OPRAH SEES OWN PRESIDENTIAL VOTE DROPPED BY TOUCH-SCREEN VOTING MACHINE

[BradBlog]

Source: BRAD BLOG, HuffPo



VIDEO: OPRAH SEES OWN PRESIDENTIAL VOTE DROPPED BY TOUCH-SCREEN VOTING MACHINE
'I went back to check it, it had not recorded my presidential vote!', Says Terrified, Potentially Disenfranchised Queen of Television...

Well, now, finally we may be able to get rid of these damned things, now that it's actually happened to Oprah.

"When I voted yesterday electronically, the first vote that you vote for on the ballot is the presidential candidate. It was my first time doing electronic, so I didn't mark the X strong enough, or I held down too long. Because then when I went back to check it, it had not recorded my presidential vote," she said.

She then simulated her meltdown, shaking and breathing heavily while stuttering out the words, "It didn't record my presidential vote."

VIDEO, FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6603


Read more: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6603

[Botany]

1. Oh Oprah ..... Oh Brad

The machine was just out of "calibration"

I am doing some election work in Ohio the word is

VOTE ON PAPER! do not touch those damn machines.

[PatrynXX]

19. magnetic

so if I came in there with several cow magnets... it might cause something to go out of calibration? :P not really joking though. Easy to come by. I imagine as with all electronic items, magnets are still a no no.

[awoke_in_2003]

34. Nah, that wouldn't do it...

that trick would work on cathode ray tubes (like TVs before HD, or old computer monitors), but not LCDs

[druidity33]

47. well

it may not work on the screens, but if it's a strong enough magnet and gets close enough to the HardDrive... that's another story. A good static shock could do it too.


:shrug:

[awoke_in_2003]

49. good point. nt

[PatrynXX]

92. Wasn't talking about the CRT's

And yes the magnets I have (and um especially the magnet in my brother battery free flashlight.. the ones you shake) bring those close enough to any CRT and I might as well be on LSD.


No , I'm thinking towards the end of the day some nut bringing in something that strong and running it near it's electronic guts. When they teach people about taking the motherboard off with a screwdriver, it's a must that that screwdriver not be magnetically enhanced. Not only would the hard drive be screwed up but you might flash one of the chips. Which one guy did actually do and the motherboard was shot.

[whopis01]

117. A magnetic screwdriver is not going to harm a motherboard.

It is not possible to 'flash' one of the chips by using a magnetic screwdriver. It is quite possible to do damage through ESD, which is what I would suspect was the culprit in the example to which you referred.

[Pavulon]

102. SSD..

It appears the machines use solid state drives, store user data in nvram and write output to solid state storage (sd card).

Shielding covers magnetic issues. There are computers operating in MRI machines in tremendous magnetic fields.

This is a case of fear of technology.

[OrwellwasRight]

106. Not trusting electronic vote machines is a fear of technology?

Or am I misunderstanding you?

Because, otherwise, we should chat. There are some books and films I can recommend to you as well. Really.

[Pavulon]

111. Ever been to vegas, sat at a bar?

in front of you is a machine with a touch interface that is designed to take your money. It will do so with a high level of reliability. They survive beer spills, pounding by users.

PLCs live in machine shops and I have seen very hostile environmentals, they chug along.

Technology is very simple. It does EXACTLY what it is programmed to do. If it is interfered with that can be made traceable.

So you have either poor interface design, poor computational logic, or poor data structure. Automation, like people, is subject to compromise but compromise is detectable.

Social engineering is still the first choice when available to defeat any system, automated or not.

[OrwellwasRight]

134. People expect to lose money at slot machines,

so you have to "cheat" to take people's money. People do expect to be able to vote and have the vote count exactly.

When there is evidence that that is not the case, then one should not trust electronic voting machines. Not because we "fear" technology, but because we understand it.

ATMs are computers that in theory should be subject to viruses, malware, hackers, etc. But since people, rarely, if ever, report problems with ATMs stealing their money, they have presumably been created in a way to protect sufficiently against those problems.

However, since people have, and do continue to report problems with voting machines, we must look for an explanation. A voting machine isn't a "black box" that one can trust unconditionally to do what we expect. It is a computer subject to viruses, malware, hackers, and most especially and most likely, purposeful programming to undercount Democratic votes. Therefore, perhaps any one or all of those things is happening.

Do you think this is faked?
ttp://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~seclab/projects/voting/

Do you really think that 18,000 people in Florida went to vote in the 2006 midterm elections, and purposefully chose not to vote for a Member of Congress (ahem, the top ticket item in midterm elections)? Really?
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2006/11/72130

Blind faith in technology is no more justifiable that irrational fear of it. A little skepticism is healthy and warranted.

You might also want to read a book of two by Greg Palast.
http://www.gregpalast.com/

Attitudes of blind faith just perpetuate the ability to steal elections.

[Pavulon]

143. Life critical systems are automated

yes a system can be broken. There are steps that make systems more complex to compromise and alert when they are interfered with.

The complexity of a piece of logic that could account for actual turnout and than distribute manipulation in such a way to defeat statistical balances while hiding from sight would be complex. Straight deletion would not pass.

Again, showing the user you changed their vote defeats the purpose, right.

All these stories have not produced one actual machine with manipulated logic or documented behavior.

Just smoke and mirrors. I wrote UI code for PLCs and know people are generally the source of problems.

And if someone was going to manipulate results they would do it tabulation, behind the scenes. 1 hack, not hundreds of thousands on individual machines.

[OrwellwasRight]

148. Um, yeah, so your argument does not prove that votes are not being stolen.

Explaining how you would do it doesn't prove that that is not how "anyone" would do it.

Explaining that Oprah went back and corrected her vote does not prove that other people didn't.

Even if not one vote was stolen in this method, you have not proved that no votes have ever been stolen.

You didn't explain how the hack in shown in the UCSB video tape couldn't happen and therefore couldn't be used (or isn't being used) to steal votes.

You didn't explain why 18,000 people didn't vote for Congress in FL in 2006.

So, in sum, we are all supposed to sit on our asses and trust the results that we are told on Nov. 4 because you write software and you say so?

Your argument holds no more weight than people who say I should believe in god because they do.

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll continue to work to make sure that my vote isn't stolen,

[Pavulon]

152. Show me ONE machine

just one fucking machine that has been caught flipping votes. repetition is simple logic core to automation. If it can not be reproduced it never happened. Some dude hacked a sd card he had PHYSICAL access to. Great, now he only has to get a few bezillion of them. Or the central tab hack. The person has to find each central tab machine presuming it is on a public facing wire, access it, change data in such a way to defeat security, then cover up. All maintaining variances that dont grab attention. Dropping some preset number of d's would not even approach the algorithm required to make that happen.

I have seen the movies. I saw nothing that made a nationwide fix look all that easy. Your video doe not come close to a national grab.

I dont HAVE to prove votes are stolen, this is not my opinion. It is my opinion that such a change would be VERY complex to automate. I mean a work of art. Then it would have to be a ghost for all these years and never be seen.

Go plug in a to a usb port at your polling place. Call me from jail. Physical access hacks are not plausible. Someone rigged every machine?really..

The only hack that covers this complexity is a remote access central tab data manipulation. And that is complex.

[OrwellwasRight]

161. Ever heard of the Electoral College? Ever heard of Christine Jennings?

One does not need to do anything on a nationwide scale. One can steal a city council seat, a congressional seat, or a presidency by messing with a precinct or two.

What makes you think that Walden O'Dell, the CEO of Diebold, who promised to deliver Ohio to Bush in 2004, simply didn't write the program to achieve a Republican victory, regardless of whether somebody saw a "vote flip" on the screen or not????? Plenty of people are skeptical about the accuracy of Diebold machines, including apparently, the New York Times.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9804E3DC1339F93AA35752C1A9659C8B63

Several machines around the country have been caught flipping votes. See this BradBlog link, which links to newspaper stories from Texas and around the country about "vote-flipping." Or do you personally have to see the vote flip in front of you to believe it? By that standard, perhaps you should not believe in the international space station or the taj mahal.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6584

Charges of software insecurity, vote-flipping, and just plain fraudulent Diebold programming are why the CA Secretary of State demanded that electronic voting machines be pulled from use and go through a recertification process. Why? Because she knows technology, not because she fears it.

GT: How did you arrive at your e-voting decision?

Bowen: When I took office, I commissioned a top-to-bottom review of all our voting systems: paper-based optical scan systems, as well as the e-voting or touchscreen systems. The University of California took the lead, and it involved universities and private-sector people from around the country. I have about 700 pages of documentation that are publicly available on my Web site, and I had another private security report that was released only to me and the people involved because it has secrecy issues. It was really clear that there was no way we could guarantee existing equipment in the field had not already been compromised, and that we could not prevent compromises from affecting future elections. It was also clear that there was no people felt was trustworthy to audit something where the vote was stored electronically. So we simply went to an older, tested technology that we've had billions of pages of experience with: the optical scan system.

GT: As a California state lawmaker, you had a reputation for understanding and using technology. How did that experience color your approach to the e-voting issue?

Bowen: I found that the more time someone has spent on the inside of the software and computer industry, the more likely they are to express to me their concerns about relying on computers for tallying and recording the vote. People who have been inside know all the things that can go wrong. (emphasis added)

More here: http://www.govtech.com/gt/380945


And one does not need to plug in a USB into anything. If you went to the links I gave you, which I highly doubt, it shows how a machine can be programed to steal your votes and you will never see a "flip." One just reprograms the software in the main tabulating machine and the "error" get replicated to any number of individual machines. If you are such a software expert, you would understand how programs (they are called "viruses") can travel from machine to machine even without USB cables. Honestly, this should not be news to you.

Try actually reading someone's posts before responding. I never said a USB port had to be used, nor did I say that vote stealing wasn't complex, nor did I say that someone would have to see a vote flip on an individual screen for a vote to be stolen. There are many, many ways to do it. As many software experts have confirmed.

And saying that you think a hack would be "complex" certainly doesn't prove it couldn't happen/isn't happening.

I'm done arguing with you. We may not have this election stolen from us. But if we do, Happy President McCain to ya. Please don't protest his victory. Don't have any questions at all about how the election results were very different that both pre- and post-election opinion polls. Instead, enjoy living in a fascist state. I'm sure everything the government tells you will continue to be true. Just like it has been for the past 8 years.

[Pavulon]

168. Your video showed guys with PHYSICAL access

with physical access to any computer you OWN it. That is why datacenters have physical security. Some have people who will kill you for breaking in.

I understand how to get code to machines, trust me. I wrote logic that makes milling machines in brazil pull code from a secure server in California over a very secure network (p2p ssl vpn over internet link requiring tfa of operator and hardware. code tranfer through ssl tunnel inside of tunnel setup by firewalls), validate the file on both sides using rsa key and file hash, and then load it for execution after operator validates, twice. The result were fan blades for ng turbines. The spec changes as other parts in the product change, so updated instructions are needed. This was not for security, but to prevent fuckups and find them after the fact.

The plc machines could be compared with vote machines. Except all the vidoes I have seen show manual collection of data. SD cards. An edge hack would be easier for a plc (controls a machine) because it is on the wire all the time. Their brain is purpose build from open source operating systems compiled with only the parts they need to work.

code does not travel in the ether, it moves over networks (optical, ethernet, serial connection, cell whatever) and is then executed by a host. Unless encrypted on the wire it is clear text. Ie your isp can collect what you post here. Even if in ssl it is visible movement. Tools look for movement. Why would one machine try over and over to get to an ip, why would it broadcast across its subnet and try to get answers.

So you propose a virus has existed, unnoticed on any network, that moves from machine to machine and then has the logic required to find vote data and change it?

The central tabulator hack is the only plausible method. It would still require compromising every machine and leaving NO TRACE.

Not saying impossible, just really damn difficult. I mean these guys wrote a product that uses ms access for a backend. That points to stupid.

BTW you would have to kill every coder who participated because no one talks more than programmers. (see above)

[Jim Sagle]

185. Trust you? Not when you've given us voluminous evidence not to.

[BradBlog]

195. Like the hundreds of election officials and voting machine company employees?

...Not to mention the poll workers who are, foolishly, allowed to go "recalibrate" the machines in the middle of an election?!

There's plenty of access. And that's the problem. Since they can't be secured, they shouldn't be used. Period. (Oh, and the part about it being impossible to verify that a single vote, ever cast on one of them, during any election, for any candidate or initiative on the ballot is also a small problem.)

[boppers]

202. Two things:

1. Did you see the vids of voting machines with unattended, unguarded, physical access?
Yes, they can *own* it. Demo vid showed a 7-minute compromise.

2. Did your ssl tunnels happen to use debian/ubuntu variants, which had a compromised PRNG for *years*?

[HopeforChange]

180. Ever hear of a random number generator?

You can easier randomize the code in such a fashion that the application will randomly do exactly what happened.

[Dems4me]

181. Not to interfere with your posts - but a couple of days ago on the

Rick Sanchez show, they had professor on there that had bought up maybe 12-16 of these machines,
(they should be like US mint plates- destroyed)he popped the top off, popped a chip out and
used a piece of equipment that reimbedded dated on a chip. Popped the chip in and 10% to 30% of all votes went to the candidates of choice. It wouldn't be hard for these machines to get filtered back into the voting system. I don't have the link to the show but I am sure you could google it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

182. You will never find the machine 'caught' flipping the votes

because when they are examined the examination is done by the people that programmed it in the first place.

They are glitchy BY DESIGN, and the designers who look at them - the only ones allowed to because of proprietary hardware and software - say "nope, we didn't find a thing".

And we're supposed to believe them.

They are the foxes and the machines are the chiken coops.

[Jim Sagle]

186. And they have allies on this board.

[NJCPA]

188. Don't be naive. When Diebold who built the machines and who

contributed heavily to the Repubs, sends their techies in to check the machines in Ohil, along with the Republican IT guru Mike Connell. Bingo, magic votes for Bush. The Repub philosophy, suppress votes when you can and change them when you can't. WIN AT ANY COST. See the blurb from the Daily Kos.


From the Daily Kos
Republican computer expert Mike Connell, who has been implicated as being at the center of vote fraud in Florida in 2000 and in Ohio in 2004, has been ordered by an Ohio judge to appear for a deposition on Monday, the day before the election!

[BradBlog]

193. Here ya go, genius...

"Show me ONE machine just one fucking machine that has been caught flipping votes. repetition is simple logic core to automation. If it can not be reproduced it never happened."

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6576

But don't worry, I'll fight for your democracy, even if you won't.

You're welcome.

[bean fidhleir]

205. "It is my opinion that such a change would be VERY complex to automate"

You must not know anything at all about programming, because that's the silliest thing I've ever read from someone who claims technical ability.

It would take me about, oh I'll be really easy on myself, a day to pseudo-code an extra routine that wedges itself into the written-by-me main program on startup, overwrites its own loader, does all the undetectable cheating I want, and then evaporates as its last act. It'd only be good for one run per install, but that's all it needs. As long as no skilled person can inspect the whole source before it runs, or snapshot dump the memory image while it runs, I'm golden.

[GOTV]

206. You want a machine that has been caught flipping votes?

http://coloradoindependent.com/13187/adams-county-quarantines-machine-that-switched-candidates-vote

[Salviati]

158. Just because systems *can* be made to be robust doesn't mean that every system *is*

There is no benefit to programming life critical systems to behave contrary to expected programming. There IS a huge benefit to programing voting machines to do something underhanded.

Granted I agree completely with you that problem of this sort are very unlikely a result of malicious design, just of poor design. But why tolerate poor design, as well as the possibility to engage in wholesale election rigging that is possible with totally electronic vote storage and tabulation, that just isn't possible when you've got actual physical ballots to deal with?

The only compelling reason I have heard for pure electronic voting is that it is faster to count than any other system. But is this really the criteria we want to maximize?

I'd argue that the most important criteria for an election system is it's trustworthiness, and in this regard, I believe that it is important to be understandable to everyone, and the official record of the vote must be human readable at all stages.

The efficiency of counting in a pure electronic system doesn't even necessarily translate to a high throughput of voters. After all, with N machines, only N people can vote at a time.

We can still use the efficiency of automated counting if we use optical scan ballots, meaning many more people can vote at a time than there are counting machines. We get the efficiency of machine counting with the trustworthiness of human verified official records. As well as the fact that bubble sheets of one sort or another are familiar to just about everyone who has been through the educational system in the last four decades.


Again, the factor of prime importance is what people want in an election, and I believe the the foremost element is trustworthiness, without trust, any election is meaningless.

[Pavulon]

163. If you took the SAT

recently (15 - 20 years or so) a computer graded it. They are far more accurate than human count. However with the sat system when an error was made it was MASSIVE. Automation errors, in my experience, seem to be significantly more visible than human errors.

Open source, human readable and barcoded with uid for transaction is a base minimum.

I have written touch screen logic for machines that could generate million dollar errors. All errors I have been called back to were always operator error. When the logic dies or the hardware fails it tends to be harsh.

Any machine can be rigged. Any human can be persuaded.

[OrwellwasRight]

164. Oops. Meant to type "DON'T have to cheat" to steal people's money in first line.

Too late to edit.

[Best_man23]

151. And slot machines are automated checkout stands

Are subject to far more testing and verification than those damned electronic voting machines.

Get rid of them, get rid of them ALL!!

[Pavulon]

153. NO it is runnng logic

that simulates odds of games based on your input. I was pretty impressed with them. The logic to make that happen is not simple.

Vote recording is cake compared to a e poker system.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

160. Or software designed to cheat

I've had one computer course in my life (FORTRAN programming in the 1980s) and I can think of two algorithms for cheating that would be undetectable without analysis of the software.

[Pavulon]

165. repeatable

initial detection is one thing, however by reproducing input and varying content a pattern manipulator can be spotted. This has been around in CS for ever.

Software can only be designed to cheat. It can not make that choice.

And that assumes the program was perfectly written, that it did its job, and the persons who wrote it did not disclose.

We cant keep top secret torture tapes quiet, never mind an election stealing conspiracy.

[Seldona]

192. Clinton Curtis did admit to building cheating software.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEzY2tnwExs

He was asked to create it by Florida Repug, and then Speaker of the House of Florida, Tom Feeney and a couple others. When he was done they admitted they wanted to use the software to "control the vote in South Florida."

His quote was, "I was ready to leave." after having that conversation with a lobbyist working with Feeney.

It is on Congressional Record, under oath, that a programmer designed a program to steal votes under false pretenses, and when confronted with his employer's true intentions he resigned immediately and reported it.

It is an amazing video. There are longer versions where they question him extensively.

*Edited to add that at the time Feeney was Speaker he was also a lobbyist for a software company as well.

[bean fidhleir]

204. And I have a SCSI card that can now see only the first 4GB of

device 0. It gave no warning and still appears to work perfectly - apart from that.

Be less enraptured by technology. Not every computer signals its unreliability by executing the HCF instruction.

[merh]

189. You are totally clueless, aren't you?

techie geeks that are ill informed - is that a case of ignorance of technology?

[merh]

190. Eww, techie glitch dupe

and I have no magnets :eyes:

[The Doctor.]

178. That's what I've been thinking.

Just wreck the damn things.

[surrealAmerican]

208. Static electricity?

That hadn't occurred to me. What with cold weather, and wool sweaters we could have a problem here.

[Grinchie]

131. Who said anything about LCD's?

Magnetism by definifition will induce electrical currents in wires and conductors, and these on/off currents are what is used in logic circuits.

Look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Faraday">Michael Faraday.

An induced current would be seen just like another impulse and cause some action in the logic circuit.

I suggest that you read up on Electricty, Magnetism, Inductors, Generators and etc. before you start spreading some disinformation around saying magnets wouldn't do anything like this.

I don't blame you, I blame our throwaway society with all of its Specialist Education that compartmentalizes everyones thinking to the point where they know nothing at all.

It's OK to say I Don't Know...

[Pavulon]

145. So would a nuclear blast

however the reality is most logic boards can and do stand up to massive magnetic forces. MRIs are one example, they have extensive automation systems in the box.

However if you walk near one with a chunk of metal it will sling the metal around the room.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEJ2notNLo0

Note the camera filming the massive magnet in this demonstration. It is writing data to some form of media.

Note the LCD panel on this multi million dollar machine. I doubt doofus is supposed to be doing this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baqYsnPOOGc&feature=related

[druidity33]

172. what do you think

about Spoonamore's contentions?

And about Connell's compulsion to testify on Monday?

:shrug:

[Pavulon]

174. So far their reaction is 101

change default password.. God help us all.

There are basic best practices that surround systems. Any automated system should follow these.

Everything I read (from quick skim) is basic best practice.

If that was my shop I would redact that shit too. GEMS server in public network, no cryptography...

This is what happens when you hit "next", "next" without a plan.

You cant stop stupid.

[druidity33]

177. so you think

it's poor design and not intentional subversion?

Cause i gotta say, that's a little implausible...


Redact?

[rucky]

112. Oh Janet

Oh Shit!

[swimmernsecretsea]

126. ROCKY!

[El Fuego]

154. DR. SCOTT!

:rofl:

[tblue]

2. I think they just messed with the wrong sistah!

I'm sure this isn't the first time Oprah has heard about such a thing happening in the polling booth. She could have covered this subject years ago. Better late than never. Now, Oprah, kick ass!!!

[xchrom]

3. recommend -- oh and fabulous picture to go with the story -- perfect! nt

[burythehatchet]

4. Ah yes, the undervote gambit

[farmboxer]

5. Republican manufactured and programmed voting machines

need to be destroyed and investigated.

[FarCenter]

60. Electronic machines were developed by CIA, AID, etc., to "assist" "fledgling democracies"

I remember seeing and advertisement on a web site for surplus electonic gear about 10 years ago. It went something like:

Electronic Voting Machines

Ruggedized and complete with weatherproof carrying cases.

These were manufactured for the CIA for use in a Latin American election. They were rendered surplus by a revolution.

[chollybocker]

6. It's because she named her company after a Marxist

[intheflow]

8. ..

:spray:

[awoke_in_2003]

35. That deserves a DUzy...

welcome to DU.

[shadowknows69]

57. I second that!

[OswegoAtheist]

7. Wow.

It's fucking sad that if this had've happened to Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, or any of the stooges, we'd have never heard about it, no matter how outraged they would have become. It's fucking sad that Oprah is one of perhaps a dozen or so people that WILL do something about it, with no fear of reprisal from advertisers, corporate higher-ups, etc. I hope she makes a stink about this.

Oswego "GOTV: Give Oprah The Vote!" Atheist

[mascarax]

24. "GOTV: Give Oprah The Vote!"

Good one! (All credit to OswegoAtheist)

[awoke_in_2003]

36. Welcome to DU

from another atheist. Have you seen Religulous yet?

[Heather MC]

64. You people are evil you will burn in Hell

Oh wait you don't believe in Hell
Nevermind
:P

[awoke_in_2003]

65. Well, if I did believe...

I would agree with Billy Joel- "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners are much more fun"

[Heather MC]

68. It's all fun a games until someone loses an eye

[awoke_in_2003]

76. Then it gets funnier. nt

[Heather MC]

88. Actually I am afraid of hell because

I believe it's filled with Republicans!!!
I have lived my entire life in Red States
I want my afterlife like to be Democratic!

[blm]

136. Sounds like the spirit of Michael O'Donoghue is being channeled on DU....yet again.

heh

[verges]

80. Or in this case

an Aye!!

[xxqqqzme]

72. I'm guessing Brian, Katie, Charlie, etc.

all vote by mail so they haven't a clue....ever.

[HughBeaumont]

81. Actually, it WOULD have never happened to them.

The simple reason being that voting machines NEVER . . . and I mean NEVER . . . switch votes from Republican TO Democrat. ALWAYS the other way around.

And until someone comes out with a widespread video of a voting machine switching A vote from Republican TO Democrat, these things are a detriment to Democracy and our elections a sham.

It's funny how Repukes are saying nothing about this. As if they're wholesale admitting and conceding that cheating is the only way they can win.

Come November 5th, you mothereffers better pray McCain doesn't by some "miracle" win after being 8-10 poll points and 100 electoral votes down with 3 days remaining. THEFT would be the only plausible explanation for such a horrific scenario and you know it.

[Raksha]

95. It isn't funny...it's infuriating!

Re The simple reason being that voting machines NEVER . . . and I mean NEVER . . . switch votes from Republican TO Democrat. ALWAYS the other way around.

And until someone comes out with a widespread video of a voting machine switching A vote from Republican TO Democrat, these things are a detriment to Democracy and our elections a sham.

It's funny how Repukes are saying nothing about this. As if they're wholesale admitting and conceding that cheating is the only way they can win.

I post on another forum that's about half liberals/independents and the other half RW kool-aid drinkers. You can confront the RWWs on this OVER AND OVER again: "Why do the voting machines ALWAYS flip votes from Democrat to Republican, NEVER the other way around?" And they won't reply. It's like your post is invisible.

They will post more look-over-there b.s. about ACORN, etc. but the only time they come even remotely close to addressing the issue is by saying things like "The libs are already claiming the election was stolen LOL."

That's what one of the wingnuts on the other board said last night. I told her we were done "claiming" they are stealing elections via rigged touchscreen machines and are now in the process of PROVING it. I don't know if she's replied yet or not, but I bet it's going to be the same response it always is: The sound of crickets chirping.

[Binka]

196. I Don't Shit Where I Eat Why Do You Post There?

They sound like assholes why battle idiots?

[OrwellwasRight]

108. Hugh,

Your sig line can't possibly be from Leave it to Beaver (can it?). It does sound familiar, but I can't place it. What's it from?

Thanks and hello!! :-) :hi:

[HughBeaumont]

110. Matinee.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107529/

VERY underrated movie. I was always fascinated with cinematic kitsch of the 50s and 60s.

[OrwellwasRight]

125. I don't think I have ever heard of this movie.

I must have heard a similar quote else where. Anyway, it's great. Thx.

[deepthought42]

87. And another welcome!

from a fellow non-believing heathen. Blessed Be His Pastaness! ;)

:hi:

And Religulous is great. :)

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

9. Brad, This is BIG!

Just Wow!

K&R!!!

[intheflow]

10. See, that's the thing about random vote dropping programming.

It's random, and so is each voter. Oprah just happened to be that random voter this time. Whoops.

[busybl]

11. oh oh

they messed with wrong person.

[awoke_in_2003]

37. "they messed with wrong person"

Methinks you're right. Welcome to DU

[yy4me]

44. My thought exactly, too bad she didn't vote earlier. I bet the

sparks will fly from this point on. She is one powerful voice. I hope she buys air time to demand paper ballots. It does not take but a few hours to print up millions of them.

[Gregorian]

12. Voter protest time! Boycott the MACHINES!

Why didn't I think of this before? It's so simple.

Voters all across the country protest and boycott the Rovian devices.

We don't need to smash them. All we have to do is ignore them.

[Laelth]

16. Um, you want us to not even TRY to vote?

:shrug:

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[paparush]

53. Perhaps the voters could demand a paper ballot rather than utilizin rigged machines.

[Laelth]

130. And what if paper ballots are not available?

That will just slow down the lines and create chaos and prevent a lot of other people from voting.

:shrug:

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Gregorian]

94. There's an alternative to losing a vote through voting.

That's actually worse than not voting.

Paper ballots. I just don't know how it is instigated without committing election interference.

I can't be the first person to think of this. But I haven't heard anyone mention it before.

[Laelth]

129. Agreed, in part.

Personally, I want mandatory, hand-counted, paper-ballots for all Federal elections by 2010. That's what they've got in Canada, and it works just fine! But it's too late to get that this year. There's little that we can do than to go ahead and vote on the machines we have, hope for the best, and then fight in the Courts if it's obvious the election has been stolen again.

If we refuse to vote on the machines we have, we would give the (R)s a legitimate basis for their claim that they won the election. They'd say, "See, we're the only ones who voted. The Democrats refused to vote because they didn't like the machines." At this point, we have to vote on the machines available.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--corrected "to"/"too" error.

[NikolaC]

75. That is NOT the answer

I am wondering if it is too late to just scrap the whole damn thing and produce millions of paper ballots before election day. The sad and disgusting fact is that they have had eight years to fix this mess and have chosen not to do so. I blame BOTH sides of the isle for that one.

[Gregorian]

93. That's exactly what I'm saying.

But I realized this morning why it wouldn't be easy. Interfering with an election. If we could simply refuse to use the machines, and demand paper ballots, we'd be done. That easy.

I'm just not sure how it would be instigated.

[roody]

105. I vote permanent absentee. My paper ballot comes in the mail.

I always drop it off in person.

[Gregorian]

114. Same here. I last voted in person in the early 90's.

I just got back from two years in Oregon. They have it together. All by mail.

[Laelth]

127. The (R)s controlled congress for six of those years.

And the (R)s controlled the Presidency (with veto power) all eight of those years. Yes, I would have liked for the (D)s to have tried to do something, but, in all likelihood, they couldn't because the (R)s have no interest in allowing everyone to vote.

Personally, I want mandatory, hand-counted, paper-ballots for all Federal elections by 2010. That's what they've got in Canada, and it works just fine! But there's nothing we can do, really, to fix this problem for this election.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Pavulon]

128. Why?

A person gets tired, hungover, and maybe cheats. A computer just takes input and processes it. Just about every life supporting (and taking for that matter) system uses automation.

If done properly it is far superior to 300 million hand counts. That is insane.

This ability to reproduce results is why machines (using human input) make better welds, cut to tolerances five right of the point, every time.

Check handling has been automated for decades.

[Laelth]

133. Machines can be programmed to cheat.

Sure, the machines work perfectly, but if they're programmed to cheat, then elections get stolen.

If two people, one Democrat and one Republican, have to examine every paper ballot cast and then record the votes on it, watching one another for foul play, then there's a very low likelihood that foul play will happen. Believe it or not, Canada accomplishes hand-counted paper ballots for every election, and they manage to get the results compiled as quickly (or more quickly) than we do in the U.S. I don't trust electronic voting machines (or electronic optical scanners) because it's been proven that their code can be manipulated to change the lawful outcome (either by the programmers, themselves, or by hackers).

That's why.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Pavulon]

146. One tenth the population

again computers can be PROGRAMMED to cheat. Computers do not cheat, lie, or manipulate. Only those running them.

Actual computational error is rare.

It is reasonable to use automation where it is supervised. A computer will launch hundreds of nuclear warheads into canada if programmed to. However the system exists to control the technology.

So a machine can create a unique receipt, along with many other checks that can catch ham handed manipulation.

[Laelth]

176. Um, no.

If the computer is programmed to cheat, it can print a receipt that is a lie and still cheat. So long as the code used to operate these computers is proprietary, and not open to public inspection, I will not trust them.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[SharonAnn]

184. I can program one to display one thing, total a second thing, and print yet a third.

And that's not the even the beginning of what could be done to sabotage an accurate vote using electronic technology.

The answer is not just better technology, it is in a better validation, tracking and audit practices.

[neuvocat]

13. kick

[bleever]

14. She's no BradBlog, but she's still big.

This might end up helping.

;)

[chalky]

15. Oprah's still in denial stage.

"...so I didn't mark the X strong enough, or I held down too long...."

No, dear--that machine didn't know you were THE Oprah Winfrey. All it saw was another Democrat voting for the Muslim terrorist. MESSAGE ERASED.

[blm]

138. BINGO! That's the first thing I thought of, too.

.

[Laelth]

17. k&r for some real news. Hope she makes a big fuss.

I want mandatory, hand-counted, paper-ballots for all Federal elections by 2010. That's what they've got in Canada, and it works just fine!

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[MillieJo]

27. The UK still has the cross in the box...

The counting is done in the town halls, infront of the candidates, the local press, tv crews, it is bloodly hard to mess with the result. I understand with America's need for instant news a hand counted cross in a box would take longer to count up but it is the safest ballot system possible.

[MrsBrady]

31. they could always

get the candidates to mud wrestle on TV while the masses are "waiting" for a real count.

that could be interesting.

:crazy:

[awoke_in_2003]

40. "get the candidates to mud wrestle on TV"

Isn't that called campaigning? :)

[Bluenorthwest]

41. A few details for you

First, in the US, each State is in charge of the election in that State. So while Oprah and the people of Illinois are still grappleing with electronic vote devices, that is not the case in most States. I'm in Oregon and we make marks on paper as well.
Second, and this is amazing, US elections take far longer to count up than for example Canadian ballots that are in fact all marked on paper. They tend to have results very quickly, here it has been known to take weeks.
Odd system, no?

[Peace Patriot]

55. You're living in Illusionland, Bluenorthwest. They SCAN your ballot into the electronic system.

They DON'T count it, in most cases. Then the electrons go flying through the aether, 'programmed' by Diebold & brethren's 'TRADE SECRET' code, to an Associated Pukes computer somewhere, thence to your TV screen, telling you who won. Your Secretary of State's office is merely a pit stop for the now energized and 'programmed' bits that made George Bush, the brain-damaged torturer of prisoners and slaughterer of a million innocent people in Iraq, President of the United States.

Mail-in/Absentee Ballots are not secure. They are treated like Optiscan ballots--merely run through a scanner. The ballot is dropped into a box, to gather dust, and is never seen again--except for a 1% audit only in the best states.

Many experts believe that a 1% audit cannot detect fraud or error. A minimum of 10% is needed. And we're not talking about an innocent system, such as they have in Venezuela. Venezuela use electronic voting, but it is an OPEN SOURCE code system--the code by which the votes are tabulated belongs to the public, and anyone may review it. Even then, they handcount a whopping 55% of the votes, as a check on machine fraud. Here, half the systems in the country do ZERO auditing, because there is nothing TO count (the touchscreens) or a miserably inadequate 1% (the optiscans, mail-in votes). We are not even close to the MINIMUM needed to detect fraud. And our system is run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY code, owned and controlled by Bushwhack corporations, whose close ties to the Bush-Cheney junta and far rightwing causes would make your hair stand on end.

This WAS the coup d'etat--or coup d'etat Part II. After the Supreme Court coup, they had to figure out how to keep Bush-Cheney in office, to keep the Forever War and the Bottomless Looting on track. The excuse of Florida's 'hanging chads' was used to fast-tracking these 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting systems all over the country, with a $3.9 billion e-voting boondoggle from the Anthrax Congress (mainly engineered by convicted felons Tom Delay and Bob Ney, and their pal Christopher Dodd, with the Democratic leadership enthusiastically behind him).

The ONLY exception today is New York, which til now, has hung on to their old, reliable, and virtually unriggable lever voting machines. But the Bushwhack EAC has now sued New York, to force them to join the election theft system. Every other state capitulated to electronic voting, including Oregon as to the electronic scanning and central tabulators.

No vote is secure that is anywhere subject to Diebold & brethren's 'TRADE SECRET' code. Mail-in ballots may be even less secure, since they first have to make it safely through the mail, then someone else--not you--scans it into the electronic system. At least with optiscan voting at the polling place, you feed it into the machine. (After that, the electrons rule.)

Mail-in is only preferable if the only other option is touchscreens. Even then, it's best to hand-deliver it, if possible. And even then, what happens to it? You don't know.

[OrwellwasRight]

116. Love your sig line.

As for the lever machines, they have them in Connecticut, too. I did election protection there is 2006. And even those are subject to error because, especially as the machines age, the working parts can get "stuck" in the vote or non-vote position and therefore not properly increase by a tick when a voter has pulled the lever.

I'm not saying that they are not better then electronic voting machines, I am just saying they are not perfect. And we all need to remember that votes were stolen by paper well before computers came near polling places (LBJ's mysterious win; ballot box stuffing; ballot box switching). In essence no system will be 100% error and tamper-free.

However, no paper trail is clearly the worst of all possible worlds and even electronic with paper trail can be manipulated because after you leave the booth, the machine can be programmed to negate your vote and its paper receipt and to replace it with another, pre-programmed vote.

I guess my point is that states need to take this more seriously. And we need to make it be taken more seriously. the complacency I have seen and heard from some Dem activists (on and off DU) is disappointing. some seem to think that if we just get a big enough margin of victory, it can't be stolen from us. I am not as confident. I think better to be prepared.

Finally, the all mail-in system is not fraud-free. Who is to keep nursing home owners from signing up every resident with dementia and do the voting for them (or adult children voting for their dementia-addled parents or parents voting for their autistic or Down syndrome adult children)? That is also fraud, but I guess of a kind that Dems don't discuss because it is somehow seen as a Repub talking point. I disagree. This kind of fraud could be used to benefit either side and would not be OK with me if used to benefit our side. And there is no protection against this type of thing in Oregon.

Nice to meet you. :hi:

[Grinchie]

140. I Agree, All Code need to be Open Source and subject to Code Review

After all, thats what we have done for years, unless some idiot in marketing say "We need to ship this!"

Or, maybe it's full of typos from the outsourced consultants using H1B programmers. void CTalyVoote();

There are many videos with experts stating that they see behaviour like reusing variables, directly changing memory addresses and the like. All the stuff that opens the door for malicious code.

The Trade Secret branding is nothing more than a way to hide the crappy code from scrutiny. Just like the Trade Secret law is abused to withold the location of GMO Test Plots on farms.

As a former Software Engineer, I would never, ever use an Electronic Voting machine. I would choose a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabulating_machine">Hollerith Machine over one if I had the choice, and even then I would double check the results.

[Salviati]

162. I think the differance is though...

Optical scan could be the foundation of a trustworthy system, with proper auditing and no insane laws like those that prohibit the using of the paper ballot.

I'd design a system where the paper ballot is the official record of the vote, so any hand count after the fact takes precident over any machine count. There would of course be hand counts in close elections. At least a 10% random audit to be chosen after the vote, and audits performed for anyone willing to pay for them on top of that.

I feel that commiting election fraud is really tantamount to treason, and should be dealt with harshly. Anyone who willfully manipulates an election to trhow the victory should be facing life in prison. Seriously. There is no greater threat to the viability of a democracy than elections that cannot be trusted.

On the other hand I don not believe that it is possible to design a trustworthy system with DRE machines as their basis. How can you trust that the machine recorded your vote properly when you have to rely on the machine to tell you that it did...

[Laelth]

139. As another posted mentioned, your method is faster too.

Personally, I want mandatory, hand-counted, paper-ballots for all Federal elections by 2010.

Thanks for the response.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[McCamy Taylor]

18. Getting a machine to read your vote is the new literacy test for Dems.

If you cant get your vote to read, the GOP will claim you do not deserve to have it read. Remember how they laughed at voters in poor, Democratic counties whose antiquated voting technology resulted in increased numbers of undercounted ballots---ballots with no presidential candidate marked in Florida in 2000 even when a hand count showed a Pres was selected? The GOP insisted that if the machine could not read it it did not count even though voter intent is the law according to the Voting Rights Act. They were using the standard of inferior grade technology being able to decipher the vote as a "literacy test" which is nothing more than a hurdle which is selectively applied. No white illiterate in the south was ever required to take a test or pay a poll tax and no Black could ever pass or come up with enough money.

The vote flipping machines are the same. The rank and file idiot GOPers that Palin courts, the ones afraid of losing their special "relationship" with the corporate bosses who screw them every working day of their lives the same way they screw the Blacks and Latinos only they slap them on the back when they screw the white workers, those guys will tell you that the Dems just aren't paying enough attention when they vote. If they all watched closely, the machines would not be able to flip. And anyway, everyone knows that the NACCP gives out crack to get homeless people to vote three or four times as dead folks.

Divide and conquer. And dumb as shit working class white folks who think they are special because their skin burns in the summer the way that their rich boss's does.

[Window]

30. I agree, and it's a damned shame. I live on a street with three Senior Citizen

buildings. We vote in the middle building, and there are so many problems with the touchscreen machines' vote-flipping, that it's pitiful. It's not bad enough that some folks can't see, hear, etc.

[StarryNite]

20. I am so glad this happened to her...

maybe something will be done if people like Oprah get screwed over by the gd machines.

[orleans]

21. here is what is AMAZING to me

that her mentioning the fact that the machine did not record her presidential vote was AN AFTERTHOUGHT!

she talks about the line, the wait, how she is usually the first one there, what a woman said, what another woman said, blablafucking bla.

and then, oh by the way,...

and then she blames herself (i pressed too hard, or not hard enough)

:grr:

with all the talk/news/reporting done on this topic why isn't this woman--who went out of her way to publicly endorse a candidate--more knowledgeable about these fucking machines??? and what the republikas did to gore and kerry???

she blames herself? well, then why were the rest of her votes recorded? did she change the way she was doing it? i doubt it.

...again, i can't get over it: she brings this up as an afterthought.

yes, she ought to talk about this on her show, educate herself and the public, and she should have done it years ago. (it might have come in handy right about now)

dear oprah--i'm glad you went back to check your votes. just think of ALL the people who didn't. maybe if it had *flipped* your vote it might have set off alarm bells--remember all the "under votes" from past elections and how the people seemed a bit puzzled by the public voting every race except the most important presidential one? and how they tried to explain it away by saying apparently some people didn't like either candidate? yeah, well--are we gonna say the same crap this time around should there be a stunning amount of "under votes?" obama just wasn't popular enough because he wasn't liked enough for people to vote for him?

on edit: yes, people in ohio waited in line for 8 hours in the rain to NOT vote for a president. what? did oprah really believe that?

come on, oprah. get a CLUE!

[goclark]

51. She has a clue now and we should be thrilled that it

happened to her during early voting.

This is a gift to the Democrats because what Oprah says is important.

This will keep the issue front and center for this election and beyond for all of the millions of people that believe that Oprah would never lie to them.

I am African American and I can assure you that our community will be all over this issue in time for early voting.

The African American community operates like the Underground Railroad.
Since we know that the "MSM" and the government can not be counted on to take care of us, since slavery, we do our best to take care of each other by word of mouth and especially in our churches.

It is absolutely perfect for a Church sermon because it is not telling the members how to vote, just telling them what happened to Oprah.

I can't wait to get to church tomorrow!

[Haole Girl]

22. This thread would have seemed surreal, enough, if it wasn't 3 a.m.

:crazy:

Now I know I need to go back to bed!

Crazy... that's all I can say...

crazy!!

[jennied]

23. Oh wow, with all her power I hope something REALLY gets done about it

[Dangerously Amused]

25. I am not happy that this happened to her, but I am very happy that it happened to HER.

Say what you will, but Oprah is a powerful woman who answers to no one and if she decides to pursue this, it may well be the break we have long been hoping for.

And for those of you who are irate because she did not attack this issue previously, give her a break. Maybe she didn't know about it. Maybe you think she should have, but maybe she didn't. But now she does. So instead of bitching, use your energy to gently enlighten her to this longstanding problem and encourage her to use her exceptional resources and connections to help us find justice.

Go Oprah!

[applejuice]

38. Here is the link to the Oprah.com contact page:

http://www.oprah.com/contactus

[yy4me]

48. Just whipped off an e-mail to her, I hope staff is on hand today

to read messages. Oprah needs to start right now, doing the best thing she will ever do, protect the right of Americans to have their vote count.

What degree of pressure she applied to the screen should not be the issue. We need paper ballots so there is never a doubt as to the real outcome of any election.

As one of the most powerful and respected of non-political Americans, I feel the will have the courage to yell this one from the rooftops.

[Dangerously Amused]

74. Thank you! I was going to come back today and add contact information.

[OrwellwasRight]

166. I emailed her. K & R. nt.

[stlsaxman]

26. hey- you think something might be done about it NOW?!?!?!?

:eyes:

[lonestarnot]

28. Well well well. Gee. Look at THAT!

:applause: NOW THROW THEM IN THE HARBOR!

[Window]

29. It couldn't have happened to a better person. Perhaps now people

will become more aware of this crap and something will be done. I hope Oprah goes on a mission and does not let up on this. Do some research Oprah!

I voted on touchscreen for the first time for the primaries, and the exact same thing happened to me. Talk about panic and raising hell...whoa!

[Ian David]

32. It's her own fault. She didn't visualize a positive outcome in her mind first. n/t

[louis-t]

97. Oh, stop it!

:D

[antimatter98]

33. The Republican coup d'etat has been very effective...

Our vote is still suppressed, or is registered into systems where it can be
altered or undercounted.

Look at this country clearly: We ARE a third world state now.

The Republican party has been playing six levels deep while we thought it
was just a simple game of checkers.

[Peace Patriot]

59. Excellent point, Antimatter98! And welcome to DU!

The game is deep, and their long term plan may not be all that obvious. With 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting and control of the corporate news monopolies, and control of all levers of power in the federal government, they can do the following:

1. Let Obama win (because he is so popular, and people are so hungry for change they might cause the Corporate Dragons a lot of messy trouble if he doesn't win), thus to throw suspicion off the voting machines and keep them in place for future uses, but (using the 'TRADE SECRET code, voter purges and other means) significantly shave his mandate, to curb his reformist tendencies; and

2. Inflict him with a Puke/'Blue Dog'-infested Congress (like the present one--of the 10% approval rating) (remember, they're Diebold-counting our primaries as well), to further tie his hands, which...

3. ...combined with the Financial 9/11 they just pulled off (massive, massive looting, unto the 7th generation), will make help for the "little guy" all the more impossible, and continued corporate looting all the more assured, so that...

4. ...they can blame all the suffering and turmoil in the country on Obama and "the liberals," and then Diebold their favorite nazi (Jeb? Ms. To-Nowhere?) into office in 2012.

-------------

What we can do to defeat this plan (and anything like it):

1. Throw Diebold, ES&S and ALL these election theft machines (touchscreens, optiscans, central tabulators) into 'Boston Harbor' whether Obama wins or not--don't be fooled;

2. Short of that--and corruption of our election officials by corporate lobbyists is a huge problem for the election reform movement--demand a ONE HUNDRED PERCENT HANDCOUNT as a check on machine fraud and a BALLOT FOR EVERY VOTE; or

3. Short of that, demand the MINIMUM AUDIT needed to detect fraud--10%--and a BALLOT FOR EVERY VOTE.

-------------

Optiscans are the corporate fall-back position, pushed by the Corpo/Fascist wing of the Democratic Party leadership. Just give people a ballot and everything's okay. NOT TRUE! If they scan your ballot into the 'TRADE SECRET' electronics, and do zero auditing or only a 1% audit, the totals are no more secure than they would be in a 'TRADE SECRET' touchscreen system. The only control is a potential recount. Recounts are expensive and very hard to get--and often do only a 3% audit of selected precincts.

The counting should be TRANSPARENT UPFRONT--not dependent on a hard-to-get recount.

Optiscans with a zero or 1% audit are as unreliable as touchscreens. So are mail-in ballots that are scanned by optiscans. This is Corpo/Fascist shuckin jive.

The system must be TRANSPARENT UPFRONT. Best check: 100% handcount. Minimum needed: 10% handcount.

Best system: PUBLICLY HAND-COUNTED PAPER BALLOTS, WITH THE RESULTS POSTED AT THE PRECINCT LEVEL. Election officials can use electronics to store and transfer data--if they can't be weaned from the billions of corrupt dollars involved in electronic vendor contracts--but NOT to tabulate the votes!

[louis-t]

98. Touch-screens are not the problem.

It's the software. I use a touch-screen banking machine that sits out in the blazing sun and sub-zero temps and it works flawlessly. I need to find out who the manufacturer is. I play touch-screen video games in bars and have never had one fail. The screens themselves work fine. That being said, I still feel safer with paper.

[roody]

107. Diebold's ATM has never made an error with my money,

nor Wells Fargo's money.

[OrwellwasRight]

119. Touch screens don't register everyone's touch the same though.

I cannot get most touch screens to work. It's like I am invisible. Sometimes I have to take a friend with me to get cash out or whatever because the screen thinks I am not there.

This is a totally separate problem, but unfair to those of us with low blood temperature or whatever the f^^k the screen is supposed to be measuring. It is why I can't get an iPhone as well. :-(

[louis-t]

121. Do you appear in mirrors?

Just askin'. :hi:

[OrwellwasRight]

124. LOL. But yes. However, many voicemail systems hang up on me,

sometimes with the message that I am being disconnected because the system isn't hearing any input. One friend's answering machine used to do this to me every single time I called. We discussed it, and none of her other friends reported the same problem. But it happens frequently enough that it clearly wasn't just her machine. It's my voice. The weirdest part of this is that I have a very loud voice. I'm more often told to lower my voice than to speak up. So you tell me.

Ah, when I was a kid I thought I was an alien. Maybe these things are just confirming it. :+

[Grinchie]

141. Perhaps you are operating on a different frequency

Everyone resonates at a certain frequency, and some have a very unique resonance.

People don't think about the billions of atoms in the billions of molecules that make up the billions of cells of our body. All of these minute entities are exchanging electrons, doing all sorts of chemical reactions, and dancing in the sea of energy that with live in. We interact with the environment like a little radio transmitter, although mainstream science likes to keep that a secret.

[OrwellwasRight]

149. That's kind of my theory about what is happening.

But that doesn't mean it is not annoying. I hate that I am being discriminated against because I speak in a weird frequency. It makes life more difficult. But at least it gives me good stories to tell. :bounce:

[merh]

191. Do street lights have a tendency to go out when you walk or

drive under them?

Watches stop on me often, I have tried expensive ones, cheap ones, self winding ones, and ones I must wind and none of them last 3 months - I now buy cheap ones I can toss away and replace for less than the cost of a battery or repair.

I generally have trouble with ATMs - I have found that if I protect the card in a card board envelope and not touch it too often, it lasts longer. There have been times the machines keep my cards and, like you, I've had to get friends to operate them for me.

When we did computer program back in the dark ages of high school and computers, when you had to write your formula on a punch card and feed it into the reader, the readers rejected my card - it would take it if someone else fed the reader, but it would shut down the computer or feed excessive paper or just reject my card if I tried.

[Pavulon]

122. capacitive

iphones use electrical impulses generated when your finger completes circuit for spatial reference. So gloves dont work. There are lots of touch screen types out there. Some are designed for performance (iphone) and others long life (video poker in vegas).

Some systems have a problem with a lack of motion. They catch the initial touch and can not determine if you finger is there.

The "touch" is used to gather input, like a keyboard anti repeat logic is needed. Holding down a key generally gives you a fraction of a second before repeating. That can be done in traditional software or hardware can handle this behavior. The logic has to determine what is valid input and what to ignore.

[louis-t]

144. Like I said, I've never had a problem with them.

:wow:

[Vinca]

39. This will become Oprah's cause - maybe it was good that it happened. nt

[Rancid Crabtree]

42. How do you check if it recorded your vote?

...we have the machines that you turn down a toggle switch next to the name, pull the lever like at the casino...but with all the talk about machines...wondered before if the thing actually counted my vote...must be some kind of tally on it somewhere...on the back maybe?...but the machine she used sounds different, so how would she know it didn't record her vote?...or how would anyone know?...do you look at the tally before entering your vote and then look again to see if it was counted?...do some lucky voters press the button and hit the jackpot?...it records multiple votes for them?

[llmart]

62. That's what I want to know ......

we use optical scanners. How do I check to see if my vote was recorded properly? What are my rights this Tuesday? And even if I knew that, how many people would be brave/bold enough to ask to check to see if their vote was recorded properly?

[OrwellwasRight]

120. In most systems, a final tally screen comes up to confirm your vote on each

office or issue, and you click a final OK to have your votes accepted and recorded. That is probably where she saw it.

[wordpix]

43. OK, Oprah, now SCREAM it out on your TV shows. Maybe your state's voting gurus will listen

[amb123]

45. You've pissed off the wrong woman

. . . Electronic Voting Machine Manufacturers!

[CADEMOCRAT7]

46. This is fantastic. She will reach a large audience to tell them double check your vote! n/t

[atjrpsych]

50. She will make a big deal of it, and she should!

I do think this is a big deal, and the electronic machines were probably responsible for why we didn't "win" the election in 2004. I think some republicans feel entitled to the presidency and will do what ever it takes to stay on top.

[americanmaverick]

69. It is indeed a big deal and I wonder why it hasn't really been...

adressed by the media, at least not seriously.

It's a shame we're still talking about electronic mahines, 8 years after the Florida catastrophe.

[wroberts189]

52. So long e-vote-ing HAHAHAHAHAHA eom K&R

[Grinchie]

142. Diebold thanks the Governments for the Billions! Hah hah

[Wednesdays]

54. Where does Oprah vote? Illinois?

Wherever it is, it's probably in a "safely blue" state. If that's the case, imagine how bad those machines are in purple and red states!

:scared:

[Phred42]

56. NOW maybe we'll be able to Kill these damned machines

Pelosi and Reid have had 2 years and did nothing.

Now that Oprah is mad - the shit will hit the fan :-)

[L0oniX]

58. I wish it would happen to McLame and Bush too n/t

[earth mom]

61. Oprah didn't give a damn about the stolen election of '04. She didn't even try to get Kerry

elected.

So only now she gives a damn when it's about a candidate she worships? Whatever. :eyes:

[lizziegrace]

63. For those who have been fighting the use of these machines

we'll take what we can get. If it's Oprah who finally drive the message home, I'm grateful.

[Adam42069gc]

66. IDEA!

:think::think::think:Anyone who lives in a district that uses these touchscreen "voting machines" at their polling place should/NEED TO take a digital camera or mobile phone that records 3 to 6 minutes or more of decent quality video or you could just use a good "old" video camera. Now when you go to vote using one of these touchscreen machines make sure you RECORD the WHOLE VOTING PROCESS AT THE MACHINE & also MAKE SURE that you "CONFIRM" that your votes REGISTERED for the RIGHT PERSON and make sure the machine didn't "move" them or just completely remove it and do ALL OF THIS while still RECORDING! The FIRST Most important thing is to vote and make sure that your votes are being registered correctly by the :puke:POS CROOKED MACHINE THAT'S MANUFACTURED BY A GOP FUNDED CROOKED COMPANY:grr:! The SECOND important thing is to make sure that record 100% of the process and make sure that once you start recording the screen that you NEVER stop until the process is 100% complete. If we can get multiple examples of proof of these machines "flipping votes" even when you push DEAD CENTER on the box and also proof of the machines just completely "blanking"/clearing things you already voted for then maybe, just maybe we can do something about these horrid machines and I DO NOT mean just try to "fix" them!:banghead:We need to outlaw these electronic voting machines! We need to alter the ballot scanning machines also: they need to have INTERNAL memory, not use a crazy proprietary memory card that requires a battery! WTF, A BATTERY??? It has been proven and shown that the memory card can be "hacked" and have plus and minus votes put onto it BEFORE it is placed into the machine and NO ONE WOULD KNOW! That is why the ballot scanning machines need enough EXPANDABLE INTERNAL MEMORY to store the info INTERNALLY until the voting is DONE. Then the poll worker(s) can print out a "hard copy" of the vote totals from each scanner and then download all the info from each of the machine's INTERNAL MEMORY using a ONLY ONE NORMAL USB FLASH DRIVE FOR ALL THE MACHINES! The USB port would be behind a LOCKED panel so not just anyone could try and download the info and it would also REQUIRE A PASSWORD! After all the info is downloaded onto the flash drive it would then be plugged into the main PC at the polling place, uploaded to that PC and then they can do whatever else they do!
:dem: :rant: :dem:

[Ms. Toad]

71. Just make sure that you are not violating the law

by using a camera to record the voting process. (Or that if you choose to go ahead anyway that you are doing it as an act of civil disobedience, understand the consequences, and are willing to accept them in service of a greater good.)

There are places where it is illegal - that would be a matter of state law.

[proud2BlibKansan]

77. It is illegal to take a camera into the voting booth here

[Augdog20]

156. Hard labor

The bastards that own these companies
should do serious hard labor
breaking rocks in the hot sun!!!!!!!!!!

http://bluesunited.blogspot.com
Vote your prediction of Obama's winning percentage at my blog's poll.

[Adam42069gc]

175. YEP!

An example needs to be made of these people, of the people that are ILLEGALLY purging voters after the 90 day limit has passed and all of these CROOKED voter suppression methods that the REPUKES are employing! They need to be brought up on charges and example made of them that says we take our right to vote seriously and we will not take anymore of you trying to suppress votes! Some of the things they are doing is so ridiculously stupid that most of us just look at it and wonder how can they expect anyone to fall for this but that is the problem, this is America and America is FULL of gullible, ignorant, low info voters that believe ANYTHING that they believe is from the government or city! As I said before they need to make an example out of these people and that don't mean just a HUGE FINE, that means that they need to receive JAIL/PRISON time for their offense(s)! Even if the person did it just once they should get at least 90 days and if the person did it more then once they should get 90 days for each offense and have the sentences run consecutively, not concurrently!
If it is illegal to record yourself voting then if you do decide to do it be careful! Video technology has gotten smaller and smaller and even mobile phones can record video so it should be pretty easy to do it discreetly and if some of us manage to get it on "tape" then maybe, just maybe someone will FINALLY do something about it! Voters are saying that their votes are flipping and/or being dropped but yet most people dismiss it so the only way to prove it would be to record yourself voting from start to finish BUT it's illegal so:mad:!

[redqueen]

67. Uh oh!

Cat's out of the bag now.

[demokatgurrl]

70. But did she ever get to vote???

[Ms. Toad]

73. Watch the video

She noticed the problem, went back and re-marked the race, pointed out that that is why there is a review screen - and cautioned everyone to make sure they check it.

[MJkcj]

She had better talk about it a LOT on her show people need o be informed!

why haven't we heard more from Oprah ayway... where the hell has she been? I thought she supported Obama but I haven't heard anything about her speaking out. maybe they asked her not to because it made Obama look too much like a dreaded hollywood celebrate?

[MJkcj]

78. She had better talk about it a LOT on her show people need o be informed!

why haven't we heard more from Oprah ayway... where the hell has she been? I thought she supported Obama but I haven't heard anything about her speaking out. maybe they asked her not to because it made Obama look too much like a dreaded hollywood celebrate?

[Ms. Toad]

91. That would be a good thing.

Get the word out: everyone needs to take advantage of every opportunity to check your ballot before casting it - too many people don't.

There are reports of absentee ballots not being signed (in most jurisdictions, the envelope must be signed for it to be counted), votes for more than one candidate (when only one is permitted), and votes not being correctly displayed on the screen (or in Oprah's case - not displayed at all). Sticking your ballot in the mail, in the optical scanner, or pressing the cast ballot button are final. Double-check everything before you do that!

It is even more critically important when you have to trust a machine to actually make the mark (Ballot marking devices for paper, touch screen voting machines, or volunteer assistants). Anytime something or someone has to interpret your intent - check to make sure it/they correctly interpreted it.

[louis-t]

79. Uh oh repugs, you just messed with

the wrong person. In a way, I'm glad this happened. And I'm glad it happened in early voting. This "You didn't hold it down long enough, you held it down too long, it needs calibration" is all bullshit. I use touch screen banking and it works great. And those things sit out in the cold and with the sun beating down on them. Every bar has a touch screen video game and I have NEVER seen one fail. Hey Oprah, IT'S A PROGRAMMING PROBLEM! Look out ES&S, Sequoia, and Diebold. You just fucked with the wrong sister. I feel a little better now.

[Overseas]

82. K&R for the electronic election fraud file.

Glad we have a celebrity eye witness to add to the count.

[colsohlibgal]

83. Big Mistake

You just don't mess with Oprah!

[fascisthunter]

84. So... Unless You Double Check Your Vote May Not Be Counted?????!!!!

WTF!

[GinaMaria]

85. Oh Man. The repukes are screwed now

:rofl: How long before these machines disappear? One Oprah show is more effective than an 8 year crusade. This is gonna be sweet!!!!!!!!!!!! The right wing assholes who have gotten away with vote stealing will be excoriated by this woman. Holy crap, I have to calm down. I'm way too excited about this. Need to stay focused on the election. Do you think her viewers/fans equal the number of votes stolen by these crooks? Put Oprah and her followers on the government's ass and we'll see change happen faster than Palin's wink. ;-)

[Raster]

90. Methinks election reform, especially electronic voting, will become Oprah's newest crusade.

She would be brilliant. She is the perfect person to champion electoral reform on a national stage. And besides, she owes us all one for Doctor Phil.

Go Oprah, Go!:kick:Every Vote FAIRLY cast AND counted!

[GinaMaria]

132. The Dr. Phil debt is a big one

that could be forgiven with an Oprah spotlight on election reform.

[mopinko]

86. we are officially no longer just howling in the wilderness.

take a bow all you loud mouthed patriots.

[happygoluckytoyou]

89. you mean the machine isn't recording A RICH PERSON'S vote! OH MY ! ! !

[satya]

96. But she's championing the wrong issue--double-checking the screen won't prove a vote was counted.

Brad, can you get her to understand that the machines are the problem? Why does she think she had to wait an hour? Did she ever have to wait that long with paper ballots?

Maybe she needs to watch Uncounted.

[Kurovski]

99. K&R. I hope she gets in touch with you Brad.

Maybe you could send her some info.

I'd love to see you on Oprah, doing a show on messed-up elections. Just please don't jump on the couch.

[Pavulon]

100. Little Devil's Advocacy

I came up writing gcode and developing interfaces for PLCs. Some touch screen others not. It is all basic logic used to interact with users. I am comfortable with structured programming and hardware level coding. My county uses OCR type machines so I have not used this sequoia equipment. Did watch hacking democracy.

My thought is simple. How do you hide the algorithm, to selectively manipulate user input? The math required to do this would need to be sophisticated or you end up with a situation similar to "office Space".

Here is how I would do it. First why would you show the user what you are doing on display? That alone makes me think this is user error. Displaying a change is actually more difficult programatically than just doing it under the covers. I take your input and change it. I would assume these machines like a plc runs a COMPILED block of code with xml control files. Users can change things like names or party affiliation, but not the transactional logic. That is what PLCs are set up to do.

The best the guy in hacking democracy could do was pre load a negative vote count onto a card. He never got off a central tabulation hack. Pretty sloppy.

This is a distributed collection central database type system. Why go after the edge? Manipulating data in an ms access (that was the only disturbing part of Hacking Democracy) or Oracle 11g database is the professionals approach. Oracle or DB2 backends most real financial systems and can be made very secure.

Single point of compromise, get in, change, cover tracks. That is the simple smart way.

Computers are simple, they do what they are told.

[AntiFascist]

101. K&R, and what about the election fraud that we can't see so easily? n/t

[Pavulon]

103. If I could steal your car..

without you noticing or ring your doorbell at 2.15 am and then steal it which do you think I would do??

Why would a hack echo results to the user?

[The Brethren]

104. I hope Oprah keeps talking about this

every chance she can to the masses until she can't stand it anymore.

Our voting system has become corrupt and inept on a nationwide scale. And it is one of the biggest rip-offs to taxpayers on top of everything else. Electronic voting has to go. And that will only happen when voters/constituents are outraged enough to demand that their elected officials do something about it ASAP.

With the help of celebrities like Oprah, hopefully more people will get it through their heads that coding/scripting is not foolproof and at best, it does what it's designers instruct it to; including designers who are paid to coerce the election....such as negative votes (roll-back counting), which has no place in election machines to begin with. Nor does coding to remove or switch votes belong in the voting process. Likewise, printed copies of the voting process from Black Box electronics can give you the read-out that the designer intended. In other words, a lie to cover another lie.

[clarkgabe]

109. This happened to me back in 2004 when I voted for Kerry

in Indiana. When I was all done, I remember pushing the final button or lever and I swear I saw Bush's name. I thought my eyes were seeing things, since I had never heard of this happening before with the machines back then. So, I didn't think anything of it. Since then, in 2006 and last week, I used the paper ballot. From now on, it's paper ballot only!

[understandinglife]

113. Finally .... and someone please tell Oprah this very simple meme --->

'Not One Line Of Software Between A Voter And A Valid Election."

[Pavulon]

115. Guess what controls reactor control rods, x ray machines

mris and every other life critical automated system. software. People cheated before software, software is not the problem.

[Don Davis]

118. Oprah Gifts to Audience Members Their Own Voting Machines

http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=4499

[buddysmellgood]

123. That's what she gets for voting while black. The machines can tell.

[LiberalLovinLug]

135. Oprah should do her own Machine Fraud Special

because the MSM are ignoring it. Maybe if the queen of TV dedicated her Monday show to it for a full hour, it would at least lay some ground work of awareness for when the election is stolen on Tuesday.

[BrklynLiberal]

137. As has been said..perhaps NOW this problem will get the attention it deserves!!!!

[LiberalFighter]

147. NOT LBN -- Was reported yesterday

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/31/oprah-opts-for-early-voti_n_139869.html

[trickyguy]

150. You go girl. Get em' and whup theyz asses.

[Augdog20]

155. Thank god for Obama's hefty legal team / my poll

Thank god for Obama's big legal team
also, this vote flip should bring more attention to the crime of the century of the vote rigging by machine
See much videos of this issue at my blog site:
http://bluesunited.blogspot.com
And check out my blog for analysis on the politics & economics of the season:
http://bluesunited.blogspot.com

Also, vote your prediction of Obama's winning percentage at my blog's poll.

[Kip Humphrey]

157. I prefer paper over pottery shards but bring back hand counting in public.

Paper is Tangible, Tactile, Indelible, Durable, Portable, and Readable. Pottery shards, not so much.

[indep_kidd]

159. Even if just one machine flipped

Even if just one machine flipped a vote in some an area, I would have all those machines taken down and investigated.

We need simple, concise ballots. They should be like huge punch-outs or huge circles to choose the candidate. Less room for error.

If they want machines, they should use machines to scan and tally the vote count. (Like standardized tests)

Each voter card should also have a specific number and the voter should get a copy or receipt of their vote. We need to eliminate the silly nonsense that we have with these machines and chads all these other stupid methods.

[Joanne98]

167. Didn't somebody try to get Oprah to do a show about this years ago?

[RedLetterRev]

169. HAVA a nice day :-\

Did we expect any different result from the legislation that was the brainchild of Ney and crew? And where are they now? Hmm?

I'd say that every machine, every syllable of code, in whatever condition and wherever situated should be impounded immediately, but I know I'm just farting in a whirlwind. I work with the compact framework, have since before electronic voting came about and I wouldn't trust it with counting chickens, let alone votes. I've railed on various blogs as a programmer experienced in the very same platform and development system, and what I've gotten in response is crickets.

If that's what America wants, then, well, at this late stage there's little I can do to help. I've offered over and over to throw my hat and experience into the ring, but it's damned difficult to get anyone who counts to listen. Maybe O can throw some weight behind it, but I don't look for a lot of progress very soon.

If you sense frustration, you are correct. There are a lot of programmers in my same boat who'd love a chance to pore through that code. Other countries use open-source code with success. IMHO, where there are secrets, there's hectares of space to integrate footsie and I, for one, am absolutely convinced that there is footsie in that "proprietary" code that no-one is allowed to look at. Trade secrets, my fruit-flavored arse. Cheat-secrets is every bit of it, and until the public gets a look at every bit of code that has ever been employed in an election (which I fully doubt will ever be the case), I will remain convinced that the latter is absolutely the proper term.

[benld74]

170. Brought to you by the GOP AFTER they stole 2000!

Remember? All this has done is increase the questions of elections, caused widespread problems, increased the cost of elections, allowed them to steal Ohio and 2004 election! EVERYTHING THEY TOUCH turns to shit!

[mcollier]

171. Your Fault For Vote

You have got to Check This Out!

SO Cool!
Fill out and send to all your contacts...... ASAP!
Your Vote Counts...

http://www.cnnbcvideo.com/taf.shtml?hp=1


Obama Supports must get this out....

Obama/Biden 08

Yes We Can...

Pass this around ASAP.....

[judasdisney]

173. Must a conspiracy smack Oprah before it's real for Americans?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

179. K&R. This is not good news for the...

...Diebold and Associates election theft team -- talk about stealing the wrong person's vote. Oops!!!

[Indi Guy]

183. K & gRRRRRRRRRRRRR n/t

[MrMickeysMom]

187. Maybe she should have featured "Black Box Voting" as one of her books of the month

[kerry-is-my-prez]

194. We should pressure Oprah into doing a show on election fraud, etc.

n/t

[bjobotts]

197. I don't trust the people who built the machines or control them.

[bjobotts]

198. Ever seen what a powerful magnet held in the hand will do to a monitor

[bjobotts]

199. Privatizing the vote recorders and counters is an invitation to corruption

[bjobotts]

200. Especially when the codes are kept private and away from public scrutiny

[bjobotts]

201. Spoonamoore's explanation is still at youtube.Definitely cannot trust e-machines voting

[mcollier]

207. Good Clean Fun!

By Move On.Org....

http://www.cnnbcvideo.com/taf.shtml?hp=1

Chris Matthews mentioned this last night....

Send to your family and friends.. GOTV

[vicecrew]

203. what is wrong with peop;le

That is terrible.