Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was the Vote Hacked?
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 61 of 101 (281118)
01-24-2006 12:01 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by AdminNWR
01-23-2006 11:56 PM


Re: Watch those insults
Then pretend I said "Trixie, the reason I replied the way I did was because I found your post dripping with a kind of condescension I recognize as distinctly British; the idea that America would be better if only we had the sense to do things the same way as you folks."
I mean, I could have said that, but it would have been a lot less funny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by AdminNWR, posted 01-23-2006 11:56 PM AdminNWR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Trixie, posted 01-24-2006 3:40 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 62 of 101 (281189)
01-24-2006 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
01-23-2006 10:12 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
the evidence are the counties in question....geesh!
Am I the only person on this thread that has actually looked up the location of the counties with optical scanners and has some familiarity with them?
Look at the evidence crash, not the conclusions, but the data itself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 01-23-2006 10:12 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 1:06 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 63 of 101 (281197)
01-24-2006 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by RAZD
01-23-2006 6:40 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
Razd, you haven't even looked at the data, it seems. The claim in Ohio is not that optical scanners were hacked, but the new Diebold touch-screen ones. I am not saying they were, but you guys are just jumping on a conspiracy without bothering to look at the facts at all.
Imo, there's more evidence of a 911 conspiracy than of vote tampering in Florida. The simple fact is these counties voted for Bush because they are ultra-conservative dixiecrats.
Take your blinders off and look at the data.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by RAZD, posted 01-23-2006 6:40 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 1:55 PM randman has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 64 of 101 (281236)
01-24-2006 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by randman
01-24-2006 10:54 AM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
the evidence are the counties in question....geesh!
No, you don't understand what I'm asking. Support your assertion. You know, this one:
The coorelation with optical scanner machines with voting patterns is just that older, rural counties that vote Republican but with high numbers of dixiecrats still use the older machines.
Say, with exit poll numbers.
Am I the only person on this thread that has actually looked up the location of the counties with optical scanners and has some familiarity with them?
Your "familiarity" isn't evidence, unless by "familiarity" you conducted rigorous polling of the views of persons in these counties in the last 3 years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 10:54 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 1:14 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 65 of 101 (281239)
01-24-2006 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by crashfrog
01-24-2006 1:06 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
Already supported my contention by showing the counties in question are north Florida rural counties. The fact these counties use optical scanners is a coincidence based on them being smaller, and thus less able to pay for the newer voting machines.
Crash, imo, you are avoiding the topic. Will you look at and discuss the data or not?
The study claims it is wrong to think high numbers of dixiecrats would vote for Bush. Anyone making that claim is either ignorant of the south or engaged in deliberate disinformation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 1:06 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 66 of 101 (281259)
01-24-2006 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by randman
01-24-2006 11:24 AM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
The claim in Ohio is not that optical scanners were hacked, but the new Diebold touch-screen ones. I am not saying they were, but you guys are just jumping on a conspiracy without bothering to look at the facts at all.
The facts seem pretty simple. The president of Diebold says "we're going to make sure that Bush wins Ohio." The result of the election in Ohio, using his machines, is that Bush wins Ohio. The result of the exit polling, not done by Diebold, is that Kerry won Ohio.
Computer experts determine that Diebold voting machines can be hacked by anybody who knows how to use Microsoft Access, and that this can be done untracably.
Hey, you do the math, conspiracy-man. Do you think that the most reasonable explanation is an extended series of coincidences, or that people in positions to act relaxed their principles long enough to ensure the outcome they thought was absolutely essential? Recall, if you will, that your side was dedicated to the defeat of Kerry at any cost. Does fixing an election really seem like something they wouldn't be capable of?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 11:24 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by BuckeyeChris, posted 01-24-2006 1:59 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 68 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 2:15 PM crashfrog has replied

  
BuckeyeChris
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 101 (281264)
01-24-2006 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by crashfrog
01-24-2006 1:55 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
The president of Diebold says "we're going to make sure that Bush wins Ohio."
Where is this established as a fact? Is there something in a link I missed? And where's the evidence of actual tampering? Not inferences based on comparisons to certain exit polls - actual evidence of the deed in question. I must be missing some vital information somewhere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 1:55 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 3:39 PM BuckeyeChris has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 68 of 101 (281270)
01-24-2006 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by crashfrog
01-24-2006 1:55 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
I think if the analysis for Florida is based on thinking it is unusual for dixiecrats to vote for Bush, then the analysis is clearly wacko, and so fully discredited.
Ohio is a different story, but just because the Diebold president is a Republican, a supporter of the president, and said he would work hard to help Bush win does not mean he would take that as far as to hack into his company's systems and cheat. In fact, considering that his business and personal fortune could well be compromised if he did that, I suspect he did not. Moreover, if it is as simple to hack into as you guys claim, Rove wouldn't need the president of Diebold to help him, and in fact, it would be a dumb move to do so.
The problem with this conspiracy theory, thus far on this thread, is that the underlying analysis falls short when you look at the data. I am not above thinking voter fraud is real and could have happened, as it has with other elections, such as JFK winning due to his Dad's deal with the mafia, but claiming dixiecrats would not vote for Bush in such high numbers is not a persuasive case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 1:55 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 4:00 PM randman has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 69 of 101 (281295)
01-24-2006 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by BuckeyeChris
01-24-2006 1:59 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
Where is this established as a fact?
He passed this out in a fundraising letter. I assumed it was common knowledge. The chief executive (which is probably different than the president; I'm often confused by the corporate world's terms of art) of the company is a prominent and vocal Bush supporter.
quote:
IN mid-August, Walden W. O'Dell, the chief executive of Diebold Inc., sat down at his computer to compose a letter inviting 100 wealthy and politically inclined friends to a Republican Party fund-raiser, to be held at his home in a suburb of Columbus, Ohio. "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year," wrote Mr. O'Dell, whose company is based in Canton, Ohio.
You can read more about it here.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0828-08.htm
When the CEO of the company says "I'm committed to making sure that Bush wins Ohio", and then Bush wins Ohio using his voting machines, with major discrepancies between the "official", unrecountable vote tally and the exit polls, which have never ever been this inaccurate in an election known to be legitimate, isn't there a pretty strong argument to take the guy at his word, and see how strong that committment is? I didn't see where he said "I'm committed to legally delivering the votes for Bush."
And where's the evidence of actual tampering?
Why would there be any evidence?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by BuckeyeChris, posted 01-24-2006 1:59 PM BuckeyeChris has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by BuckeyeChris, posted 01-24-2006 4:00 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 70 of 101 (281296)
01-24-2006 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by crashfrog
01-24-2006 12:01 AM


Re: Watch those insults
Crash, there was no intention to be condescending, there was no intention to even remotely suggest that the UK system was best. I posted it because Holmes had mentioned printing out votes and the voter keeping a printed copy, the problem was then how to be sure that the electronic version had actually been counted. I posted the paper-based system description as it seemed relevant to what was being discussed.
Try reading my post again without the bile-coloured glasses. I certainly had no intention of remotely suggesting
that America would be better if only we had the sense to do things the same way as you folks.
I think you've got a hold of the wrong end of the stick and now you're trying to beat me with it.
If after re-reading my post, you still think that I was condescending, well, there's nothing I can do about that.
Oh and your original post wasn't funny, just rather sad and arrogant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 12:01 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
BuckeyeChris
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 101 (281299)
01-24-2006 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by crashfrog
01-24-2006 3:39 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
I guess that shows how closely I follow politics. I live a handful of miles away from this guy here in Columbus, and I had never heard about any of this.
It would definitely cause me to raise an eyebrow if I were a Kerry supporter, but it just seems to me that if there's no actual evidence, then it doesn't seem justified to me to go beyond the eyebrow raising. There's just nothing else to go on. I certainly wouldn't slander a guy just because he's a Bush supporter, and the results don't jive with exit polls. Heck, he made a reasonable point in that same article
Blackwell said Diebold is not the only company with political connections - noting that lobbyists for voting-machine makers read like a who's who of Columbus' powerful and politically connected.
"Let me put it to you this way: If there was one person uniquely involved in the political process, that might be troubling," he said. "But there's no one that hasn't used every legitimate avenue and bit of leverage that they could legally use to get their product looked at. Believe me, if there is a political lever to be pulled, all of them have pulled it."
Is that statement incorrect, or is there some special reason I'm missing to single out Diebold? Other than, of course, the fact that those machines were used and that the exit polls paint a different picture. I'm curious though, is there a standard format when it comes to exit polling? How is it done? How is the sample selected? What time of day does it occur - all day? Who conducts it? Is it a standard "every 10th person", all day type of thing or what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 3:39 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 5:30 PM BuckeyeChris has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 72 of 101 (281300)
01-24-2006 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by randman
01-24-2006 2:15 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
Ohio is a different story, but just because the Diebold president is a Republican, a supporter of the president, and said he would work hard to help Bush win does not mean he would take that as far as to hack into his company's systems and cheat.
He didn't say he was committed to doing everything that was legal. He simply said he was committed to a Bush victory. Is it really so unreasonable to wonder about the strength of that committment? Business leaders are not typically known for being men of deep-seated ethical restraint. Usually the opposite.
What he said isn't really unreasonable by itself. That's a pretty common kind of campaign bravado. Or it would be, delivered by anybody except the one man in a position to actually deliver votes. Delivered by the guy who does the counting, it's a chilling forshadow of a potential subversion of democracy.
In fact, considering that his business and personal fortune could well be compromised if he did that, I suspect he did not.
Compromised? By who? Certainly not the administration he just handed the victory to. And his voting machines can be untracably hacked and altered. Where's the risk to this guy, as long as he keeps handing the election to people who won't ever pursue the case against him?
Moreover, if it is as simple to hack into as you guys claim, Rove wouldn't need the president of Diebold to help him, and in fact, it would be a dumb move to do so.
The help Rove needed was making sure the machines were as easy to hack into as they were. Certainly the president of the company isn't sitting there diddling bits himself. (That's a computer term, not a sex term.) But internal Diebold memos make it absolutely clear that critical security failings were ignored over the objections of engineers by their managers and their superiors.
And, yes, it is that simple to hack these machines. It's simply a matter of editing a database file, stored in completely plain text, on a flash memory card that can be inserted into any computer or even a PDA. Anybody could do it. It's not even really a hack.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 2:15 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 4:08 PM crashfrog has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 73 of 101 (281302)
01-24-2006 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by crashfrog
01-24-2006 4:00 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
President Clinton said he was doing what he could to elect Gore. Maybe he was using the FBI and CIA to spy on the GOP, and harass them, eh?
Bottom line is you have no evidence, nada. The OP deals with an analysis so faulty as to discredit the whole concept in acting like it was a surprise that dixiecrats voted for Bush.
Most likely reason the exit polls is they were cooked by liberal dems to help the dems. That's what happened in 2000 when they called Florida for Gore while people were still voting in the Panhandle, and even Ohio. Plus, the democratic party has a long history of voter fraud, dead people voting in Chicago, union/mafia muscle, etc,....so if fraud was done, most likely it was dems that did it, but you never know...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 4:00 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by crashfrog, posted 01-24-2006 5:28 PM randman has not replied
 Message 76 by nator, posted 01-24-2006 8:51 PM randman has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 74 of 101 (281320)
01-24-2006 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by randman
01-24-2006 4:08 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
President Clinton said he was doing what he could to elect Gore.
If Gore had won because Bush was suddenly arrested for counterfeiting in what later turned out to be an FBI "mistake", we might very well be having a conversation about what Clinton had done to fix the election.
Most likely reason the exit polls is they were cooked by liberal dems to help the dems. That's what happened in 2000 when they called Florida for Gore while people were still voting in the Panhandle, and even Ohio. Plus, the democratic party has a long history of voter fraud, dead people voting in Chicago, union/mafia muscle, etc,....so if fraud was done, most likely it was dems that did it, but you never know...
That's a charming load of BS you've just dropped to evade my points, but I see you don't bother to substantiate any of it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by randman, posted 01-24-2006 4:08 PM randman has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 75 of 101 (281321)
01-24-2006 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by BuckeyeChris
01-24-2006 4:00 PM


Re: maybe the vote was hacked but...
It would definitely cause me to raise an eyebrow if I were a Kerry supporter, but it just seems to me that if there's no actual evidence, then it doesn't seem justified to me to go beyond the eyebrow raising.
Can you tell me what kind of evidence you're looking for?
Is that statement incorrect, or is there some special reason I'm missing to single out Diebold? Other than, of course, the fact that those machines were used and that the exit polls paint a different picture.
I don't understand why you don't think that's enough. What does it matter that other people build voter machines? If your quote is supposed to be some kind of rebuttal, I don't see how it even comes close to addressing the point. It's a complete non sequiter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by BuckeyeChris, posted 01-24-2006 4:00 PM BuckeyeChris 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