Has anyone seen this?

[Tim4319]

I am sorry if this is a dupe. I was pointed in the direction of this article today and thought I would share it. Again, I am not sure if this had been discussed yet or not. So, I apologize if this is a duplicate.

Apparently, there is more concrete evidence that the machines (that we all know) were hacked to manipulate the election data.


<<snip>>
In Ohio, Bush won by only 118,775 votes out of more than 5.6 million cast. Honest election advocates contend that O’Dell’s statement to hand Ohio’s vote to Bush still stands as a clear indictment of an apparently successful effort to steal the White House.

Some of the GAO’s findings are:
1. Some electronic voting machines “did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected.” In short, the machines; provided a way to manipulate the outcome of the election. In Ohio, more than 800,000 votes were cast on electronic voting machines, some registered seven times Bush’s official margin of victory.

2: the report further stated that: “it was possible to alter the files that define how a ballot looks and works, so that the votes for one candidate could be recorded for a different candidate.” Very many sworn statements and affidavits claim that did happen in Ohio in 2004.

Next, the report says, “Vendors installed uncertified versions of voting system software at the local level.” The GAO found that falsifying election results without leaving evidence of doing so by using altered memory cards could easily be done.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00165.htm

Tim

[applegrove]

1. Speculation. Doesn't Dem wins that Tuesday give you pause for

thought?

[Spiffarino]

5. Yes. It makes me wonder...

...if the MOV was closer than it should have been.

Republicans control the machines. They control all three branches of government. They manipulated intelligence to get their little war in Iraq so tell me, if it's easy to manipulate election results, do you believe that they wouldn't?

[applegrove]

12. That is why it is speculation. Just because they could does not mean

that they did. There are reasons for forward and backward linkages in their machines. Bill Gates puts it in all his code.

So - just because these nuts or liars does not mean that they lie to the hilt in every possible instant.

Again - you are speculating.

[Spiffarino]

19. Nice try. n/t

[Land Shark]

6. Go to the casino applegrove, if you never let 'em win, No One will play

Yeah I thought about for two seconds, and came up with the subject line of this post.

This year's elections, while encouraging, change nothing, except in Va. Hopefully there is no widespread rigging, but that would be somewhat of a departure from our history as a democracy. In any case, this 2005 election doesn't disprove anything.

There were lots of reports of switched votes in VA and in fact though Kaine had margin to overcome it, the AG is around 400 votes behind statewide heading into a recount, and vote switching was all over the VA TV/reports in the AG's race too. Are you saying the coast is clear applegrove and there are no issues here?

You can only steal a reasonably close election. Or else it's too obvious and the whole CONfidence game crumbles. (i.e. "voter confidence").

On Edit: Wondering if I need to mention that the casino always wins, in the End.

GODDAMMIT people, only an idiot would try to win all the time, no one will play that game!!! So, an occasional Dem party is NOT, repeat NOT a disproof of ANYTHING!! :mad:

[applegrove]

13. But there is no proof. So until there is actual smoking gun proof - you

are speculating. I don't go to the casino. I went once with 2 twenties. I went through the first twenty and said to myself - "how stupid is this - that wasn't fun - It would be more fun to go to a corner store and buy a pop with a twenty and then get all that change". So I changed my last $20 back to cash and went home.

[Land Shark]

16. Exactly, so the casino, to fleece you, needed to let you win a bit more

but didn't.

Applegrove, you don't know what you are talking about. A bunch of us are in litigation, right now, with evidence. You come out of the blue and say there's no "smoking gun"

you don't even know what a smoking gun IS, in this context.

[applegrove]

18. I'm all for going to court when there is evidence of dirty tricks. There

are many examples of that in Florida & ohio. And because there is proof in some instances (too few machines, intimidation, etc.) those cases will make it beyond the first round.

[Land Shark]

21. You also go to court when denied evidence in the first place

Step one: Person sets up very high privacy fence. Step two: people seen going in, but never seen leaving. reported missing.

I guess we are STUCK EH? No smoking gun.

How about going to court and getting a search warrant?

The answer, applegrove, is to move forward with the suspicion still open, not to go back to sleep on the strength of a "no smoking gun here" conclusion.

[applegrove]

23. I'm against people who claim that it is a done deal. That diebold is

not speculation. It is. That is what it is. That is the truth.

[Spiffarino]

25. Yep. It's the same reason Scooter is under indictment.

Libby not only lied, he withheld testimony and evidence. Fitz couldn't get anywhere because Libby - and probably lots of others - stonewalled him. That's why perjury is a crime...it restricts the prosecutor's ability - and by association, the people's - to get at the truth.

If there is nothing to it, the evidence should bear it out. There is no harm in looking. However, much harm will come if they can't investigate. If the truth isn't allowed to come out - whatever turns up - the citizens will be left to wonder why they should even bother voting.

[applegrove]

27. I agree the whole election system should be studied. And transparency laws

put into place. I agree with all that. Just not people who characterize massive diebold vote stealing as anything more than speculation.

I cannot wait for Dems to win in 2006 so they can look into the whole transparency issue with some teeth.

I am heartened too that there were no exit polls. Cause those suckers seem to work only to keep people from voting. When the election is called at 2PM for the Dems - how many harried mothers looking for a babysitter and not being able to really afford one - how many of them stay home. A whole lot!

[skipos]

9. It is interesting is that Dems did better in 05 than most polls

predicted but most people around don't even acknowledge it. It probably doesn't jive too well with some peoples beliefs that we only lose elections because of Diebold.

[Land Shark]

10. Dems regularly should do a bit better than polls because of the

cell phone voters being heavily dem, and people on fixed incomes and in collections with the new robo-dialing systems for collectors avoiding their phones.

A door to door poll would confirm this, though the one Zogby pre-election cell phone poll did. Normally pollsters can't call cell phones as I understand it because it shifts a cost to the voter, thus it is considered unprofessional or unethical or at least distorting to make people pay something to have their political opinion measured.

[skipos]

11. I have heard the cell phone theory before

but I don't see any reason to put a lot of stock in it. Thats just my opinion though. It seems like most polls I have seen are *generally* pretty accurate for most elections, pre and post cell phones. There are always bad calls for whatever reason. Personally, I think it is best too look at many different companies to get a general idea, and ignore the outliers. Anyone who did that for the popular vote in 04 would have found the predictions to be pretty accurate. Most of them predicted Bush winning by a little bit.

[BeFree]

28. Your poll info is wrong

"Most of them predicted * winning by a little bit."

The pre-election polls might have had a majority of one with such a prediction, but given the high numbers of undecideds and the history of where undecideds vote (the challenger) and, given the exit-polls showing the majority of new voters going Kerry, your info is wrong.

I don't know where you are in understanding the 2004 election but if all you have is 'most' then I'd say you've a whole lot more to read up on before you make such ill-informed statements, eh?

[skipos]

29. You can ease up on the condescension a bit, eh?

Remember we are on the same side here.

Polls are far from consistently accurate, and I am sure we will have plenty of "Dewey defeats Truman" results in the future.

Before the 2005 election, right when polls had Kaine inching above Kilgore, I read an analysis of how polls have always predicted the VA Rep candidate to be much lower (6% I think) than the actual results. That's what Kilgore was using to claim an early victory. Alas, it wasn't so. Dems kicked ass in '05, and the polls were pretty good in predicting that.

All in all, it doesn't change much for me. I am getting ready to start working on '06 and I'll support any election reforms that I hear about.

[BeFree]

30. Good for you

Getting the facts straight is a start. Knowing that nearly all indicators showed a Kerry win in 2004 is a good basis for further progress. Let's stick with that, shall we?

What kind of reforms have you heard about? Where do you think we should go from here, now that we've experienced several stolen elections?

[applegrove]

14. Stats! You can make of them what you want. It is still speculation.

Do you really think that Repukes don't have cell phones?

[applegrove]

15. Yes - in the Dem or Repuke riding offices they have a list of the people

in the home and how many are voting which way.

[Land Shark]

17. Of course I'm not saying that, i'm saying there's up to a 60/40 dem

advantage in the population, fully 40 or more out of 100 with cell phone ONLY will vote R but the numbers powerfully favor D over time

[applegrove]

24. And where do you put the 35% who do not bother to vote?

[skipos]

2. "Possible to alter" doesn't

sound like "concrete proof" to most people. The biggest problem we have getting the U.S. to have paper trail elections and/or proving that any election was fraudulent, is evidence that convinces Joe Average. We need to remember about 90% of Americans are confident that their vote is counted.

[Land Shark]

7. "possible to alter" PLUS "all electronic evidence strictly trade secret"

[NanceGreggs]

3. It's been said before ...

... on this site, and others. But I'll say it again.

Election/vote tampering is more than illegal. It is treason. Let's have the laws reflect that status, and deal with the bastards accordingly when they're caught.

That doesn't just mean Diebold. How many people who did 'their bit' during the last two presidential elections, such as dumping registration forms in the garbage if they were for a Democrat, would take the risk if they were facing years in prison, or a possible death penalty?

Overthrowing the will of the people in an election is TREASON against your fellow citizens.

[Land Shark]

8. Not to mention a crime against democracy (i.e. govt by the people, for...)

[masmdu]

4. test

This is only a TEST!!!!!!! ta da!

[Spiffarino]

20. Interesting how people keep trying to derail this thread

I'm just sayin'...

[Land Shark]

22. Yes, it's very frustrating. See my post number 21 above, trying to move

forward with an investigation, that applegrove and others nonsensically try to derail.

it's also ok to have what amounts to probable cause to file a lawsuit and develop the detailed evidence in the course of the suit

[Carolab]

26. Executable programs on the memory cards.

This is what Bev's research in Florida proved could be/was done to switch votes.

This is how votes can be switched with optiscan machines--memory cards store the votes in the scanners.