company that supplied the electronic voting machines, once again in a non-secure situation, without the proper observers.

Please read this article. #The material, while not well publicized, is well documented. #This isn't "whining by losers". #It is a compilation of facts that are now well documented, and as more investigators are becoming interested, more information is turning up.
Link 1 (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/print)

Now I am sure that some will see that article and immediately discount it because of the author's name. That, of course, would be a closed minded approach and we know everyone here reads all of this material with an open mind.

If you really believe in Democracy, then any attempt by any individual, candidate, or party to subvert the voting process should be dealt with in the most severe manner possible. #Subverting a national election could be construed as treason.

Who wins the election is nowhere near as important as how the election is conducted.#
Link 2 (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11717105/robert_f_kennedy_jr__will_the_next_election_be_hac ked/print)

Right now it really does not matter who did what. #

Two things do matter:
1 - That there were significant improprieties in the last two elections, without regard to who perpetrated them, and,
2 - That everyone should be insisting on the most honest election processes possible. #It is the only was to prove who really is legitimately representing the people of this country.

-gary

KC2KFC

10-04-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,07:21)]...A means must be found to issue the required picture IDs to elderly shutins who can't go to the driver's license bureau...
If these shutins can't get out to get a picture ID then do they really go out and vote?

10-04-2006, 08:13 PM

Quote[/b] (KA8DKT @ Oct. 04 2006,12:12)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 04 2006,12:17)][quote=K0RGR,Oct. 04 2006,08:22]
I disagree. Every election has observers at every polling place and counting station from both partys, with full access and the ability to stop anyone at any time if they question thier actions. Then the questionable activity can be halted and investigated.

This did not happen. Instead the poll observers signed off that they saw no problems, then only as it appeared thier side was losing did they first come foward with these weak at best arguements.

Why did they not stop the suspicious behavior that was so bad they wrote it up later?
Why did they sign off to certify the election?
Why did they not raise the flag before it was vertified?

Sorry, but observers from both parties were there and the election was certified by them.
Well, that's the way it is supposed to work. #In several cases there were no poll observers, and the votes were counted in secret. #In one state, at least some of the votes were counted by the company that supplied the electronic voting machines, once again in a non-secure situation, without the proper observers.

Please read this article. #The material, while not well publicized, is well documented. #This isn't "whining by losers". #It is a compilation of facts that are now well documented, and as more investigators are becoming interested, more information is turning up.
Link 1 (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/print)

Now I am sure that some will see that article and immediately discount it because of the author's name. That, of course, would be a closed minded approach and we know everyone here reads all of this material with an open mind.

If you really believe in Democracy, then any attempt by any individual, candidate, or party to subvert the voting process should be dealt with in the most severe manner possible. #Subverting a national election could be construed as treason.

Who wins the election is nowhere near as important as how the election is conducted.#
Link 2 (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11717105/robert_f_kennedy_jr__will_the_next_election_be_hac ked/print)

Right now it really does not matter who did what. #

Two things do matter:
1 - That there were significant improprieties in the last two elections, without regard to who perpetrated them, and,
2 - That everyone should be insisting on the most honest election processes possible. #It is the only was to prove who really is legitimately representing the people of this country.

-gary
You know, we agree on how elections should be conducted.

I volunteer at the polls, do you? or do you just whine and complain but expect everyone else to fix it?

10-04-2006, 08:29 PM

I have seen Kennedy's articles, and while he cites a lot of sources alot of what he cites is not strong proof of any form.

For example one of the biggest reasons for the arguement of missing votes in Ohio is that results did not match exit polls. Sorry, but exit polls are sometimes wrong, hell the two times I ran into a poller I lied just because they irritaed me.

Yet he cites a source basing an arguement on the fact that exit polls did not match results...then he just a bit further down cites an article where Dick Morris rants about how the exit polls were sabatoged and inaccurate.

So what was it, were the polls sabatoged an inaccurate, or accurate enough that the mismatch must meant lost or stolen votes? He can't have it both ways.

He writes a good article, and cites a lot of sources. That is enough to impress a lot of people who do not dig further or want to agree with him. But look at it with a critical eye and you can see where his own bias leads him to pick and choose what he considers "evidence" and discount everything else. Indeed look at your first link and footnote 18... look at what he takes from the article, then go read the whole article. He ignored the whole gist of the story he quoted part of and only quoted the parts that bolstered his point.... despite the fact that the whole article, when actually read, discounts his idea that the exit polls are so accurate they can be used as evidence things are foul.

n2nh

10-04-2006, 10:10 PM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 04 2006,07:26)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Oct. 03 2006,21:51)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan,
A lot to overlook. Especially when he predicted he would bring Ohio in for Bush prior to the election. I'm certain there would be a witch hunt going on for decades if this had happened to the neo-cons. I mean, we're still hearing about Johnson, Truman and FDR.

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines,
AHEM. * Proof * (and it's been available for over a year.) (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)
*More Proof* (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121604Z.shtml)

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.
Having major problems with a major election isn't a "Little Evil." It's disenfranchising American Citizens of their Democratic and Constitutional right to vote and have it count. As long as we continue to view this as just another small problem, it will become a right that we lose for ourselves and our children. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
All I see from that is that a rep from the company came in to work on the machines, poll workers let him, but no evidince of any kind of fraud was actually found...only supposition. Oh and he had a "heavy coat" and suggested a cheat sheet that they did not use.

No hard numbers, no data, and the write up goes on to allege more than the actual affidavit.

Sorry, but if you want to prove fraud show me real numbers that have been tampered with, not "a guy with a heavy coat took apart our computer while we let him and suggested we may want to use a cheat sheet".
I have posted numerous times on this subject. It has been here for all to see. Those who are used to lies, treachery and deception as a way to disenfranchise Americans of their Constitutional rights are used to this kind of chicanery as business as usual. To Americans, this is a travestry of justice. That neo-cons are justifying the existence of tampering in a major election is proof of the neo-con agenda and how they despise thinking Americans for questioning this.

Let's post a few other links though, for those who are interested in more information, not furthering their agenda by trying to obsfucate the issue further...

* LINK * (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_election_voting_controversies)
* LINK * (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61930-2005Jan9.html)
* AFTER 2004 What has happened?? * (http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp)

Those who have eyes will see. Those who don't will have an agenda. This is why there are stories about how many places are attempting to reject these electronic machines for this election. They're a bad joke and a betrayal of our right to have our vote count. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

n4sva

10-04-2006, 10:15 PM

I always get a kick when the Dems decry voter intimidation at the polls. Tell me this: Who is going to go to the inner city polling station and intimidate a brother waiting in line to vote?

K1OU

10-04-2006, 10:20 PM

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 04 2006,15:15)]I always get a kick when the Dems decry voter intimidation at the polls. Tell me this: Who is going to go to the inner city polling station and intimidate a brother waiting in line to vote?
Nobody, because they fight amongst themselves waiting in line for four hours.

n2nh

10-04-2006, 10:39 PM

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 04 2006,18:15)]I always get a kick when the Dems decry voter intimidation at the polls. Tell me this: Who is going to go to the inner city polling station and intimidate a brother waiting in line to vote?
I get a real kick out of neo-cons continually excusing felonious behaviour by one of their own, but screaming blue-blazes when it is someone else.... and continually saying we don't have any right to our Constitutional Rights.

BTW, one more link, but a quote from that link...

Page 6 of 7
Quote[/b] ]What the ESI audit demonstrates is that the Diebold VVPAT, poorly implemented though it was, is a remarkably valuable tool for detecting problems with the performance of the machines. The audit the ESI team conducted brought to light important information that has not surfaced before.

*We learned that often (16.2% of the time) the VVPAT summaries of the VVPAT ballots fail to match the VVPAT ballots.

*We learned that, most of the time (72.5%), the voter-verified paper audit trail records do not match the electronic records.

*And we learned that the redundant storage, which DRE manufactureres claim makes their machines reliable, isn't truly redundant storage, because sometimes the totals that are supposed to be identical are identical, and sometimes (26% of the time) they aren't.
Words In Bold as in the original document in the link:
* LINK * (http://www.votersunite.org/info/ADeeperLook-ESI.pdf)

How convenient of neo-cons to summarily dismiss something of great importance to every American of Voting age. More neo-con chicanery. Hey, if you don't care about your vote, fine. Don't vote. But don't assume that I don't care about my vote. My first vote was in '72. I voted against that crook Nixon. It meant a lot to me then and it means a lot to me now.

10-05-2006, 01:32 AM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Oct. 04 2006,15:10)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 04 2006,07:26)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Oct. 03 2006,21:51)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]Overlooking for a moment that the CEO of Diebold is a rabid Republican partisan,
A lot to overlook. #Especially when he predicted he would bring Ohio in for Bush prior to the election. #I'm certain there would be a witch hunt going on for decades if this had happened to the neo-cons. #I mean, we're still hearing about Johnson, Truman and FDR.

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]I don't think there's any clear evidence of voter fraud involving these machines,
AHEM. * Proof * (and it's been available for over a year.) (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)
*More Proof* (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121604Z.shtml)

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 02 2006,10:21)]This is just one of many little evils that are creeping into American elections.
Having major problems with a major election isn't a "Little Evil." #It's disenfranchising American Citizens of their Democratic and Constitutional right to vote and have it count. #As long as we continue to view this as just another small problem, it will become a right that we lose for ourselves and our children. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
All I see from that is that a rep from the company came in to work on the machines, poll workers let him, but no evidince of any kind of fraud was actually found...only supposition. Oh and he had a "heavy coat" and suggested a cheat sheet that they did not use.

No hard numbers, no data, and the write up goes on to allege more than the actual affidavit.

Sorry, but if you want to prove fraud show me real numbers that have been tampered with, not "a guy with a heavy coat took apart our computer while we let him and suggested we may want to use a cheat sheet".
I have posted numerous times on this subject. #It has been here for all to see. #Those who are used to lies, treachery and deception as a way to disenfranchise Americans of their Constitutional rights are used to this kind of chicanery as business as usual. #To Americans, this is a travestry of justice. #That neo-cons are justifying the existence of tampering in a major election is proof of the neo-con agenda and how they despise thinking Americans for questioning this.

Let's post a few other links though, for those who are interested in more information, not furthering their agenda by trying to obsfucate the issue further...

* LINK * (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_election_voting_controversies)
* LINK * (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61930-2005Jan9.html)
* AFTER 2004 What has happened?? * (http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp)

Those who have eyes will see. #Those who don't will have an agenda. #This is why there are stories about how many places are attempting to reject these electronic machines for this election. #They're a bad joke and a betrayal of our right to have our vote count. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
Hey, I am a fan of paper ballots myself, don't get me wrong.

However nothing more than circumstantial pieces put together and a whole lot of supposition on the part of people who really, really don't want to think they could have lost the election. No real hard evidince that anything was "stolen".

Not that I don't think the potential is there, I just am not convinced that it happened last election. However if you put all that is written together with a true desire in your heart to want to believe it was stolen you can convince yourself... but step back and look for real, hard provable numbers, names and evidince, such as "one this date XXXX in XXX precinct changed the vote total from XXXX to XXX". The best we have is "exit polls don't match" or "some dude messed with the computer but we don't know what he did". The rest is circumstance built around selective reading of facts trying to prove a conclusion that they came to the day the results were announced.

Hard proof is not there. And with so many thosuands of people out there looking so hard at this for so long if such evidince was available it would have come out by now. Unless the dems beleive the same people who they insist are so incompetent they get every aspect of governing wrong can somehow steal an entire election and get away with it, but get nothing else right.

n2nh

10-05-2006, 08:26 PM

It is more than obvious that you have not clicked on a single link that has been provided. As stated earlier, those who have eyes will see. Those with an agenda will make excuses.

If Americans can see how felonious behaviour is constantly defended by neo-cons (many of them attempting to pose as anything but a neo-con), then Americans will do what Americans always do. They'll kick the bums out.

If this were a murder case and the suspect had shot the gun, it was still smoking and 1,000 people had seen it, there will always be a friend of the murderer trying to convince the rest of us that he's innocent and we imagined all of it. Ah, the new wishy-washy, flip-flopping neo-con.

This thread is proof of how far backwards neo-cons will bend to excuse their own in violating every American's Constitutional rights. I, for one, can't wait to vote.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif