Let the Election Fraud Begin! - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ratbastid · 10-25-2006, 11:27 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...301178_pf.html

Quote:

Some Voting Machines Chop Off Candidates' Names
Computer Glitch Affects Voters in 3 Jurisdictions; Error Cannot Be Fixed by Nov. 7

By Leef Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 24, 2006; B04

U.S. Senate candidate James Webb's last name has been cut off on part of the electronic ballot used by voters in Alexandria, Falls Church and Charlottesville because of a computer glitch that also affects other candidates with long names, city officials said yesterday.

Although the problem creates some voter confusion, it will not cause votes to be cast incorrectly, election officials emphasized. The error shows up only on the summary page, where voters are asked to review their selections before hitting the button to cast their votes. Webb's full name appears on the page where voters choose for whom to vote.

Election officials attribute the mistake to an increase in the type size on the ballot. Although the larger type is easier to read, it also unintentionally shortens the longer names on the summary page of the ballot.

Thus, Democratic candidate Webb will appear with his first name and nickname only -- or "James H. 'Jim' " -- on summary pages in Alexandria, Falls Church and Charlottesville, the only jurisdictions in Virginia that use balloting machines manufactured by Hart InterCivic of Austin.

"We're not happy about it," Webb spokeswoman Kristian Denny Todd said last night, adding that the campaign learned about the problem a week ago and has since been in touch with state election officials. "I don't think it can be remedied by Election Day. Obviously, that's a concern."

Every candidate on Alexandria's summary page has been affected in some way by the glitch. Even if candidates' full names appear, as is the case with Webb's Republican opponent, incumbent Sen. George F. Allen, their party affiliations have been cut off.

Jean Jensen, secretary of the Virginia State Board of Elections, who said yesterday she only recently became aware of the problem, pledged to have it fixed by the 2007 statewide elections.

"You better believe it," Jensen said. "If I have to personally get on a plane and bring Hart InterCivic people here myself, it'll be corrected."

Absentee voters casting ballots in advance of the Nov. 7 election first noticed the problem. Election officials have been forced to post signs in voting booths and instruct poll workers to explain why some longer names appear cut-off.

Election officials in Alexandria said they have been vexed by the problem since they purchased the voting machines in 2003. Although the problem has raised eyebrows among confused voters, elections officials said they are confident that the trouble has not led voters to cast ballots incorrectly.

"This is not the kind of problem that has either shaken our confidence in the system overall or that of the vote," said Alexandria Registrar Tom Parkins. "There have been far worse problems around the country."

James T. "Jim" Hurysz, an independent candidate who's running to unseat incumbent Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), sees it somewhat differently. His name has been shortened on the summary page to "James T. 'Jim.' "

Moran is the one lucky James in Alexandria whose last name made the summary page, although without the "Jr."

"That situation is not acceptable," Hurysz said. "There's enough voter confusion as it is."

Jensen said Hart InterCivic has created an upgrade for their firmware and recently applied for state certification to apply the fix. That process, she said, can be time-consuming because of security measures in place .

Hart InterCivic officials yesterday said they hoped to correct the problem by next fall.

"The newer voting systems will not be certified and installed before the Nov. 7 election," said company Vice President Phillip Braithwaite. Hart InterCivic "does intend to install the newer system version before the next major election in 2007, assuming certification from the commonwealth."

In the meantime, Jensen said, the three affected jurisdictions have begun educating voters to prevent confusion on Election Day and will place notices in each of the polling booths that explain the summary page problem.

"We have a very conspicuous posting in the booths and if [voters] say, 'Hey I don't like what I'm seeing on the summary page,' we can refer them to the chart," Parkins said.

Three years ago, Alexandria purchased about 225 Hart InterCivic machines for $750,000. "We're not comfortable with [this problem] in the long term . . . but we have every reason to expect it will be rectified before the next election," Parkins said.

Sheri Iachetta, general registrar for Charlottesville, said the city purchased 72 machines in 2002. Election officials have had trouble displaying long names ever since.

"We do have people complain and say they don't get it," Iachetta said. "I completely understand what they're saying, but it's not something I can control. We do a pretty good proactive job getting the word out. . . . We've tried to let the voters know that their vote will count even if they can't see the entire name on the summary page."
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

Nice. So no big deal: the Democrat and one Independant only look practically identical on the confirmation screen... Oh, and they promise to have this all sorted out by next year's elections.

Your thoughts on this? Is this the Palm Beach Butterfly Ballot all over again? Or is this no big deal? Do you expect voting difficulties like those seen in the past? Or were those seen in the past no big deal either?

Ustwo · 10-25-2006, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Your thoughts on this? Is this the Palm Beach Butterfly Ballot all over again?

You mean the ballot designed by a democrat in a democrat controlled county that was somehow rigged to be bad for the democrats?

Quote:

Or is this no big deal? Do you expect voting difficulties like those seen in the past? Or were those seen in the past no big deal either?

Its human error, when I want to see voter fraud I'll look in one of the Chicago voting locations after the polls close. This is just odd hysteria.

Willravel · 10-25-2006, 11:51 AM

Isn't this how Robin Williams was elected in Man of the Year?

If you can't build a voting machine that works, then go with the normal way of voting. I see no sense in putting a machine that doesn't work into play.

Bill O'Rights · 10-25-2006, 11:59 AM

Fraud?
Probably not. Although a suspicious eye should certainly be raised.

It is, however, a little inexcusable that the error was not noticed until absentee voters brought it to the attention of election officials. Did no one bother to check beforehand? Somebody's napping.

Ustwo · 10-25-2006, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights

Somebody's napping.

You mean there in incompetence in government?

I'm surprised the votes get counted period.

NCB · 10-25-2006, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Isn't this how Robin Williams was elected in Man of the Year? .

No, that was Eddie Murphy in the movie where he played a congressman. Good stuff

Sun Tzu · 10-25-2006, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

If you can't build a voting machine that works, then go with the normal way of voting. I see no sense in putting a machine that doesn't work into play.

Amen. Assemble a counting committee with representatives from each party to oversee it. The only technology that would be useful is the satellite that will feed the monitoring of the count that should be televised to any American wanting to watch.

NCB · 10-25-2006, 01:37 PM

I believe that we need to incorporate technology into our voting system. We can do that and have a verifiable paper trail. That said, liberals will continue to kick themselves in the balls and lose if they think they have lost elections because of those Wascally Wepublicans.

roachboy · 10-25-2006, 02:18 PM

huh.
i would have thought that even republicans would be concerned about voter fraud. i dont understand the cavalier attitude toward it on the part of the usual far right suspects above...o wait, i do: voter fraud is a problem when and only when it affects republican candidates. otherwise, its all paranoia and such.
well, i am sure glad i worked that one out.
and here i thought the rules of a democracy were different from that: you know, that all votes mattered.
i was obviously misinformed: the rule is that only republican votes really matter.
it's that "all animals are equal: but some are more equal than others" logic....

well thanks lads: if i hadn't figured out the real rules from reading your posts, i could easily have confused them with glib horseshit.
good thing that didn't happen.

feelgood · 10-25-2006, 02:47 PM

Well holy fuck, if you can't figure out that the machine ask you to confirm your vote and you dont know who the hell "Maria Cantw[cut off]" is after you voted for "Maria Cantwell ", then by gods, you shouldn't be voting.

NCB · 10-25-2006, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by feelgood

Well holy fuck, if you can't figure out that the machine ask you to confirm your vote and you dont know who the hell "Maria Cantw[cut off]" is after you voted for "Maria Cantwell ", then by gods, you shouldn't be voting.

I think youre being too cavalier about this. Dead people often have a hard time distinguishing between two closely spelled words.

Sun Tzu · 10-25-2006, 06:38 PM

Machines are made by people; peple have agendas. IMO this is one area that old fashioned paper (not chads) under total public monitoring (not counted by private companies) which also has potentional for agendas to be set forth.
No assumptions made until all votes are in and counted.

ratbastid · 10-25-2006, 06:39 PM

I work every day building user interfaces. To be perfectly blunt, it's not that hard. This sort of blunder is either gross incompetence, or highly suspicious voter manipulation.

Voting machines are made by? Companies. Usually big-business style companies. Who's the big business buddy? Republicans. Who continually gets the short-end of "accidents" with voting machines? Democrats. Can you really ignore the coincidences here?

NCB · 10-25-2006, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

I work every day building user interfaces. To be perfectly blunt, it's not that hard. This sort of blunder is either gross incompetence, or highly suspicious voter manipulation.

Voting machines are made by? Companies. Usually big-business style companies. Who's the big business buddy? Republicans. Who continually gets the short-end of "accidents" with voting machines? Democrats. Can you really ignore the coincidences here?

Of this rampant election fraud you seem to be so well versed about, have any of these "accidents" ever negatively affected a Republican?

Sun Tzu · 10-25-2006, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Of this rampant election fraud you seem to be so well versed about, have any of these "accidents" ever negatively affected a Republican?

I dont know, good question. Probably. It definately had positive effects in 2000.

dc_dux · 10-25-2006, 07:57 PM

One of the outcomes of the 2000 controversies was the enactment of the Help America Vote Act in 2002 with strong bi-partisan support.

Among its provisions are requirements that states must have a centralized voter registraiton database and Voting systems that produce a permanent paper record with an audit capacity that can be manually audited.

The effective date was 1/1/06 so this will be the first election where these new standards are tested. I suspect we will see more challenges then ever before from whatever candidate(s) loses close elections.

http://www.fec.gov/hava/hava.htm

an addendum for NCB

In this current session of Congress, a Repub senator introduced a bill to amend HAVA called the Voter Protection Act of 2005. Among its provisions was the "removal of registrants from voting rolls for failure to vote"

One of those wacky bills that had only 4 other Repub co-sponsors and died a quiet death.....even other Repubs didnt want to take away a fundamental right, even if you chose not to exercise that right (for whatever reason).

NCB · 10-26-2006, 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

I dont know, good question. Probably. It definately had positive effects in 2000.

I thought the Diebold excuse was for the 2004 election and that daddy and brother convinced the supreme court for GWB to win in 2000. Hard to keep up with all these excuses......

samcol · 10-26-2006, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

I thought the Diebold excuse was for the 2004 election and that daddy and brother convinced the supreme court for GWB to win in 2000. Hard to keep up with all these excuses......

Hey, Diebold's chief executive has stated he's "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." Shouldn't the CEO of a company that is supposed to hold honor, ethics, and integrity highly, not support the campaign's of political parties? Why can't a company who has ATM machines that run perfectly not get voting machines to work perfectly?

ratbastid · 10-26-2006, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Of this rampant election fraud you seem to be so well versed about, have any of these "accidents" ever negatively affected a Republican?

Not that I know of. Of the reports I've heard, every single one has hurt the Democrat. Actually, now that I think of it, this post of yours I've quoted here is the first time I've heard anyone even suggest that it might be negative for Republican candidates too. It seems to be common knowledge that the Dems are the ones most badly affected by it.

NCB · 10-26-2006, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Not that I know of. Of the reports I've heard, every single one has hurt the Democrat. Actually, now that I think of it, this post of yours I've quoted here is the first time I've heard anyone even suggest that it might be negative for Republican candidates too. It seems to be common knowledge that the Dems are the ones most badly affected by it.

Naturally

ratbastid · 10-26-2006, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Naturally

Okay, look, I know it's not your default mode, but do try to add something to the discussion.

Have YOU heard of any electoral gitches that harmed Republicans? I'm actually interested in this.

NCB · 10-26-2006, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Okay, look, I know it's not your default mode, but do try to add something to the discussion.

Have YOU heard of any electoral gitches that harmed Republicans? I'm actually interested in this.

Frankly, I dont buy into conspiracy theories, which probably correlates with my lack of black helicopter sightings around my house. I think the problem your side is having is not Kathy Harris, The Supreme Court, Diebold, or Halliburton, its your message. At some point you have to claim responsibility for your own failures and not blame them on this, that, or the other. Its a fairly simple concept, but its one that your people need to understand.

That said, have there been polling station issues? Of course there have been and its nothing new. There have always been sheenanigans at the polling booth pulled by both parties. But to point to this as the sole reason for your partys defeats is myopic

ratbastid · 10-26-2006, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

That said, have there been polling station issues? Of course there have been and its nothing new. There have always been sheenanigans at the polling booth pulled by both parties. But to point to this as the sole reason for your partys defeats is myopic

But who's doing that? You're putting words in the mouth of the liberals on this thread and elsewhere. I never said that electoral fraud was the only reason the republicans won in 2000 and 2004. I wish Kerry could have pulled the stick out of his ass for just a minute and started talking and behaving even slightly telegenically, for instance. And the Republicans definitely whomped the Dems at staying on message. But there's no denying that electoral "accidents" were a contributing factor, and, given how close the actual voting was, may well have been the final straw that tipped the result.

I ask again: can you point to an instance of electoral screwup since (and including) the 2000 election that didn't favor the Republican? I can't, but maybe you can.

If not, then black helicopters or no, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to connect the dots.

Yakk · 10-26-2006, 08:56 AM

How to catch and stop some election fraud:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaEECHjWptU

Video the vote. Bring cameras. Record what happens. Find out how to complain about problems, and do it ASAP.

How to hack the vote:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/evoting.ars

A description of how to change the results of the next US election nearly untraceably.

NCB · 10-26-2006, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

I ask again: can you point to an instance of electoral screwup since (and including) the 2000 election that didn't favor the Republican? I can't, but maybe you can..

Yes, the John Thune vs. Tim Johnson race. The viilage of Pine Ridge on a SD Indian reservation indicated that there were changed ballots. That county was the last to report and ultimately put Johnson over the top by about 500 votes. Thune, being the anti-liberal, decided not to put the state through a bitter recount and conceded the race. Two years later, he defeated Daschle

Yakk · 10-26-2006, 09:32 AM

Ah, here is some details how someone using the most popular Electronic Submission voting machine in the USA can hack it:

Quote:

* The Ohio Compuware report describes how to turn a voter card into a supervisor card, which can then be used to cast multiple votes, delete votes, or shut down the machine, using a PDA with a smartcard attachment.
* In order to use a supervisor card to access the AccuVote, you must first enter a four-digit PIN. In version of the machine that was in use as late as 2003, the exact same supervisor PIN was hard-coded into every single AccuVote TS shipped nationwide. That PIN was 1111. (I am not making this up.) This is still the default PIN for these machines, although the county can change it on a machine-by-machine basis if they have the workers and the time.
* All of the AccuVotes have the same lock securing the PCMCIA slot that contains the Flash card with all the votes on it. When I say the "same" lock, I mean the exact same key opens all of the machines. But even if you don't have one of the tens of thousands of copies of this key that are floating around, the lock can be picked by an amateur in under 10 seconds. The Princeton video has a nice demo of this. Once you have access to the PCMCIA slot, you can do all kinds of great stuff, like upload vote-stealing software (a simple reboot will cause the machine to load software from whatever you've put in the PCMCIA slot), crash the system, delete all the votes on the machine, etc.
* Some localities have taken to securing the PCMCIA slot with security tape or plastic ties. The idea here is that a cut tie or torn tape will invalidate the results of that machine, because poll workers can't guarantee that it wasn't compromised. There are two things wrong with this scheme:
1. If you want to invalidate all the results stored in machines in a precinct that favors your opponent, just cut the tape or the ties on those machines. If the election supervisor sticks to the rules, then he or she will be forced to throw out all of those votes.
2. According to author, security researcher, and Maryland election judge Avi Rubin, one would almost have to have a CIA background to be able to tell if the security tape applied to the AccuVotes in the Maryland primary had been removed and reapplied.

Now, naively, that only gives you the ability to swing a single machine. And if you recorded 10,000 votes on that machine, someone might notice.

Really, why think small scale? Get a copy of the Princeston virus:

Quote:

Ed Felten's team at Princeton was able to quickly upload a vote-stealing Trojan to the AccuVote via the PCMCIA slot in less time than it would take many people to complete an electronic ballot. Furthermore, they also created a viral version of the Trojan that could infect any card inserted into the PCMCIA slot with vote-stealing software that would then infect any machine into which the tainted card was inserted. The newly infected machines would in turn infect other cards, which would infect other machines, and so on. In this way, the vote stealing "Princeton virus" could travel across an entire precinct or county, given enough time.

Install a Princeton virus, and you can easily turn an entire voting location's machines into voting for whatever candidate you want.

Every smart card that is used gets infected with the Princeton virus, which infects every machine at the location.

If that seems like too much work (I mean, you only get to swing the election by a few thousand votes!), you could try hacking the vote counting machine:

Quote:

Many GEMS servers are connected to a modem bank, so that the accumulators can dial in over the phone lines and upload votes. One team of security consultants hired by the state of Maryland found the GEMS bank by wardialing, discovered that it was running an unpatched version of Windows, cracked the server, and stole the mock election. This great Daily Show segment, in which one of the team members describes the attack, states that they did this in under five minutes.

But why hasn't this happened?

I did explain that this is nearly impossible to detect. Here is a less credible report on some evidence if it actually happening -- not proof, because there is no way to provably detect this kind of intrusion:

Quote:

Evidence from election official declarations and discovery documents obtained in litigation over a recent election using Diebold machines reveals that:

* Illegal and uncertified Lexar Jump Drive software was loaded onto the Diebold GEMS central tabulator, enabling secretive data transfer on small USB "key chain" memory devices. This blocked election transparency and raises questions as to whether hidden vote manipulation may have taken place.
* Other uncertified software of various kinds was loaded onto the system and, according to the event logs examined, was used. This opened the door for hand-editing of both vote totals and the reporting of election results.
* Evidence of actual attempts to manipulate election reporting results exists. The evidence available wouldn't record successful manipulation, only attempted manipulation, due to software failure. The logs show repeated failed attempts to use an HTML editor.
* According to Shelby County elections officials, they opened the central vote totals repository to widespread network connections. The dispersed nature of access to the central tabulator would prevent finding the perpetrators, even if documentation of manipulation could be achieved—a difficult feat, since the type of hacking enabled by the GEMS program tends to erase evidence.
In an on-site inspection of the network connections conducted by Jim March, elections department lead computer operator Dennis Boyce pointed to a location on a network interconnection plug panel where the Diebold-supplied GEMS central tabulator is plugged in. No extra security such as a router or firewall was present at the interconnection. This appears to open up access by anybody in county government to the central tabulator.
* At the same on-site inspection, the Diebold-supplied GEMS backup central tabulator had more uncertified software than could be quickly documented—but observers did spot Symantec's PC Anywhere utility. This program would allow opening the machine to outside remote control—the PC Anywhere program allows a remote computer across a dial-up or networked connection to see the screen of the "zombied" computer and operate its keyboard and mouse. To call this a security breach is an understatement.
* At the primary GEMS central tabulator station, all of Microsoft Office 2000 Professional application suite was loaded and working. According to Windows, MS-Access was a frequently used program, the only component of the overall MS-Office suite that was so identified.

Anyone want to make the state of Ohio have a huge happy face in the election results?

ratbastid · 10-26-2006, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Yes, the John Thune vs. Tim Johnson race. The viilage of Pine Ridge on a SD Indian reservation indicated that there were changed ballots. That county was the last to report and ultimately put Johnson over the top by about 500 votes. Thune, being the anti-liberal, decided not to put the state through a bitter recount and conceded the race. Two years later, he defeated Daschle

Interesting. I did some googling on this, not having heard of it before. Googling '"John thune" "tim johnson" election fraud' didn't turn up a whole lot, but there were a few articles--some that were during the allegations and several on the aftermath of them.

It appears that the claims were dismissed. There was another article that indicated that the fraud allegations were from a canned fraud complaint template distributed by the RNC.

I'm glad to have disproven this, but it's not really the partisan in me. I'd actually be very happy if somebody came along and dispelled other allegations of electoral fraud, including the ones that allegedly helped Republicans. If other fraud claims are as ersatz as this one appears to be, it would suggest that there may actually be a foundation of integrity underlying our government after all. I'd vastly prefer to lose honestly than to have the election stolen at the last minute by either party.

Here's the clearest piece I found about the Thune case, btw:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200411010001

Quote:

CLAIM: Democrats engaged in fraudulent activities in South Dakota during the 2002 election that led to Democrat Tim Johnson's win. (Chapter 6, pp. 77-94)

FACT: South Dakota's Republican attorney general dismissed the allegations, called affidavits supporting Republican charges "flat false."

NCB · 10-26-2006, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

http://mediamatters.org/items/200411010001

Quote:

Originally Posted by Media Matters website

Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media

Sorry if I dont find this site anything more than a smear site dedicated to advancing liberal causes

ratbastid · 10-26-2006, 09:50 AM

... Was it the word "progressive"?

That wasn't the only article stating that the SD incident was a non-event. If you run that same google query, you'll see that.

Elphaba · 10-26-2006, 10:01 AM

There are a number of other issues of potential concern being reported:

Link

Quote:

Report Warns of Potential Voting Problems in 10 States

By Amy Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 25, 2006; A03

Two weeks before the midterm elections, at least 10 states, including Maryland, remain ripe for voting problems, according to a study released yesterday by a nonpartisan clearinghouse that tracks electoral reforms across the United States.

The report by Electionline.org says those states, and possibly others, could encounter trouble on Election Day because they have a combustible mix of fledgling voting-machine technology, confusion over voting procedures or recent litigation over election rules -- and close races.

The report cautions that the Nov. 7 elections, which will determine which political party controls the House and Senate, promise "to bring more of what voters have come to expect since the 2000 elections -- a divided body politic, an election system in flux and the possibility -- if not certainty -- of problems at polls nationwide."

In a state-by-state canvass, the 75-page report singles out places, such as Indiana and Arizona, where courts have upheld stringent new laws requiring voters to show poll workers specific forms of identification. It cites states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, which have switched to electronic voting machines whose accuracy has been challenged. And it points to states such as Colorado and Washington, which have departed from the tradition of polling sites in neighborhood precincts.

The report of the clearinghouse, sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trusts, is the latest of several warnings in recent weeks and months by organizations and scholars who say that electoral problems persist in spite of six years of efforts by the federal government and states to correct voting flaws. The flaws gripped the public's attention after the close 2000 presidential election, which led to recounts in Florida and the intervention of the Supreme Court.

The election shambles of 2000 prompted Congress to pass in 2002 legislation intended to help states make significant election changes, such as by replacing outdated voting equipment. Some of the changes, including making sure that databases of registered voters are accurate, were required to be in effect by this year.

Doug Chapin, director of Electionline.org, said "things are getting better over time." But he said many of the changes in recent years have led to new problems and disputes. For instance, the decisions by many states to convert to electronic voting machines have yielded new concerns about whether they are secure and accurate, about paper records as backup proof and -- this year -- about whether the electronic or paper record should be considered the official tally if a candidate demands a recount.

The report cites Maryland for what it calls a "dismal primary" in September that "included human and machine failures galore," in part because Montgomery County election officials forgot to distribute to polling places the access cards needed for its electronic machines to work. The study raises questions about whether Montgomery officials are prepared for the bigger crowds in the general election and whether large numbers of mistrustful voters will resort to absentee ballots.

Sun Tzu · 10-26-2006, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

Frankly, I dont buy into conspiracy theories, which probably correlates with my lack of black helicopter sightings around my house. I think the problem your side is having is not Kathy Harris, The Supreme Court, Diebold, or Halliburton, its your message. At some point you have to claim responsibility for your own failures and not blame them on this, that, or the other. Its a fairly simple concept, but its one that your people need to understand.

That said, have there been polling station issues? Of course there have been and its nothing new. There have always been sheenanigans at the polling booth pulled by both parties. But to point to this as the sole reason for your partys defeats is myopic

Dont assume because someone disagrees they are automatically a liberal or "your side" which you seem to be saying alot.

Going off of your black heliocopter statement; I'm curious to what source of information (outside of being present at the place of any occurance) do you use to gather the data that formulates what you interpret as being real and factual?

Ustwo · 10-26-2006, 01:43 PM

ratbastid considering you think that the Flroida ballot was somehow fraud despite it being a democrat designed ballot in a democrat county, I don't know how anyone could convince you that this wasn't just a mistake either.

Yakk · 10-29-2006, 07:23 AM

Want to hire consultants to do the grunt work for you?

http://fixavote.com/

They even have a 1-800 number.

ratbastid · 10-29-2006, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

ratbastid considering you think that the Flroida ballot was somehow fraud despite it being a democrat designed ballot in a democrat county, I don't know how anyone could convince you that this wasn't just a mistake either.

Actually, I do think the Florida ballot was a mistake. It was a harmful mistake that quite possibly gave the presidency to the wrong candidate. (Either that or Palm Beach County has a HELL of a lot of Pat Buchanan fans!) But a mistake.

I'm not so generous in my view of Diebold and their "built-to-be-hacked" voting machines. Nobody has successfully demonstrated to me why a voting machine can't be secure, or why it can't include a voter-verifiable paper trail. Nobody has successfully demonstrated why a corporation whose CEO declared his commitment to "deliver Ohio for the President" should be trusted with our voting infrastructure.

If the 2004 election had taken place in a third world country under the eye of international observers, it would have been thrown out. How can this not be a major concern? Here's how: the errors almost universally benefit the (current) majority party.

dc_dux · 10-29-2006, 08:51 AM

The other issue that came out of Florida in 2000 was the sloppy way in which the state attempted to purge the voting registration records to ensure that person with criminal records were removed from the list as eligible voters. The problem was they purged people with the same name, people with misdomeanor convictions, and others. No one really knows how many eligible voters lost their voting rights, but the evidence suggested that most were in the minority communities in Florida.

Hopefully, the new law that mandates provisional ballots when a person's voting rights are questioned when they attempt to vote will make this less likely this time around.

ASU2003 · 10-29-2006, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yakk

Anyone want to make the state of Ohio have a huge happy face in the election results?

It would be better if a write in candidate won, who didn't even know they were running. Let's say if Jim Tressel (OSU football coach) wins the governorship in Ohio.

What the government should have done, was in 2000 or so, make a X-prize type competition that colleges, companies, and individuals could have entered to make a perfect, hacker safe, easy, cheap and reliable voting system for 300 million people. And then offer a prize for who ever could figured out a way to hack it.

I know that electronic voting has problems now, but it could work.

magictoy · 10-29-2006, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Okay, look, I know it's not your default mode, but do try to add something to the discussion.

Have YOU heard of any electoral gitches that harmed Republicans? I'm actually interested in this.

Well, this isn't an "electoral glitch," but it sure smells bad. No doubt it won't be a problem for the same people who consider a Democrat-designed ballot to be a Republican plot.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us...gewanted=print

Quote:

A New Campaign Tactic: Manipulating Google Data
By TOM ZELLER Jr.
If things go as planned for liberal bloggers in the next few weeks, searching Google for “Jon Kyl,” the Republican senator from Arizona now running for re-election, will produce high among the returns a link to an April 13 article from The Phoenix New Times, an alternative weekly.

Mr. Kyl “has spent his time in Washington kowtowing to the Bush administration and the radical right,” the article suggests, “very often to the detriment of Arizonans.”

Searching Google for “Peter King,” the Republican congressman from Long Island, would bring up a link to a Newsday article headlined “King Endorses Ethnic Profiling.”

Fifty or so other Republican candidates have also been made targets in a sophisticated “Google bombing” campaign intended to game the search engine’s ranking algorithms. By flooding the Web with references to the candidates and repeatedly cross-linking to specific articles and sites on the Web, it is possible to take advantage of Google’s formula and force those articles to the top of the list of search results.

The project was originally aimed at 70 Republican candidates but was scaled back to roughly 50 because Chris Bowers, who conceived it, thought some of the negative articles too partisan.

The articles to be used “had to come from news sources that would be widely trusted in the given district,” said Mr. Bowers, a contributor at MyDD.com (Direct Democracy), a liberal group blog. “We wanted actual news reports so it would be clear that we weren’t making anything up.”

Each name is associated with one article. Those articles are embedded in hyperlinks that are now being distributed widely among the left-leaning blogosphere. In an entry at MyDD.com this week, Mr. Bowers said: “When you discuss any of these races in the future, please, use the same embedded hyperlink when reprinting the Republican’s name. Then, I suppose, we will see what happens.”

An accompanying part of the project is intended to buy up Google Adwords, so that searches for the candidates’ names will bring up advertisements that point to the articles as well. But Mr. Bowers said his hopes for this were fading, because he was very busy.

The ability to manipulate the search engine’s results has been demonstrated in the past. Searching for “miserable failure,” for example, produces the official Web site of President Bush.

But it is far from clear whether this particular campaign will be successful. Much depends on the extent of political discussion already tied to a particular candidate’s name.

It will be harder to manipulate results for searches of the name of a candidate who has already been widely covered in the news and widely discussed in the blogosphere, because so many links and so many pages already refer to that particular name. Search results on lesser-known candidates, with a smaller body of references and links, may be easier to change.

“We don’t condone the practice of Google bombing, or any other action that seeks to affect the integrity of our search results,” said Ricardo Reyes, a Google spokesman. “A site’s ranking in Google’s search results is automatically determined by computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page’s relevance to a given query.”

The company’s faith in its system has produced a hands-off policy when it comes to correcting for the effects of Google bombs in the past. Over all, Google says, the integrity of the search product remains intact.

Writing in the company’s blog last year, Marissa Mayer, Google’s director of consumer Web products, suggested that pranks might be “distracting to some, but they don’t affect the overall quality of our search service, whose objectivity, as always, remains the core of our mission.”

Still, some conservative blogs have condemned Mr. Bowers’s tactic. These include Outside the Beltway, which has called him “unscrupulous,” and Hot Air, which declared the effort “fascinatingly evil.”

But Mr. Bowers suggested that he was acting with complete transparency and said he hoped political campaigns would take up the tactic, which he called “search engine optimization,” as a standard part of their arsenal.

“I did this out in the open using my real name, using my own Web site,” he said. “There’s no hidden agenda. One of the reasons for this is to show that campaigns should be doing this on their own.”

Indeed, if all campaigns were doing it, the playing field might well be leveled.

Mr. Bowers said he did not believe the practice would actually deceive most Internet users.

“I think Internet users are very smart and most are aware of what a Google bomb is,” he said, “and they will be aware that results can be massaged a bit.”

If cutting off the last few letters of the candidate's name is a plot, you should have nothing but contempt for the people behind this despicable tactic.

dc_dux · 10-29-2006, 07:54 PM

If a group of Dem computer nerds are manipulating Google, absolutely it should be investigated, althought it is hardly a violation of election laws.

But at worst, it is moving stories up in Google, and not creating false stories. I dont find it nearly as despicable as directly trying to influence voters with false information like the letter to hispanic immigrants in Calif...and not nearly as serious as flaws in the actual ballots or equipment.

Edit: (the next day)
I changed my mind....forget the investigation.

Let this "despicable"

battle of Google Bombs rage on!

Quote:

From the "Right Wing News"

Republican Googlebomb #2 Of 2: Operation YouTube!
Ok, let's talk about Googlebombs.

First of all, let's do an update on the first Googlebomb that went live on the morning of the 23rd. It's 3 days later -- which isn't very long -- and so far, 11 of the links to our first 45 targets have made it into the top 20. One of them. however, was a Wikipedia entry, which was already in there. So, I think actually, we've gotten 10 out of 45 in there so far -- and that number should increase over the next few days.

On the left, they had 52 targets and 18 made it in the top 20. However, 5 of them were Wikipedia entries, which were almost certainly in the top 20 anyway. Also, there tend to be a lot more negative articles about Republican candidates in the top 20 to begin with, so when you break it down, we're probably running about even.

http://www.rightwingnews.com/archive..._22.PHP#006685

Hopefully, this silliness will keep these passionate partisans on both sides from doing real harm in the last week before the election.

ratbastid · 11-02-2006, 05:06 AM

Okay! Here's the first wave of early-evoting machine "glitches":

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...s/15869924.htm

http://www.kfdm.com/engine.pl?statio...ortvideo.shtml

So in Florida and Texas counties' early voting, votes for Democrats are being turned into votes for Republicans. Surprise, surprise.

Stay tuned to this thread, kids. I'll keep you posted of every voting irregularity I can--especially those related to electronic voting. I promise to be non-partisan about this; I'll put it here no matter whose vote turns into whose.

Elphaba · 11-02-2006, 12:12 PM

Thank you, rb. So far, the "irregularities" are getting little national coverage that I have seen.

10-25-2006, 11:59 AM	#4 (permalink)
Bill O'Rights will always be an Alyson Hanniganite Location: In the dust of the archives	Fraud? Probably not. Although a suspicious eye should certainly be raised. It is, however, a little inexcusable that the error was not noticed until absentee voters brought it to the attention of election officials. Did no one bother to check beforehand? Somebody's napping. __________________ "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony "Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

10-25-2006, 02:18 PM	#9 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	huh. i would have thought that even republicans would be concerned about voter fraud. i dont understand the cavalier attitude toward it on the part of the usual far right suspects above...o wait, i do: voter fraud is a problem when and only when it affects republican candidates. otherwise, its all paranoia and such. well, i am sure glad i worked that one out. and here i thought the rules of a democracy were different from that: you know, that all votes mattered. i was obviously misinformed: the rule is that only republican votes really matter. it's that "all animals are equal: but some are more equal than others" logic.... well thanks lads: if i hadn't figured out the real rules from reading your posts, i could easily have confused them with glib horseshit. good thing that didn't happen. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-25-2006, 02:47 PM	#10 (permalink)
feelgood Free Mars! Location: I dunno, there's white people around me saying "eh" all the time	Well holy fuck, if you can't figure out that the machine ask you to confirm your vote and you dont know who the hell "Maria Cantw[cut off]" is after you voted for "Maria Cantwell ", then by gods, you shouldn't be voting. __________________ Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

10-25-2006, 06:38 PM	#12 (permalink)
Sun Tzu Conspiracy Realist Location: The Event Horizon	Machines are made by people; peple have agendas. IMO this is one area that old fashioned paper (not chads) under total public monitoring (not counted by private companies) which also has potentional for agendas to be set forth. No assumptions made until all votes are in and counted. __________________ *To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking*

10-25-2006, 07:57 PM	#16 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	One of the outcomes of the 2000 controversies was the enactment of the Help America Vote Act in 2002 with strong bi-partisan support. Among its provisions are requirements that states must have a centralized voter registraiton database and Voting systems that produce a permanent paper record with an audit capacity that can be manually audited. The effective date was 1/1/06 so this will be the first election where these new standards are tested. I suspect we will see more challenges then ever before from whatever candidate(s) loses close elections. http://www.fec.gov/hava/hava.htm an addendum for NCB In this current session of Congress, a Repub senator introduced a bill to amend HAVA called the Voter Protection Act of 2005. Among its provisions was the "removal of registrants from voting rolls for failure to vote" One of those wacky bills that had only 4 other Repub co-sponsors and died a quiet death.....even other Repubs didnt want to take away a fundamental right, even if you chose not to exercise that right (for whatever reason). __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

10-25-2006, 11:51 AM	#3 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Isn't this how Robin Williams was elected in Man of the Year? If you can't build a voting machine that works, then go with the normal way of voting. I see no sense in putting a machine that doesn't work into play.

10-25-2006, 06:39 PM	#13 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	I work every day building user interfaces. To be perfectly blunt, it's not that hard. This sort of blunder is either gross incompetence, or highly suspicious voter manipulation. Voting machines are made by? Companies. Usually big-business style companies. Who's the big business buddy? Republicans. Who continually gets the short-end of "accidents" with voting machines? Democrats. Can you really ignore the coincidences here?

10-26-2006, 08:56 AM	#24 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	How to catch and stop some election fraud: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaEECHjWptU Video the vote. Bring cameras. Record what happens. Find out how to complain about problems, and do it ASAP. How to hack the vote: http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/evoting.ars A description of how to change the results of the next US election nearly untraceably. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

10-26-2006, 09:50 AM	#29 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	... Was it the word "progressive"? That wasn't the only article stating that the SD incident was a non-event. If you run that same google query, you'll see that.

10-26-2006, 01:43 PM	#32 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	ratbastid considering you think that the Flroida ballot was somehow fraud despite it being a democrat designed ballot in a democrat county, I don't know how anyone could convince you that this wasn't just a mistake either. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-29-2006, 07:23 AM	#33 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	Want to hire consultants to do the grunt work for you? http://fixavote.com/ They even have a 1-800 number. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

10-29-2006, 08:51 AM	#35 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	The other issue that came out of Florida in 2000 was the sloppy way in which the state attempted to purge the voting registration records to ensure that person with criminal records were removed from the list as eligible voters. The problem was they purged people with the same name, people with misdomeanor convictions, and others. No one really knows how many eligible voters lost their voting rights, but the evidence suggested that most were in the minority communities in Florida. Hopefully, the new law that mandates provisional ballots when a person's voting rights are questioned when they attempt to vote will make this less likely this time around. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

11-02-2006, 05:06 AM	#39 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Okay! Here's the first wave of early-evoting machine "glitches": http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...s/15869924.htm http://www.kfdm.com/engine.pl?statio...ortvideo.shtml So in Florida and Texas counties' early voting, votes for Democrats are being turned into votes for Republicans. Surprise, surprise. Stay tuned to this thread, kids. I'll keep you posted of every voting irregularity I can--especially those related to electronic voting. I promise to be non-partisan about this; I'll put it here no matter whose vote turns into whose.

11-02-2006, 12:12 PM	#40 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Thank you, rb. So far, the "irregularities" are getting little national coverage that I have seen.