Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Evidence showed that machines might be the real swing voters"

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
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 06:54 PM
Original message
"Evidence showed that machines might be the real swing voters"
Ok..think of ALL the articles googled and found by DUers SINCE 11/2..articles and stats from ***BEFORE*** Black Tuesday..example of one below. HOW the HELL can anyone be allowed to get away with saying NOW they never thought about the machines/software fucking up the election? Where were the hearings and protests and gripes before 11/2??? It's not like the companies and thugs involved had a stellar rep before they stole the election this time around.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/978/


In the Alabama 2002 general election, machines made by Election Systems and Software (ES&S) flipped the governor’s race. Six thousand three hundred Baldwin County electronic votes mysteriously disappeared after the polls had closed and everyone had gone home. Democrat Don Siegelman’s victory was handed to Republican Bob Riley, and the recount Siegelman requested was denied. Three months after the election, the vendor shrugged. “Something happened. I don’t have enough intelligence to say exactly what,” said Mark Kelley of ES&S

<snip>
The excuses given for these miscounts are just as flawed as the election results themselves. Vendors have learned that reporters and election workers will believe pretty much anything, as long as it sounds high-tech. They blame incorrect vote counts on “a bad chip” or “a faulty memory card,” but defective chips and bad memory cards have very different symptoms. They don’t function at all, or they spit out nonsensical data.

<snip>

Voting machine vendors claim these things are amazingly accurate. Bob Urosevich, who has headed three voting machine companies under five corporate names, said in 1990 that his company’s optical-scan machines had an error rate of only “one-thousandth of 1 percent.” At that time Urosevich was with ES&S (then called American Information Systems). Recently, the same Urosevich (now president of Diebold Election Systems) gave an even more glowing endorsement of his company’s touch-screen accuracy.

<snip>
Tom Eschberger became a vice president of ES&S not long after he accepted an immunity deal for cooperating with prosecutors in a case against Arkansas Secretary of State Bill McCuen, who pleaded guilty to taking kickbacks and bribes in a scheme related to computerized voting systems. Eschberger reported that a test conducted on a malfunctioning machine and its software in the 1998 general election in Honolulu, Hawaii, showed the machine worked normally. He said the company did not know that the machine wasn’t functioning properly until the Supreme Court ordered a recount, when a second test on the same machine detected that it wasn’t counting properly.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm hoping that Kerry's crew was planning for this and laying a trap
that is about to spring. We all knew this could happen, how could they possibly not have. Everyone that opens their mouth now that it's starting to get into MSM is saying "we know it won't affect the race" which seems to be keeping with their low-key strategy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I hope you are right
But my gut tells me that the democrat leadership made sort of a deal with the repukes. all they promised was to be a good lousier should they louse, and in exchange for that they will run a weak candidate in 08 giving Hillery a shot at it.
They the democrat leadership, signed off on the PFANAC idea and know that Iraq will be another Viet Nam and they will be in the cat bird seat in 08.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. True dat
I've been wondering why the opposition parties couldn't have got together after selection 200 and particularly after the farcical borg election in 2002 to ensure that a voter verified paper ballot is available on ALL electronic machines across the country.

They could have simply made it a requirement to receive HAVA funds, and we wouldn't be having all the problems today.

It seems the major and opposition parties went through the last four years with their collective heads up their asses despite TONS of warnings from us and other BBV people.




http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. Maybe you never wrote to your Representative about H.R. 2239
I did. There was quite a write in about H.R. 2239 before the election. Maybe you missed this bill. It is the bill that would have made a paper trial available for the election of 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I wrote to mine also
But it was ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. I did but I believe it never made it to the floor for
a vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. This bill is being held up in House Committee on House Administration
There are currently 157 Cosponsors!

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.02239:

There are very few Bills with this many cosponsors. The reason it is being held in committee is for the reason to stay in power and circumvent the vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 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