Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,893 Year: 4,150/9,624 Month: 1,021/974 Week: 348/286 Day: 4/65 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was the Vote Hacked?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1433 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 16 of 101 (157895)
11-10-2004 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Silent H
11-10-2004 5:48 AM


fine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Silent H, posted 11-10-2004 5:48 AM Silent H has not replied

  
DC85
Member
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 17 of 101 (158968)
11-12-2004 11:31 PM


The exit polls in many of the states won by Bush showed Kerry winning by a landslide. How can they all be this wrong? According to the polls Kerry was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada and Colorado some how bush ended up winning all of these.... The exit polls in other states worked why not these?
I smell foul play.... I suspect these Computers and scanners where rigged... This just doesn't make sense... I am going to look for more information... Does anyone else have information or ideas on this? Am I just crazy?

My site The Atheist Bible
My New Debate Fourms!

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 11-12-2004 11:38 PM DC85 has not replied
 Message 19 by crashfrog, posted 11-12-2004 11:48 PM DC85 has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1372 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 18 of 101 (158970)
11-12-2004 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by DC85
11-12-2004 11:31 PM


you're crazy.
i've spoken with enough die hard bush fans that it makes we want to vomit. bush owns the religious conservative middle-class base. i called this election for bush weeks before nov 2nd.
i suspect there was some tampering -- there always is. but enough to influence the election? i don't know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by DC85, posted 11-12-2004 11:31 PM DC85 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1495 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 19 of 101 (158972)
11-12-2004 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by DC85
11-12-2004 11:31 PM


There are, apparently, some irregularities stemming from the optical scan voting machines, irreularities that appear to have favored Bush.
On the other hand, there's any number of reasons why the exit polls may not have been accurate; in no case, from what I've read, have the voting results been drastically out of the confidence interval of the polls. As close as this election was, any discrepancies between the polls and the votes could easily be due to sampling errors.
Not to mention there's an inherent response bias in exit polling - you don't have to talk to an exit poller if you don't want to. It's reasonable to suggest that a Kerry voter might have been excited enough about their vote to agree to answer questions about it, whereas a Bush voter might not have been.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by DC85, posted 11-12-2004 11:31 PM DC85 has not replied

  
DC85
Member
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 20 of 101 (158974)
11-12-2004 11:53 PM


I just found some info that says this was predicted last year!
4_The_2004_Election_Has_Already_Been_Rigged.htm 9-2-03
Also here is some recent information
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm
This message has been edited by DC85, 11-12-2004 11:54 PM

My site The Atheist Bible
My New Debate Fourms!

  
DC85
Member
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 21 of 101 (161306)
11-18-2004 10:46 PM



Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Silent H, posted 11-19-2004 4:34 AM DC85 has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1495 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 22 of 101 (161328)
11-18-2004 11:21 PM


I'd like to see a chart of all the election irregularities we've seen so far, and then I'd like to see which candidate the erroneous results favored. If both candidates come out roughly even then it's just human incompetence.
But, all I've seen so far are irregularities that overwhelmingly favor Bush. The only explanation for that would be fraud.

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 23 of 101 (161392)
11-19-2004 4:34 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by DC85
11-18-2004 10:46 PM


If this all hangs on Florida then I am not so surprised. The republicans did a massive campaign to convince specifically democratic voters in Florida to vote for Bush. They did this by campaigning to Jewish voters, stating that if they loved Israel they had to vote for Bush.
They even got Ed Koch to go down there and say toe their line. Ah yes, if you love America, you must vote for Sharon.
That of course does not mean this is the reason for the dramatic turnaround in dem counties, but it certainly is a possibility.
Since the discrepency is with optical scan machines, aren't the paper ballots available for review at some point in time? It seems that such a review will pretty quickly answer the question.
Of course there is stuff outside of Fla, which is disturbing and clearly a problem, it just hasn't been determined if it was widespread enough to have made a difference (or indicates conspiracy).
In any case I wish, more than anything else, the constant question of this would push people to insist on revamping the entire system for ease of doublechecking, and transparency in operation.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by DC85, posted 11-18-2004 10:46 PM DC85 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by DC85, posted 11-20-2004 11:52 PM Silent H has not replied

  
DC85
Member
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 24 of 101 (161972)
11-20-2004 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Silent H
11-19-2004 4:34 AM


quote:
Since the discrepency is with optical scan machines, aren't the paper ballots available for review at some point in time?
Someone needs to order a hand recount before it can be done...
quote:
Of course there is stuff outside of Fla, which is disturbing and clearly a problem, it just hasn't been determined if it was widespread enough to have made a difference (or indicates conspiracy).
Even if all of this fraud wasn't enough to effect the election... What is stopping this from becoming more widespread by 2008?
I fear America will lose its democracy even more if it already hasn’t
Something NEEDS to be done

My site The Atheist Bible
My New Debate Fourms!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Silent H, posted 11-19-2004 4:34 AM Silent H has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 101 (280631)
01-22-2006 3:15 AM


diebold voting machines
The Washington Post has a new article about how easy it is to hack into Diebold voting machines.
It's chilling!

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3734 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 26 of 101 (280753)
01-22-2006 3:53 PM


UK style
here in the UK, we wander to the polling station, give our name and address and this is found on the list of electors and scored out. We're then handed a ballot paper which is officially stamped in front of us and we wander into a small plywood booth.
Using the pencil provided on a length of string, we mark a "X" in the box we want, then fold the ballot paper and toddle out to the ballot box. We post our folded ballot paper into the sealed box.
After the polls close, all boxes are taken to a central counting place, the seals are broken, the votes emptied out, then they are counted by hand. Any candidate can demand a recount if the final figures are close.
Sounds primitive, but it seems to work and we haven't had scandals of vote rigging etc. Maybe that's the way to go.

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Coragyps, posted 01-22-2006 4:12 PM Trixie has not replied
 Message 28 by Minnemooseus, posted 01-22-2006 4:20 PM Trixie has not replied
 Message 29 by crashfrog, posted 01-22-2006 4:26 PM Trixie has replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 27 of 101 (280757)
01-22-2006 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Trixie
01-22-2006 3:53 PM


Re: UK style
We did exactly that here in desert Texas until a few years back. Heck, it used to be fun to go down to the courthouse and watch them post the results of each box as it got counted.
"For a list of ways in which progress has failed to improve the quality of life, please press 'seven' followed by the pound key now."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Trixie, posted 01-22-2006 3:53 PM Trixie has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3945
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 28 of 101 (280759)
01-22-2006 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Trixie
01-22-2006 3:53 PM


Going off-topic a bit, but...
here in the UK, we wander to the polling station, give our name and address and this is found on the list of electors and scored out.
In the U.S., we wander to the polling station and only give our name, which is then located on the list of registered voter. We then sign off on that list. My understanding, and I did once work as an election judge at a little local election, is that election judges can not legally ask for ID to document that you are who you say you are. That is, if you are previously registered. Seemingly someone else could show up and vote as you. Perhaps, if present, a non-election judge polling monitor could challenge your validity as a voter (re: address or ID), but that's another can of worms.
Minnesota has same day voter registration. You can show up at the polling place, register, and then vote. To register you must supply an address, documentation that that address is true, and ID to show you are who you say you are.
Moose

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Trixie, posted 01-22-2006 3:53 PM Trixie has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1495 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 29 of 101 (280760)
01-22-2006 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Trixie
01-22-2006 3:53 PM


Re: UK style
here in the UK
Your country is the geographic size of Wisconsin, one of our states. Moreover, if I understand your political system correctly, you elect reigonal MP's, and then the MP's elect a Prime Minister.
We have 50 states, and a nationwide vote for the Presidency where every person's vote has to be counted. (And then EC votes apportioned, but that's largely a mathematical formality.) And this all has to happen in time for the 11 o'clock news. I'm so pleased that your system works so well for your little island. You may find that it doesn't scale well. We sure did.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Trixie, posted 01-22-2006 3:53 PM Trixie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 01-22-2006 5:06 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 31 by Silent H, posted 01-22-2006 5:13 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 33 by cavediver, posted 01-22-2006 7:31 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 34 by bobbins, posted 01-22-2006 9:49 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 54 by Trixie, posted 01-23-2006 4:27 PM crashfrog has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1433 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 30 of 101 (280776)
01-22-2006 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by crashfrog
01-22-2006 4:26 PM


Re: UK style
There is no reason to have the vote counted that quickly, in fact the original counts were carried by horse-back and took weeks to get compiled.
The Bush 2000 rush to count completion was a total fallacy from the get-go, only created to build a false sense of urgency when the only requirement is that the results be completed in time for the Electoral College to meet (if the state wants their votes counted ...).
There is no reason a paper system cannot work better that what we currently have and still meet the needs of the nation.
The bigger problem is how to ensure that you vote was counted and that there are no false votes in the system, regardless of the method used.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by crashfrog, posted 01-22-2006 4:26 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024