host

I believe a recount of presidential ballots in Ohio will happen and that it
will be a positive in helping to heal the political rift in the nation by reducing
speculation that a voting fraud conspiracy resulted in Bush retaining the
presidency while legitimately receiving less popular votes in Ohio, and
possibly in Florida. Do you agree or disagree that an Ohio recount will
happen or that it is a necessary step in our political process?

Bev Harris initiated a suit against Diebold that has resulted in the company agreeing to pay $2.6 million to settle a lawsuit alleging that it lied about its faulty equipment before the March primary.
<a href="http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=%22bev+harris%22&scoring=d">Bev Harris Google News search results</a>
<a href="http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp?sort=date&selectstate=OH&selectproblemtype=ALL">http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp?sort=date&selectstate=OH&selectproblemtype=ALL</a>

bal8664

I'm dissapointed by the election results. But lets face it, President Bush won, fairly. More people voted for him in ohio, and in the entire country. Even if this recount gave Kerry 50,000 more votes (very highly doubtful) it would still be a 100k difference. Just too big of a win to make a recount useful.

Tophat665

Would I be pleased to see a recount? Yes.
Do I think there was fraud on a massive, nearly unimaginable scale? Yes.
Do I think that it will matter in the end? No.

Every time I have heard someone bring up the stats that showed that the Exit Poll data in areas with paper ballots were much closer to the actual count than in areas with electronic voting, they have been pooh-poohed off the air by the pudits. I have yet to hear anyone say anything that didn't amount to "vote rigging on that scale would be unimaginable". I have a very good imagination. I also know my way around Excel and Access. I also know that who votes is less important that who counts the vote. I am concerned.

I also know this is chapeau by Reynolds Wrap territory, so I'll take what I can get and be, if not satisfied, at least somewhat mollified by whatever comes of it.

I am hoping that some day soon Kerry can call up Bush and say, "I was man enough to concede when the votes looked like they were for you. Now that we know better, are you man enough to do the same?" It is not a big hope, but I make plans for winning the lottery too.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

Superbelt

Well, the purpose of the recount is also to evaluate the legitimacy of the electronic voting machines. Some of the machines posted bogus results like thousands more votes for president than for every other vote on the ballot.

Superbelt

Though there is a laundry list of things that are wrong with Diebold's electronic voting systems, these three take the cake.

1) Based on Microsoft Access Architecture

2) Uses an encryption key (DES) that was hacked in 1997 and is no longer used by anyone else for security, for obvious reasons.

3) Administrator pin was 1111

On top of it all, there is no verifiable physical backup to these machines for recounts.

pan6467

2 Things

1) the article says "Katherine " Blackwell..... It's Kenneth and he is an asshole who dumped 1,000's of registrations for no reason.

2) Personally, I find it a sad day when our past 2 presidential elections are fraught with such controversy. I don't think this nation can withstand another questionable election and going to courts. I have lived through 9 of these babies and the last 2 have been the worst by far. The only way to keep the nation from having more partisanship and destructive politics is to just admit defeat, let the election stand and figure out a way to get Congress back in '06.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Clark

I think this is a good thing becouse it is going to show the flaws in electronic voteing. I do not think it will have an effect on this election but starting in 2006 I think elections will be less prone to "error". I think that this recount will also show the neew for an independent head of elections in each state and the inportence of not having that position filled with a "party person".

__________________
Dyslexic please excuse the spelling.

funbob

I feel like saying "Just get over it" I think that all of this is fodder for the media, driven by the media. If those of you out there think that election fraud is reserved for only Rebuplicans......... If we really opened this thing up we would find fraud on both sides. The key here is the margin of victory. Like it or not Bush is the man for the next four years. Instead of looking back, the Dems should be looking forward.

But hey, that is just my opinion, I could be wrong. So like my favorite comedian Dennise Miller says:

"Fuck it, lets eat pie"

Locobot

I'm still waiting for the provisional ballot count myself. They said it would take 10 days, it's been 14. I don't think the Ohio result will be overturned, but there are obvious problems with the system that need to be fixed. This was obvious four years ago as well, obvious to Bush's election commision, and yet Bush refused to implement many of their suggestions. So we're left to believe that there are those who, through tampering or negligence, are seeking to undermine our system of choosing leaders for political gain.

Also the electoral college hasn't met yet so...

Stompy

Whether you're republica, democrat, whatever.. I don't know how people can so easily trust the electronic machines.

Then again, I don't know how its all handled.. like who supervises it all or does the counts..

But it's just WAY too easy to forge results when it comes to a computer. There's no way you can take a piece of software and expect it to operate on a bug-free level to have it work across nearly 120 million uses. There's just no way.

__________________
I love lamp.

kutulu

To me it's more about exposing flaws in electronic voting than getting the results overturned. I'm not expecting Kerry to pull a win out of this, I just want the machines checked.

Ustwo

The problem is if there is no paper trail, how does one check the machine?

__________________
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.

mml

Regardless of the outcome of a recount, I hope the lesson learned is how are we going to deal with electronic voting in a time when close elections are the norm in many, many races. There are obvious faults with any kind of system, but I think there is greater opportunity in today's society for there to be "electronic fraud". In my county, we have a very simple ballot that asks you to complete a line by the candidate you choose. Once done, you slide it into a scanner, which ensures you have not double voted on any issue. If you have, it spits out the ballot and you can redo the form. The usable ballots are kept in case of a recount, which can be done by computer recount or visual recount. Simple system - few mistakes - very cheap technology. Seems like a no brainer to me.

__________________
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
-Douglas Adams

Stompy

Exactly. I don't know how these machines were able to be used without any substantial regulation or checks in place.

In the very least, the system should've been submitted to a committe of sorts for review of not just the code, but potential bugs and flaws.

Does anyone know if this was done, or was there just one private company in control of all development?

__________________
I love lamp.

yoyoyobro

While the recount could show that errors were made in the original count of the vote. I do not see how it could effect the results in the State in any way because I don't see how the turnaround could be anywhere near to Bush's margin of victory in Ohio.

tellumFS

As flawed as the voting machines maybe, there was a discussion about this on Minnesota Public Radio yesterday, and it was brought up that the machines are tested by independent committees, and after approval they're purchased by states. I don't recall the name of the commissions that does the testing, or the details of it, but the show can be found on MPR's web site:

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.or...20041115.shtml

host

There is a paper trail in Ohio, where 70 percent of ballots cast were of the
paper punch card variety, the same type made famous in Florida in 2000.
The results of the Ohio provisional ballot count should be interesting.....

host

Guess again....Diebold made sure that their voting machines were not tested
for "security"

host

In short.....we as in "WE, the People", are fucked.....Bev Harris is a true patriot in taking on Diebold et al and uncovering the largest threat to "homeland security" ever perpetrated. Where is Tom Ridge????? Why isn't
his agency investigating this????? We must uncover and expose what has
happened to our right to vote in fair elections, if we have any hope in taking
back our country. By their silence, the national main stream media and our
political representatives are complicit in a conspiracy to deprive us of our
constitutional rights. It is pathetic that it is left to the Greens and Nader to
file the paperwork and to pay the fees necessary to recount the vote in
New Hampshire, Ohio, and possibly in Florida. Where is federal, state, and
local law enforcement when an attack on our freedom is clearly happening?

Lebell

Agreed.

I also agree with Ustwo that a lack of a paper trail makes it damn hard to audit.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

funbob

I love this!!! Since elections emerged we have had voting fraud. Before there were machines to blame we had ballot box stuffing, we had organized groups pulling the homeless off the street and taking them to the polls, we had dead people voting in Chicago.

The system is not perfect, it will never be perfect, there will always be those who find a way to cheat. The only problem here is that Kerry lost, this board is more pro Kerry and that has some people pissed.

To make those Kerry supporters happy, if Bush would have lost, there would be plenty crying from Bush supporters. What is key here is the margin of victory aprrox 3.5 million more votes for Bush. If this election was stolen, then that in and of itself is impressive. (Sarcastic coment there at the end)

Clark

Yes Bush won. For me the question is not about who won but about a new voter tecnology that is showing so flaws. Do we not look into those flaws becouse it might uncover some flaws or do we as a country contnue to try to make a voting systom that is less open to fraud.

I say fix the systom if the fix is fuled by the anger of the party that lost than that is a productive use of there anger.

__________________
Dyslexic please excuse the spelling.

host

An update on the Ohio vote recount.

LINK

joeshoe

The recount won't make any difference, realistically (Bush isn't just going to step down), but it'll be good to clear up any suspicion.

And I would not trust electronic voting. There's no paper trail to make sure my vote counted, and much easier to manipulate than paper.

Tarl Cabot

Having a paper trail doesn't seem to make a damn bit of difference. I don't hear anyone talking about this crime, which dwarfs the numbers being argued in Ohio.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=21739

A flood of new green cards and naturalizations would overwhelm an Immigration and Naturalization Service that is already stretched thin, racked by bureaucratic mismanagement -- and that stands accused in a damning new report by its own inspector general of minting new citizens on the direct orders of the Clinton-Gore White House in reckless disregard of the law.

The 684-page INS inspector general report was released with little fanfare during a congressional hearing in September, 2001. Its most stunning allegation -- that the Clinton-Gore White House had hijacked the INS for partisan political purposes in what amounted to massive voter fraud -- never emerged as a campaign issue until after election day, when it became evident that Al Gore owed his near-victory in Florida to hundreds of thousands of newly-minted citizens in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

According to the IG report, many of those new voters should never have been granted citizenship.

Some were convicted felons. Others had overstayed tourist visas and were working illegally. Close to 200,000 never underwent any background check, so INS does not know to this day whether they were eligible for citizenship. Few passed an English language and citizenship test worthy of the name. Some could not understand their own swearing-in, because the ceremony was conducted in English.

And yet, Bush White House officials point to campaign pledges by President Bush to treat immigration "not [as] a problem to be solved, but [as] the sign of a successful nation," and to speed the naturalization process even further. To accomplish that goal, aides say, Bush plans to split the INS into two separate agencies, one that processes green cards and citizenship applications and a second that polices America's borders.

But before he gets that far, Bush will have to deal with the thorny issue of fraud, and the political hijacking of the INS.

'A pro-Democrat voter mill'

The investigation into INS shenanigans began with a May 1996 report in the Washington Times about an INS whistleblower who criticized the acceleration of the naturalization process under Clinton-Gore. It quoted other INS employees who revealed the existence of a program known as Citizenship USA, and questioned the motives behind it.

Citizenship USA was an initiative of Vice President Al Gore that was ostensibly part of his National Performance Review to "reinvent" government. Internal White House memos, obtained by the House Judiciary Committee in 1997, showed that the vice president was well aware that the effort could be perceived as a "pro-Democrat voter mill."

On March 28, 1996, White House aide Doug Farbrother e-mailed Gore detailing his efforts to get INS to waive fingerprinting and background checks "to make me confident they could produce a million new citizens before Election Day."

Gore then wrote Clinton: "You asked us to expedite the naturalization of nearly a million legal aliens who have applied to become citizens." The risk, Gore warned, was that "we might be publicly criticized for running a pro-Democrat voter mill and even risk having Congress stop us."

Congress did complain -- but only after the election.

In response to those complaints, the Joint Management Division of the Department of Justice hired KPMG Peat Marwick to review the Citizenship USA program, which ran from Aug. 31, 1995 through Sept. 30, 1996. They found that of the 1,049,867 aliens naturalized under the program, INS never did fingerprint checks on 180,000 persons.

"Applicants who were ineligible because of criminal records, or because they fraudulently obtained green cards, were granted citizenship because the INS was moving too fast to check their records," says Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who chaired the House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the IG report last September.

In addition to those 180,000, Smith said, "more than 80,000 aliens had fingerprint checks that generated criminal records, but they were naturalized anyway."

The initial review by KPMG Peat Marwick led to a temporary slowdown in the numbers of new citizens. But not for long.

By 1999, the numbers shot up once again, with 872,485 aliens granted citizenship, according to INS statistics made available to the Western Journalism Center. And during its final year in office, the Clinton-Gore administration used streamlined naturalization procedures to mine yet another 898,315 new citizens, just in time for voter registration deadlines last October.

INS officials said in interviews that they received 1.3 million applications during the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. Some 400,000 of those applying for citizenship were rejected.

By contrast, fewer than 250,000 aliens were naturalized during FY 1992, the final year of the first Bush administration. "Naturalizations were averaging between 200,000 to 300,000 per year before then," said INS spokesperson Elaine Komis.

In other words, despite hearings in 1997 that roundly condemned the administration's naturalization program, and promises from the INS to reform its own procedures, it was back to the Democratic voter mill -- just in time for the 2000 election.

According to the newly released inspector general's report, the latest rush of naturalizations took place without any significant changes to the flawed procedures that led to the abuses found during the Citizenship USA program in 1995-1996. Hundreds of thousands more persons were granted U.S. citizenship without any background checks just prior to November 2000.

In presenting his report before Lamar Smith's subcommittee on Sept. 7, Deputy Inspector General Robert L. Ashbaugh noted that repeated requests for interviews to the vice president's office had been denied. Similarly, top presidential advisers Harold Ickes and Rahm Emanuel -- identified as having played key roles in hijacking the INS for political purposes -- refused to answer questions.

host

Tarl Cabot, you are new to TFP, so I will simply advise you that your post
about the INS and Clinton era immigration policy is not relevant to this thread,
which I intended as a thread to discuss the state of Ohio 2004 vote recount
developments.

Some words of caution about the author of the article which you quoted,
Kenneth Timmerman. His website at http://archive.org .
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20001110060100/http://www.timmerman2000.com/">http://web.archive.org/web/20001110060100/http://www.timmerman2000.com/</a>
provides strong evidence that he is a partisan, Clinton basher, and a failed
candidate for the U.S. senate. You also quoted an article from the
Washington Times, a newspaper controlled by the controversial, convicted
felon, Korean Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

You linked worldnetdaily.com as the site of your Timmerman article on the
INS report. Here is a rant published just four days ago by that "news" organization's Editor in Chief, Joseph Farah:
Please post as much as you want at TFP.....but.....try to stay on topic, try
to quote and link to sources that make an attempt at even handedness.
That way, your points won't reflexively be dismissed by one side, or the other, and readers can all gain something to think about, even if they don't
always agree with you.

sob

I'm not new to TFP, and I found his post extremely relevant. Democrats have tried to win the last two elections with lawyers, not votes, and when the lawyers fail, they attack the physical means of voting. Those are two reasons we have a "rift in the nation."

His article also points out voter fraud much larger than the "massive, nearly unimaginable scale" mentioned in this thread. Can you dispute any of the accusations it brings up?

This attempt to dismiss any voter fraud that works in accordance with your political preference is gross hypocrisy. Thank you for going public with it.

By your "logic," you have just ruled out the use of any statements by Bill Clinton or Dan Rather, because in addition to being "controversial," they are documented liars. Clinton gets extra credit for lying under oath.

By the way, what does being a "failed candidate for the U.S. senate" have to do with a person's credibility? In addition to writing off "failed candidates," can we discredit "impeached presidents?"

Please look up "poisoning the well." You'll find it's a logical fallacy.

Lastly, this isn't the first time I've noticed that you seem to think starting a thread allows you to dictate what's said in it. I can't find that in the "Rules of Tilted Politics" sticky.

But I'm sure Tarl Cabot will thank you for granting him permission to post!

Tarl Cabot

What your post establishes is the following (but being a newbie, I can't find the rule which states that you get to dictate what's said in the responses):

1. "Some" criminal activity in elections isn't relevant to this thread, but Joseph Farah's opinion of the ACLU is.

2. Timmerman isn't to be believed, because he's a "partisan," but you referenced Michael Moore in another thread. Is Moore who you meant when you said I should "try to quote and link to sources that make an attempt at even handedness?"

3. I can attack anything that uses CBS as a source, since their anchorman made such an ass of himself.

4. Criminal activity isn't important, unless it works against Democrats.

Got it.

Ustwo

I wonder why everyone so desperately wants an Ohio recount, when Pennsylvania uses electronic voting and had a closer vote margin

__________________
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.

host

If the Washington Times, Worldnetdaily, and Kenneth Timmerman are
accepted as credible sources to link to, I am wasting my time by posting at
the TFP politics forum. Thank you for helping me to recognize this.

D Rice

I thought diebold rigged it. The recount won't show anything. What a joke

Tarl Cabot

You're welcome. The above is such a golden example of the "poisoning the well" fallacy that you're saving yourself a lot of embarrassment. Especially since you can't refute the facts (which of course is why you tried to impugn the source).

But since you hate the sources so much, here's another for you:

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees...hju67344_0.htm

host

I have a feeling that this thread is going to see some action if the last part
of this article comes to pass......
And......before the reflexive reaction from the right in response to Olbermann's
quotes of "Jackson", please keep in perspective that the article is the latest
segment of the continuous post election reporting of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann; the only major news outlet reporter to provide credible and consistant reporting about the "deficiencies" uncovered about election 2004......

Midnight_Son

I only have one question:

Is it honestly feasible that a person who is smart enough to hack into the system would vote for W?

__________________
SWM, tattooed, seeks meaningful tits and beer. Enjoys biker mags, pornography, and Sunday morning walks to the liquor store. Winners of erotic hot dog eating contests given priority.

Ustwo

Wow, this made it all day without anyone else saying troll?

Hmmmmmmmmmm

__________________
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.

flstf

Probably not, but it's possible that a Democrat voter could be confused by the complicated ballot and vote the wrong way.

tecoyah

Double troll.....damn....ah....what was that topic
again?

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

flstf

Sorry about that, just trying to be clever.
My answer to the original question is that I don't think the recounts will reveal much and the election result(s) will stay the same. One party will pick up votes in some districts and visa versa. As long as they don't get to just cherry pick the districts that their party normally receives the most votes. There is too much of a margin in Ohio. Now Washington State's governor race is so close that there is a good chance that recounts could matter.

host

this article is the latest segment of the continuous post election reporting of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann; the only major news outlet reporter to provide credible and consistant reporting about the "deficiencies" uncovered about election 2004......

Locobot

I personally can't wait for one of these close elections to fall in a state with a Democrat Secretary of State. Think of the shitstorm that would ensue from the conservative press in that scenario!