Reply #53: I completely agree. [View All]

[Cadence]

I'm also a computer engineer and have looked at the software and the ease at which this could be done. The way they have their software set up it was basically designed to do this, not to prevent it like we would expect. It wouldn't have been difficult at all to get 3 million extra by switching names in the spreadsheet fields, adding votes, taking away etc. In fact www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm shows how easy it is. I don't think people really grasp that this is 2004, the technology age, that millions of dollars are spent every year on software design and security, that the level of coding for this software has become extremely sophisticated and that what Diebold did was basically the exact opposite.

I agree with they barely accomplished what they wanted in 2000 so they handled it this time. Also remember they didn't have the popular vote. The supreme court ordered Florida to stop counting when * was ahead by 579 votes. So this time they put systems in place to make it look unquestionable. How can you question 3 million votes? Exactly what we are doing. Well maybe there were 3 million votes but for someone else.