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 #11: The Diebold effect? [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 » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 01:45 AM
Response to Original message
11. The Diebold effect?
MINNESOTA: Norm Coleman (R-incumbent) v. Al Franken (D)

At last count, just 443 votes separate the two candidates, out of some 2.5 million votes counted to date. An automatic manual recount has been triggered, and is now scheduled for mid-November. The state uses all paper ballots, but in much of the state they were counted on ES&S optical-scan systems which "reported inconsistent vote totals", such that “The same ballots run through the same machines, yielded different results each time” when the same machines were tested just before the election in Michigan.

Two of the three largest counties use the same Diebold op-scan machines which miscounted huge numbers of ballots in the January NH primary (among other elections), were used to hack a mock-election in HBO's Emmy-nominated Hacking Democracy, and, by Diebold's own admission, regularly drop thousands of votes when memory cartridges are uploaded to the central tabulator.

Some good news: MN's Sec. of State Mark Ritchie has been one of a handful of Democratic state election chiefs to have been a long-time election integrity advocate.

See our detailed coverage from last night here...

GEORGIA: Saxby Chambliss (R-incumbent) v. Jim Martin (D)

The state uses Diebold touch-screen machines across the entire state. Every vote cast on one of those machines is a 100% unverifiable vote. Chambliss, was declared the victor in 2002 in an upset over incumbent Max Cleland (D), despite pre-election polls predicting a Cleland win. That was the year that the state used the Diebold touch-screens for the first time, and the year that Diebold themselves secretly patched all of the machines, just prior to the election, with uncertified software patches


more here > http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6645
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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