Recounters must see Votomatic labels & must de-compile programs!

[IndyOp]

I read a post earlier today about a recount in one Ohio county getting the exact same result as reported on election night - to the shock of recount observers. Did the observers see the Votomatic labels or just the punch cards? According to Douglas Jones at U of Iowa, recounters must demand to see the actual ballot labels used on the votomatics in that precinct so that they can check the holes against the tabulation.

Here is how I understand it: If, on election day, I am expecting Kerry to get more votes than Bush, I put labels on the machines in one precinct that indicate that voters should punch the first hole for Bush and the second hole for Kerry. I set the card reader in that precinct so that votes are swapped: Candidate 1 = Kerry and Candidate 2 = Bush. The tabulated votes show Bush with 55% and Kerry with 45%. It is apparently easy to program this 'swap' --

========================================
Here is the email Doug Jones sent me last week:

With Votomatics, installing the wrong ballot label for the precinct can make trouble. On the Votomatic, the ballot label puts names by holes in the card. If you tabulate hole one as a Bush hole, but your ballot label says hole one is a Kerry hole, of course, you'll switch votes. So, recounters should demand to see the actual ballot labels used on the votomatics in that precinct and check the holes against the tabulation.

I have written it all up, in boring detail, on my web pages. See the tutorials section in <http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/>

Doug Jones

========================================

Here is my attempt to think like a CEO of a voting machine company that has just rigged an election:

First - possible? - I could pick up all of the Votomatics from each precinct and put them back in the central warehouse -- so the recounters can't see the actual ballot labels on the Votomatics used in the precinct. Are the Votomatics from each precinct still in that precinct? Will impartial election workers in that precinct on Nov. 2 be there to indicate that the label is the same as it was on election day? Could precincts with doors left open all night have machines or labels swapped?

Second - really fanciful? - Let's say that I can't get away with swapping labels on the Votomatics. So, during the ridiculously long period between the date on which the GLIBS have requested the recount and the actual recount date - I have my technician go to each county to install a new program that can count punch cards in two different ways. Both programs/routines look identical to any recount observer and switching between the two is seamless.

The first routine is activated during the hand recount - it correctly counts the 3% that are inspected visually by recount observers. Given that the labels on the Votomatics in this precinct direct the voter to punch the first hole to vote for Bush and the second hole to vote for Kerry, this program will correctly reflect that -- Candidate 1 = Bush and Candidate 2 = Kerry.

Once the recount observers see that the 3% hand count matches the machine count, the technician activates the second routine through which we put ALL votes in that precinct -- and this one swaps votes just like on election night.

This *is* fanciful and nonetheless it doesn't sound like too much of a programming challenge.

The only way to work around these potential problems is to demand to see the Votomatic labels for each precinct; demand that 100% of ballots be recounted by hand; and impound the punch card readers and do complete forensic analyses.

What do you think? :shrug:

[Verve]

1. Keep this kicked for all Ohio volunteers to see! n/t

[GetTheRightVote]

3. Thank you for the educational value of your post

[Carolab]

15. Do you know if the Ohio recounters are seeing this stuff?

Does anyone know how to get this stuff to them, in case they aren't?

[Straight Shooter]

2. I would like Doug Jones to engage in a conversation with Triad president.

something tells me the Triad prez would have a hard time sneaking anything by this guy.

[Alizaryn]

4. DEFINITELY share it with the Ohio workers.

[Carolab]

16. HOW???

Does anyone know how the Ohio volunteers are getting this type of information? I'd really like to know because I've been trying to send stuff out and I don't know where to forward.

[tridim]

5. I'm extremely worried about self-destructing code

All they have to do it put a file on every computer that runs after the election and deletes or alters the code. Even the self-destruct code can erase itself, it's very easy to do. I think the NASA guy mentioned it during his testimony on Monday.

[trudyco]

9. But they don't even have to be that clever.

We talked about this last week, if I follow this thread. The trick is to change the label, or VoterGuide so it is NOT what the machine actually tabulates for that precinct. Everybody voting for Kerry in Precinct X are told in the voterguide that it is punch number1 when in fact the tabulator has that punch number1 is for Bush.

The voterguides are swapped back later. The recount people need to have somebody who voted on election day in that precinct to verify that their voterguide had the same punch order as the machine is tabulating on recount day. The recounters should get a list of punch order found on election day by precinct so they can verify the voterguide was not swapped.

Although this latest revelation about the rigging of the tabulator before the recount may lead to a hack, all avenues for fraud should be checked.

trudyco

[lizzieforkerry]

6. Warren County here...

It couldn't have been a direct switch here because our results were Bush 72% Kerry 28%. We were expecting Kerry to get 33-35% and HOPED he would get 38%. He never could have gotten 72%. Unless they just did it in some precincts- I am now answering my own question. Please email me so I can forward you the machine testing stuff that we received.

[KaliTracy]

12. Gore got 28% in 2000. How weird is that?

[KaliTracy]

19. in 2000 Bush got 70%

[Carolab]

18. Sounds to me like your problem was the "sampling"

In fact, it sounds to me as though Ohio is violating their own statutes by not allowing 100% "random sampling" of precincts in each county. Pre-selecting counties or putting a few selected precincts in a hat is NOT a "random sample". What are the attorneys doing about this? Anything?

[UL_Approved]

7. Kick. n/t

[enough]

8. kick

[Higans]

10. Print Bumper Stickers!

Is E-Voting ME-Voting? Prove it!

[aquart]

11. kick

[jean]

13. kick

[Woo]

14. Don't know much...

About voting machines -- OR how they work --

Does anyone know how many ballots they ran through that machine?

Getting the exact number sounds somewhat amazing -- if this trend continues throuh the recount, of getting EXACTLY what was expected --something is really really fishy(but it makes use look worse and worse) -- even with the fairest count possible, the machines aren't THAT accurate... especially when dealing with punch cards -- you should see the vote shift by a few votes either way-- or possibly the machine records a couple of under and over votes that it didn't record before -- but EXACTLY the same... that's kind of weird...guess you have to look at some other counties.

[KaliTracy]

17. it's all fishy... 10 day out of the water stinkin' fishy....

But WHY is this so hard to swallow? On Local NPR they had people from election boards saying it would be impossible, because the BOE is 2 dems and 2 repubs..... NOT ONE person (or the commentator) stopped to consider that maybe only one or two people at most in the state were involved.... even with the Curtis information -- people were scoffing the "very idea" ....

We need Stats of the last 5 elections.... we need to see if the were vote compiliations happened then, too. It just doesn't seem RANDOM to me -- and shouldn't it be? Random I mean. Why would Gore get 28% in Warren County in 2000 when he pulled out weeks before the election, and Kerry, who had supports of GOTV all the way until election, only got --- 28% --- How "Random" is that? --

[IndyOp]

20. Kick to the top for the morning crowd!

:kick:

[EMunster]

21. kick

[texpatriot2004]

22. kick it