You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #30: Clear as mud to me - there are several ways aggregating [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
trudyco Donating Member (975 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Clear as mud to me - there are several ways aggregating
effects election fraud that I can tell:
1) Sophisticated caging - this is done prior to voting day and it means automatic purging of registration lists. This is not a new idea, obviously. I thought provisional balloting really takes the teeth out of this. Can you explain how this circumvents provisional ballots?
2) Undervoting/overvoting - this would have to be done on election day, it would require a connection between the aggregator on the Poll book database and the voting machine, it would require knowing which voter is on which voting machine - the machines would have to be psychic.
3) Phantom votes - this would require reasonable fake people to be added to the registered voters database. Then it would require the voting machine or a central tabulator to add phantom votes equal to the number of bogus voters added to the registry. I don't know how sophisticated the aggregator has to be. It doesn't even have to be an aggregator, does it? The software on the registered voters DB could add any name, a correct address, etc. The only problem I see with this is how to add the signature to make it look like somebody actually voted? In my experience the poll books were books and the signature was in ink on paper. Did some precincts have it all electronic?

I only see number 1, above, really using an aggregator. The second option is much too complicated if not impossible - it would be much easier to have code that just randomly made Kerry votes over/undervotes in the tabulator and then have the code self destruct afterwards. Number 3 has possibilities if you can explain the signature - that would explain how the Republicans apparently had an enormous registration drive/GOTO drive when in most places Dem say they didn't. I don't see it needing a fancy aggregator, though. Just bogus names and legitimate addresses.

Please post again when you can make this coherent. There may be something there but I just can't tell. I certainly haven't forgotten the Cybernet/Clint Curtis/Fischer stories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC