Is Bev Harris This Country's Only Hope For Election Oversight? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

host · 11-17-2004, 11:07 PM

The media and the prosecutors do not seem to have the interest or the incentive to investigate and expose the fraud committed by election officials in
the 2004 election. This is especially frustrating to many people because of the
events surrounding Bush's 2000 Florida election vote plurality of only 537 votes
before his lawyers successfully argued for the U.S. Supreme Court to intercede
by issuing an order that stopped the Florida vote recount.

It appears now that the most effective investigation into possible official misconduct of election officials across the country is being conducted by
Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.org. Here is some of her past accomplishments and current efforts:

Quote:

<a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm">http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm</a>
On the CNBC TV show "Topic A With Tina Brown," several months ago, Howard Dean had filled in for Tina Brown as guest host. His guest was Bev Harris, the Seattle grandmother who started www.blackboxvoting.org from her living room. Bev pointed out that regardless of how votes were tabulated (other than hand counts, only done in odd places like small towns in Vermont), the real "counting" is done by computers. Be they Diebold Opti-Scan machines, which read paper ballots filled in by pencil or ink in the voter's hand, or the scanners that read punch cards, or the machines that simply record a touch of the screen, in all cases the final tally is sent to a "central tabulator" machine.

That central tabulator computer is a Windows-based PC.

"In a voting system," Harris explained to Dean on national television, "you have all the different voting machines at all the different polling places, sometimes, as in a county like mine, there's a thousand polling places in a single county. All those machines feed into the one machine so it can add up all the votes. So, of course, if you were going to do something you shouldn't to a voting machine, would it be more convenient to do it to each of the 4000 machines, or just come in here and deal with all of them at once?"

Dean nodded in rhetorical agreement, and Harris continued. "What surprises people is that the central tabulator is just a PC, like what you and I use. It's just a regular computer."

"So," Dean said, "anybody who can hack into a PC can hack into a central tabulator?"

Harris nodded affirmation, and pointed out how Diebold uses a program called GEMS, which fills the screen of the PC and effectively turns it into the central tabulator system. "This is the official program that the County Supervisor sees," she said, pointing to a PC that was sitting between them loaded with Diebold's software. ....

Quote:

Years before the election, perhaps it was with the quiet passage of the 2002 Help America Vote Act which mandated the use of Diebold and ES&S machines notorious for their "tamperability"--concerned citizens from various walks of life--professors, computer scientists, systems analysts, even grandmothers and literary publicists from Seattle--had been attempting to sound the alarm: the Diebold voting machines are not secure; the democratic process itself is in jeopardy, seriously so. Bev Harris, Executive Director of the consumer protection organization Blackboxvoting.org, first published her groundbreaking book Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century in 2003......... <a href="http://www.opednews.com/friedberg_111504_media_whitewash.htm">http://www.opednews.com/friedberg_111504_media_whitewash.htm</a>

Quote:

For Harris, this all started with a search of the Internet during her lunch hour. She was cruising Commondreams.org, a left-wing Web site, when she noticed an article by Lynn Landes. Since she was still sore about the Florida machinations of the 2000 presidential race, the article's scathing critique of computer voting piqued Harris' interest.

She decided to do some research. She learned that Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., had an ownership share in Election Systems & Software (ES&S), whose Web site brags that its equipment counted 56 percent of the nation's votes in each of the past four presidential elections. Moreover, ES&S voting machines count all the votes in Hagel's home state of Nebraska, except in those counties that tally ballots by hand. While there is nothing illegal about the senator's stake in the company, it didn't seem right to Harris. When she posted the information about the situation on her Web site, she promptly received a cease-and-desist order from ES&S lawyers. She e-mailed the cease-and-desist order to 3,000 of her media contacts.
<a href="http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0410/040310_news_blackbox.php">http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0410/040310_news_blackbox.php</a>

Quote:

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Nov 3 2004 -- Did the voting machines trump exit polls? There’s a way to find out.

Black Box Voting (.ORG) is conducting the largest Freedom of Information action in history. At 8:30 p.m. Election Night, Black Box Voting blanketed the U.S. with the first in a series of public records requests, to obtain internal computer logs and other documents from 3,000 individual counties and townships. Networks called the election before anyone bothered to perform even the most rudimentary audit.

Quote:

Posted on Thu, Nov. 11, 2004

Diebold settles e-voting lawsuit

Judge's OK would end California's fraud claim

By Erika D. Smith

Beacon Journal staff writer

Diebold Inc. shook loose an expensive albatross Wednesday, agreeing to pay California $2.6 million to end a lawsuit over electronic voting.

If the settlement is approved in court, it would put to rest rounds of finger-pointing that began back in November 2003. It also would let the Green-based company escape a trial. The plaintiffs were seeking as much as $57 million in damages.............This is just our effort to put these issues behind us so we can move forward,'' Diebold spokesman Michael Jacobsen said.

In the lawsuit, the state of California accused Diebold of making false claims about the security and certification status of its electronic voting machines and tabulation systems. As a result, six counties were misled into buying the machines, the state said.

Diebold denies any wrongdoing and insists its voting machines are secure.

However, $500,000 of the settlement would go toward training poll workers, and Diebold would be required to bolster the security measures on its touch-screen and tabulation machines............
Harris, who did not return a call seeking comment Wednesday, said in September that a settlement might not satisfy her. Asked if she would object, the Washington state resident said that would depend on the terms.
<h3>
``What I want at this point is them out of the industry,'' Harris said of Diebold.</h3>

The court will determine how much Harris and March receive from the settlement. They also will be able to ask the court to make Diebold pay their legal costs.
<h3>
Harris and March filed the whistle-blower lawsuit in 2003 under the ``qui tam'' provision of California's False Claims Act, which is often used to find fraud. Under the law, whistle-blowers -- Harris and March, in this case -- can collect 30 percent of the damages for tipping off the government to shoddy contractors. The law allows for damages of triple the amount paid to the contractor.</h3>

In this case, Diebold was paid $19 million by California and Alameda County, meaning the parties were seeking as much as $57 million.
<a href="http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/10152705.htm?1c">http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/10152705.htm?1c</a>

Quote:

TUESDAY NOV 16 2004: Volusia County on lockdown

County election records just got put on lockdown

Dueling lawyers, election officials gnashing teeth, Votergate.tv film crew catching it all.

Here's what happened so far:

Friday Black Box Voting investigators Andy Stephenson and Kathleen Wynne popped in to ask for some records. They were rebuffed by an elections official named Denise. Bev Harris called on the cell phone from investigations in downstate Florida, and told Volusia County Elections Supervisor Deanie Lowe that Black Box Voting would be in to pick up the Nov. 2 Freedom of Information request, or would file for a hand recount. "No, Bev, please don't do that!" Lowe exclaimed. But this is the way it has to be, folks. Black Box Voting didn't back down.

Monday Bev, Andy and Kathleen came in with a film crew and asked for the FOIA request. Deanie Lowe gave it over with a smile, but Harris noticed that one item, the polling place tapes, were not copies of the real ones, but instead were new printouts, done on Nov. 15, and not signed by anyone.

Harris asked to see the real ones, and they said for "privacy" reasons they can't make copies of the signed ones. She insisted on at least viewing them (although refusing to give copies of the signatures is not legally defensible, according to Berkeley elections attorney, Lowell Finley). They said the real ones were in the County Elections warehouse. It was quittin' time and an arrangment was made to come back this morning to review them.

Lana Hires, a Volusia County employee who gained some notoriety in an election 2000 Diebold memo, where she asked for an explanation of minus 16,022 votes for Gore, so she wouldn't have to stand there "looking dumb" when the auditor came in, was particularly unhappy about seeing the Black Box Voting investigators in the office. She vigorously shook her head when Deanie Lowe suggested going to the warehouse.

Kathleen Wynne and Bev Harris showed up at the warehouse at 8:15 Tuesday morning, Nov. 16. There was Lana Hires looking especially gruff, yet surprised. She ordered them out. Well, they couldn't see why because there she was, with a couple other people, handling the original poll tapes. You know, the ones with the signatures on them. Harris and Wynne stepped out and Volusia County officials promptly shut the door.

There was a trash bag on the porch outside the door. Harris looked into it and what do you know, but there were poll tapes in there. They came out and glared at Harris and Wynne, who drove away a small bit, and then videotaped the license plates of the two vehicles marked 'City Council' member. Others came out to glare and soon all doors were slammed.

So, Harris and Wynne went and parked behind a bus to see what they would do next. They pulled out some large pylons, which blocked the door. Harris decided to go look at the garbage some more while Wynne videotaped. A man who identified himself as "Pete" came out and Harris immediately wrote a public records request for the contents of the garbage bag, which also contained ballots -- real ones, but not filled out.

A brief tug of war occurred, tearing the garbage bag open. Harris and Wynne then looked through it, as Pete looked on. He was quite friendly.

Black Box Voting collected various poll tapes and other information and asked if they could copy it, for the public records request. "You won't be going anywhere," said Pete. "The deputy is on his way."

Yes, not one but two police cars came up and then two county elections officials, and everyone stood around discussing the merits of the "black bag" public records request.

The police finally let Harris and Wynne go, about the time the Votergate.tv film crew arrived, and everyone trooped off to the elections office. There, the plot thickened.

Black Box Voting began to compare the special printouts given in the FOIA request with the signed polling tapes from election night. Lo and behold, some were missing. By this time, Black Box Voting investigator Andy Stephenson had joined the group at Volusia County. Some polling place tapes didn't match. In fact, in one location, precinct 215, an African-American precinct, the votes were off by hundreds, in favor of George W. Bush and other Republicans.

Hmm. Which was right? The polling tape Volusia gave to Black Box Voting, specially printed on Nov. 15, without signatures, or the ones with signatures, printed on Nov. 2, with up to 8 signatures per tape?

Well, then it became even more interesting. A Volusia employee boxed up some items from an office containing Lana Hires' desk, which appeared to contain -- you guessed it -- polling place tapes. The employee took them to the back of the building and disappeared.

Then, Ellen B., a voting integrity advocate from Broward County, Florida, and Susan, from Volusia, decided now would be a good time to go through the trash at the elections office. Lo and behold, they found all kinds of memos and some polling place tapes, fresh from Volusia elections office.

So, Black Box Voting compared these with the Nov. 2 signed ones and the "special' ones from Nov. 15 given, unsigned, finding several of the MISSING poll tapes. There they were: In the garbage.

So, Wynne went to the car and got the polling place tapes she had pulled from the warehouse garbage. My my my. There were not only discrepancies, but a polling place tape that was signed by six officials.

This was a bit disturbing, since the employees there had said that bag was destined for the shredder.

By now, a county lawyer had appeared on the scene, suddenly threatening to charge Black Box Voting extra for the time spent looking at the real stuff Volusia had withheld earlier. Other lawyers appeared, phoned, people had meetings, Lana glowered at everyone, and someone shut the door in the office holding the GEMS server.

Black Box Voting investigator Andy Stephenson then went to get the Diebold "GEMS" central server locked down. He also got the memory cards locked down and secured, much to the dismay of Lana. They were scattered around unsecured in any way before that.

Everyone agreed to convene tomorrow morning, to further audit, discuss the hand count that Black Box Voting will require of Volusia County, and of course, it is time to talk about contesting the election in Volusia.
<a href="http://blackboxvoting.org">http://blackboxvoting.org</a>
<a href="http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Politics/Headlines/03PoliticsPOL03111704.htm">http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Politics/Headlines/03PoliticsPOL03111704.htm</a>

Quote:

If you wanted to commit massive illicit vote fraud the vote tabulator software on the PCs is the easiest place. Another place is modifying the memory cards from the controllers but you have hundreds or thousands of them. Changing the memory cards after the controllers are turned in might be easier than before the election and less likely to be caught if there is some kind of test, for example only a few people vote on one machine and you know how they voted. The original paper trails from the controllers could reveal modifications in either the tabulator results or the memory cards after they left the precinct.

There should be no changes from a precinct printed controller paper trail after the election.<h3> It is also, of course, a felony violation of federal law to change the votes or even throw away most of the election materials</h3> <a href="http://elemming2.blogspot.com/">http://elemming2.blogspot.com/</a>

Well......Tee Effers....whaddya think???? Was the response to Bev Harris's
FOIA request for voting records lawful, ethical, professional, or suspicious
enough to warrant more press coverage and a criminal investigation?

Why don't Bev Harris's credentials and track record, especially with the news
last week that her lawsuit against Diebold has prompted a response from that
company of a swift offer to settle the case, prompt more media coverage?
With what is truly at stake here, regarding the future of our country, how
much more than Bev Harris's reputation and actions in filing 3000 timely
and precise FOIA requests and the above developments at the Volusia
County, Florida election officials HQ will it take to arouse media and prosecutorial interest in the results of Bev Harris's Election 2004 investigation?

smooth · 11-18-2004, 01:01 AM

No, Nader, Badnarik, and Cobb are doing good things, as well.

Nader is paying the starter for a recount in one state.

Badnarik and Cobb are in Ohio and, I think, Florida.

I hope these recounts will end up in court. I anticipate that after the recount is paid for, it will quickly become apparent that a recount is impossible in some places--because of the paperless systems. At that point, it will end up in court and the court will have to rule something.

I don't know what that something is, but if I can somehow trigger a small recount in Irvine (where it's hugely electronic w/o paper), the courts here and the legal scholars in the UC and private Uni's could likely take it to the top. The idea would be to force paper trails through the judicial process.

Sometimes people call this judicial activism. But there is a bill Congress to mandate paper trails (or was when the show I am currently watching on Free Speech TV was filmed). It would be interesting to see how the bill fares. If the republican controlled Congress fails to address this issue, that is quite telling their involvement via complicitness, at the least. It's telling to me, but not proof, I'll admit.

But I wouldn't call judical actions 'judicial activism,' I would call it 'checks & balances.'

If anyone has any input for me on how to get rolling, I'd like to hear it.

daswig · 11-18-2004, 08:42 PM

Bev Harris is a nutjob. She's the Left's equivalent of Carol Valentine.

guthmund · 11-18-2004, 09:20 PM

Well, that well thought out argument settled that right quick.

I don't care what her motivation is as long as she's drawing attention to the horrendous voting practices that are in place. It seems all I see on the news are bits and pieces. One machine here, one companies machines there, a few votes lost or added and security concerning the ones that are cast correctly and how they're counted.

I've yet to see a full comprehensive review of the process. I certainly think that there's a bigger problem to address than simply recounting and reviewing individual precincts or states ballots and procedures. Anything that draws attention to that fact, I'm all for.

Will it change the election? Probably not. Is Bev Harris a screwball? Who isn't?

I find it incredible that financial institutions like banks and credit companies all over the nation handle billions of sensitive transactions every day and manage to keep it private, secure and verifiable. How is it we can't seem to have an election lately without the Keystone Kops coming out to play?

smooth · 11-18-2004, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guthmund

I find it incredible that financial institutions like banks and credit companies all over the nation handle billions of sensitive transactions every day and manage to keep it private, secure and verifiable. How is it we can't seem to have an election lately without the Keystone Kops coming out to play?

Probably because all those institutions aren't run by computer criminals.

I watched a special wherein the people were reading the indictments and criminal records of Diebold's and ES&S' founders.

daswig · 11-18-2004, 10:14 PM

Guthmund, if you go around quoting Bev Harris, "normal" people will assume that you're a nutjob too. It's like the LaRouchites. A broken clock is right twice a day, but if you go around telling people that the broken clock is always right, they're going to give you reynolds wrap-based haberdashery. Even the folks at DemocraticUnderground.com (which is largely populated by complete and total nutjobs/self-professed communists) have to periodically scratch their heads in befuddlement when it comes to Bev.

MSD · 11-18-2004, 11:23 PM

I honestly don't think we have much hope at all for election oversight. The population is apathetic and ignorant (I know a total of about 10 people who knew that there were more than 3 candidates in the presidential race, and none want to hear about any others,) and the courts don't seem to want to do anything. This kind of crap is why I'm getting into politics. If you can't change the system from the outside, work on it from the inside.

host · 11-22-2004, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Bev Harris is a nutjob. She's the Left's equivalent of Carol Valentine.

well....the "nutjob" is the founder of BlackBoxVoting.org. It is apparent that
Diebold and the eidtor at the Oakland Tribune take her more seriously than
you do. Why are you negative about an activist who has a verfiable record
of representing the interests of voters? Should we just trust Diebold and
the election officials who do business with them, in spite of the poor
security of their voting software, Diebold's secretive and uncooperative
stance with the professional software security standards community,
and the election officials willingness to overlook the lack of paper receipts
when they choose Diebold technology? The openly partisan statements
and financial contributions of Diebold's CEO, while by themselves do not
disqualify Diebold as a competent designer and vendor of voting equipment, when added to other controversies, serve to further cloud Diebold's reputation.

It wasn't California AG Bill Lockyer who was an initial plaintiff in the suit
against Diebold, it was whistleblower Bev Harris and Blackboxvoting.org .

Quote:

Article Last Updated: Saturday, November 20, 2004 - 3:11:26 AM PST

Slow the hasty

settlement with Diebold

IF Attorney General Bill Lockyer and Alameda County were horses, our inclination would be to rein them in.

What's the rush to bury the proverbial hatchet with Diebold Election Systems so soon after the first election in three elections in which its equipment in Alameda County performed reasonably well?

Why not wait until some time after Nov. 30, when the official canvass of the Nov. 2 election is completed by the Registrar of Voters, before setting aside a False Claims Act lawsuit against the electronic voting machine vendor?

As e-voting activist Jim March of Sacramento says, "the timing of shutting down this case so soon after the election sucks." He prefers waiting to "see what evidence rolls in" before the county and state give a good voting seal of approval to Diebold's system.................

............The agreement not only fails to recover any of the $12 million Alameda County paid for 4,000 Diebold touch-screens, it does nothing to secure a discount when we purchase attachments needed for the machines to provide a paper trail in future elections.

We're being hustled given Diebold's past performance, its failure to certify equipment prior to its being used in two prior elections, and its outright deceit of local and state officials.

We somewhat understand -- although we don't necessarily agree with -- why county officials settled. They've invested a bundle in Diebold's system and desire a good working relationship with the vendor in the future.

But we expect a bit more from Attorney General Lockyer, who once represented the Bay Area in the Legislature. He said earlier that Diebold treated California, its voters and taxpayers "cavalierly" by "making false claims about its equipment." We agreed. Now, he says, "This settlement holds Diebold accountable and helps ensure the future quality of its security and voting systems." Poppycock!
<h3>
We agree more with March, a board member of BlackBoxVoting.org, one of two plaintiffs in the original lawsuit on behalf of state and local taxpayers. </h3>He says the settlement "stinks," that Diebold "gets a slap on the wrist" and isn't required to do anything seriously new in terms of security.

He plans to ask the judge to "put everything on hold" until all evidence on its Nov. 2 performance "rolls in." That makes more sense.
<a href="http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82%257E1761%257E2547879,00.html?search=filter">http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82%257E1761%257E2547879,00.html?search=filter</a>

guthmund · 11-23-2004, 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Guthmund, if you go around quoting Bev Harris, "normal" people will assume that you're a nutjob too. It's like the LaRouchites. A broken clock is right twice a day, but if you go around telling people that the broken clock is always right, they're going to give you reynolds wrap-based haberdashery. Even the folks at DemocraticUnderground.com (which is largely populated by complete and total nutjobs/self-professed communists) have to periodically scratch their heads in befuddlement when it comes to Bev.

I was quoting Bev Harris?

Even the "nutjobs" get things right occasionally. If only that were generally true of the "nutjobs" in charge.

The point still stands. At least this particular "nutjob" is drawing attention to a situation that is, at best, horrendous. On the eve of 2001 we had an election pickle that seemed to come up on us by surprise. Four years later, that pickle still seems to be sitting in the same old jar. Regardless of what the guy selling it says, that pickle ain't getting any tastier and just like the current election debacle, no amount of alcohol is going to wipe that taste out of your mouth anytime soon.

Sorry, I got a little "homespun" on you there....

After the planes were grounded after the events of September 11th, banks around the nation had a difficult time completing transfers. My bank was behind for a considerable amount of time. About a month ago, Check 21 went into effect a year to the day after it was signed into law in 2003.

Banks have it bad and are inconvenienced. Laws are passed. The "fix" is prompt.

The electorate has it bad and are inconvenienced. Laws are passed. The "fix" is in the mail.

Now tell me what's more important to our wise and benevolent federal government; Making sure the money is counted right or the votes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by smooth

Probably because all those institutions aren't run by computer criminals.

Computer criminals? Probably not. Just plain ol' criminals. Oh, they probably are. They just haven't been "caught" yet. At the rate they're catching corporate criminals, I'm not holding my breath.

guthmund · 11-23-2004, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct

This kind of crap is why I'm getting into politics. If you can't change the system from the outside, work on it from the inside.

Oops. double post. Oh well, might as well use it, no?

That's fantastic. I suggested this just a minute ago in another thread. I couldn't agree more.

Other than "taking arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them," working the system is the only viable solution. You can only stand on the sidelines and bitch for so long.

Kudos to you, MrSelfDestruct. I only hope that the swamp that is modern politics doesn't dampen your initiative.

Superbelt · 11-23-2004, 04:41 AM

Hey daswig, if you are gonna post in this subject, could you please post something substantial and intelligent rather than ad-hominem attacks?

I take from both of your posts that you really know nothing about Bev and what she does and are only going off of what other people have said about her to base your opinion. Otherwise you would have had some specific argument against her rather than the generic blow-off of "She's a nutjob."

Fact is she is apparently the only person, with her organization, who is taking the concepts of 'accountability' and 'transparency of government' in our electoral process seriously. That deserves some respect. Her website has outlined very cogent arguments and has backed it up with evidence. Her efforts have helped to convince states to review their transfer to electronic voting, resulting in some absolutely halting all forward progress into the medium.

What do you have against someone who is raising warning bells against a method of voting that has such clear flaws (among many others) such as:
Releasing the sourcecode over ftp servers, immediately opening the software to hackers.
Running it unsecurely by using Microsoft Access as the database architecture, and establishing the encryption with a code that was compromised in 1997, thus worthless.
Developing absolutely no means of verification of voting. What is so hard, and so abominable that they would absolutely refuse to add in a paper trail? Computers crash all the time, software fucks up constantly, the most important piece of software for most americans, Microsoft OS has had enough patches since it's inception to show that no program should be trusted.

What do you have against someone campaigning for more accountability, better standards? Do you think she is doing all this as a flaming partisan? (I assume as much as you say "She's the Left's equivalent of Carol Valentine." Where is your basis for this? Do you believe it is a quality of the left alone to want to have verifiable voting? Ok....) She did file her FOIA request before the election. The outcome didn't matter to her, only fixing america's system of voting.

Please, if you come back to this thread, come with something better than puerile attacks.

prb · 11-23-2004, 10:53 AM

I don't know if he'll be back anymore.

host · 11-23-2004, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Bev Harris is a nutjob. She's the Left's equivalent of Carol Valentine.

If it wasn't for this "nutjob", we would not find out that some Florida election
officials at the county level, appear to ignore the peoples' "right to know", in
a matter as serious as 2004 election integrity fact finding. We now stand a
chance of finding out if these election officials have chosen to break the
law in order to obstruct justice and hide more serious malfeasance.

Quote:

BREAKING -- MONDAY NOV 22 2004: Florida counties stonewall records requests. While some Florida counties have been attentive to the public interest and have promptly complied with our public records requests (scroll down for the Nov. 2 records request, for critical audit diagnostics), other counties have stalled, stonewalled, failed to comply in a timely manner, or outright refused to provide the records. Stay tuned for who they are and what happens next.
<a href="http://blackboxvoting.org">http://blackboxvoting.org</a>

Ustwo · 11-23-2004, 12:47 PM

While you can make a big deal of it if you want, its most likely nothing more sinister then the original claims of 'to many Bush voters' in Ohio and Florida which have been throughly debunked.

I don't like the 'black box voting' (read 'The moon is a harsh mistress') but nothing in the election was surprising. The only one surprised was Zogby (which is very pro-dem, even my gay lawyer ex senate staffer friend says so and states they always used Zogby when they wanted a favorable poll). The rest of the states basicly lined up with the polls.

Manx · 11-23-2004, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

my gay lawyer ex senate staffer friend says so

I'm kinda used to your typical friend/cousin/uncle/employee/grade school teacher who is/was/will be a lawyer/doctor/poor/rich/liberal/woman thinks that guns/healthcare/iraq/social security/republicans/democrats/terrorists/soldiers are good/bad/dangerous/heros/a right/not a right.

But this one takes the cake!

Ustwo · 11-23-2004, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

I'm kinda used to your typical friend/cousin/uncle/employee/grade school teacher who is/was/will be a lawyer/doctor/poor/rich/liberal/woman thinks that guns/healthcare/iraq/social security/republicans/democrats/terrorists/soldiers are good/bad/dangerous/heros/a right/not a right.

But this one takes the cake!

No what take the cake is his boyfriend who is a republican.

I guess they never talked politics and he was rather upset with him on Nov 3.

host · 11-24-2004, 12:11 AM

Looks like Bev is gonna get a little help......

Quote:

<a href="http://news.com.com/Government+watchdog+to+investigate+election/2100-1028_3-5464969.html">http://news.com.com/Government+watchdog+to+investigate+election/2100-1028_3-5464969.html</a>
<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/23/election.investigation/">http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/23/election.investigation/</a>
The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress, will investigate anomalies in the November election at the request of five Democratic representatives.</b>

In two letters, sent Nov. 5 and Nov. 8, Reps. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and Robert Wexler, D-Fla., asked that the <a href="http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gao.gov%2F&siteId=3&oId=2100-1028-5464969&ontId=1023&lop=nl.ex">GAO</a> investigate various complaints about election machine technology and procedural issues preventing some votes from being counted. Two other members of the House of Representatives, Robert Scott, D-Va., and Rush Holt, D-N.J., signed the Nov. 8 letter.</p>

"On its own authority, the GAO will examine the security and accuracy of voting technologies, distribution and allocation of voting machines, and counting of provisional ballots," the five members of the House <a href="http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.house.gov%2Fapps%2Flist%2Fpress%2Fny08_nadler%2FGAOupdate112304.html&siteId=3&oId=2100-1028-5464969&ontId=1023&lop=nl.ex">said in statement</a> Tuesday. "We are hopeful that GAO's nonpartisan and expert analysis will get to the bottom of the flaws uncovered in the 2004 election."

The lawmakers provided to the GAO some 57,000 incident reports that had been received by the House Judiciary Committee.

While most observers have concluded that election technology performed reasonably well in the last election, a variety of anomalies have cropped up. In Ohio, President Bush received a <a href="http://news.com.com/More+e-voting+glitches+surface/2100-1002_3-5440809.html?tag=nl" title="More e-voting glitches surface -- Friday, Nov 5, 2004">boost of some 4,000 votes</a> in the preliminary tallies due to a transmission error. Data from Florida has raised eyebrows and led to at least one analysis that claimed the result of voting there is <a href="http://news.com.com/Report+Florida+data+suggests+e-voting+problems/2100-7348_3-5459186.html?tag=nl" title="Report: Florida data suggests e-voting problems -- Thursday, Nov 18, 2004">statistically implausible</a>. </p>

The congressmen asked the GAO to move quickly while there was still evidence from the election to analyze.

"There is substantial concern that much of the primary evidence needed to evaluate these allegations will not be preserved without immediate action," the representatives argued in the Nov. 8 letter.

Eight other members of the House of Representatives gave their support to the GAO request as well, the congressmen said in their statement.

pedro padilla · 11-25-2004, 08:55 PM

go Bev go.

11-18-2004, 01:01 AM	#2 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	No, Nader, Badnarik, and Cobb are doing good things, as well. Nader is paying the starter for a recount in one state. Badnarik and Cobb are in Ohio and, I think, Florida. I hope these recounts will end up in court. I anticipate that after the recount is paid for, it will quickly become apparent that a recount is impossible in some places--because of the paperless systems. At that point, it will end up in court and the court will have to rule something. I don't know what that something is, but if I can somehow trigger a small recount in Irvine (where it's hugely electronic w/o paper), the courts here and the legal scholars in the UC and private Uni's could likely take it to the top. The idea would be to force paper trails through the judicial process. Sometimes people call this judicial activism. But there is a bill Congress to mandate paper trails (or was when the show I am currently watching on Free Speech TV was filmed). It would be interesting to see how the bill fares. If the republican controlled Congress fails to address this issue, that is quite telling their involvement via complicitness, at the least. It's telling to me, but not proof, I'll admit. But I wouldn't call judical actions 'judicial activism,' I would call it 'checks & balances.' If anyone has any input for me on how to get rolling, I'd like to hear it. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

11-18-2004, 09:20 PM	#4 (permalink)
guthmund big damn hero	Well, that well thought out argument settled that right quick. I don't care what her motivation is as long as she's drawing attention to the horrendous voting practices that are in place. It seems all I see on the news are bits and pieces. One machine here, one companies machines there, a few votes lost or added and security concerning the ones that are cast correctly and how they're counted. I've yet to see a full comprehensive review of the process. I certainly think that there's a bigger problem to address than simply recounting and reviewing individual precincts or states ballots and procedures. Anything that draws attention to that fact, I'm all for. Will it change the election? Probably not. Is Bev Harris a screwball? Who isn't? I find it incredible that financial institutions like banks and credit companies all over the nation handle billions of sensitive transactions every day and manage to keep it private, secure and verifiable. How is it we can't seem to have an election lately without the Keystone Kops coming out to play? __________________ No signature. None. Seriously.

11-23-2004, 12:47 PM	#14 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	While you can make a big deal of it if you want, its most likely nothing more sinister then the original claims of 'to many Bush voters' in Ohio and Florida which have been throughly debunked. I don't like the 'black box voting' (read 'The moon is a harsh mistress') but nothing in the election was surprising. The only one surprised was Zogby (which is very pro-dem, even my gay lawyer ex senate staffer friend says so and states they always used Zogby when they wanted a favorable poll). The rest of the states basicly lined up with the polls. __________________ 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.

11-18-2004, 08:42 PM	#3 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	Bev Harris is a nutjob. She's the Left's equivalent of Carol Valentine.

11-18-2004, 10:14 PM	#6 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	Guthmund, if you go around quoting Bev Harris, "normal" people will assume that you're a nutjob too. It's like the LaRouchites. A broken clock is right twice a day, but if you go around telling people that the broken clock is always right, they're going to give you reynolds wrap-based haberdashery. Even the folks at DemocraticUnderground.com (which is largely populated by complete and total nutjobs/self-professed communists) have to periodically scratch their heads in befuddlement when it comes to Bev.

11-18-2004, 11:23 PM	#7 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	I honestly don't think we have much hope at all for election oversight. The population is apathetic and ignorant (I know a total of about 10 people who knew that there were more than 3 candidates in the presidential race, and none want to hear about any others,) and the courts don't seem to want to do anything. This kind of crap is why I'm getting into politics. If you can't change the system from the outside, work on it from the inside.

11-23-2004, 04:41 AM	#11 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Hey daswig, if you are gonna post in this subject, could you please post something substantial and intelligent rather than ad-hominem attacks? I take from both of your posts that you really know nothing about Bev and what she does and are only going off of what other people have said about her to base your opinion. Otherwise you would have had some specific argument against her rather than the generic blow-off of "She's a nutjob." Fact is she is apparently the only person, with her organization, who is taking the concepts of 'accountability' and 'transparency of government' in our electoral process seriously. That deserves some respect. Her website has outlined very cogent arguments and has backed it up with evidence. Her efforts have helped to convince states to review their transfer to electronic voting, resulting in some absolutely halting all forward progress into the medium. What do you have against someone who is raising warning bells against a method of voting that has such clear flaws (among many others) such as: Releasing the sourcecode over ftp servers, immediately opening the software to hackers. Running it unsecurely by using Microsoft Access as the database architecture, and establishing the encryption with a code that was compromised in 1997, thus worthless. Developing absolutely no means of verification of voting. What is so hard, and so abominable that they would absolutely refuse to add in a paper trail? Computers crash all the time, software fucks up constantly, the most important piece of software for most americans, Microsoft OS has had enough patches since it's inception to show that no program should be trusted. What do you have against someone campaigning for more accountability, better standards? Do you think she is doing all this as a flaming partisan? (I assume as much as you say "She's the Left's equivalent of Carol Valentine." Where is your basis for this? Do you believe it is a quality of the left alone to want to have verifiable voting? Ok....) She did file her FOIA request before the election. The outcome didn't matter to her, only fixing america's system of voting. Please, if you come back to this thread, come with something better than puerile attacks.

11-23-2004, 10:53 AM	#12 (permalink)
prb Psycho	I don't know if he'll be back anymore.

11-25-2004, 08:55 PM	#18 (permalink)
pedro padilla Insane	go Bev go.