T Nation

Electronic Voter Fraud


#1

"no current electronic voting system is secure by the U.S. government's own standards."

Well, it looks like we can already assume George Bush will win the next election. The electronic voting machines we use can be hacked into, and votes can be dumped to the cadidate of choice. It just so happens that 3 companies manufacture the vast majority of voting machines, and these 3 companies are owned by right wing fundamentalist Christians.

Before you declare me to be a Bad Guy, how about reading the article?

Here's a couple of choice quotes:

"Baldwin County results showed that Democrat Don Siegelman won the state of Alabama. However, the next morning, 6,300 of Siegelman's votes disappeared and the election was handed to Republican Bob Riley. A recount was requested and denied."

"In Comal County Texas, an uncanny coincidence resulted in three Republican candidates winning by exactly 18,181 votes each. Two other Republican candidates outside Texas also won by exactly 18,181 votes. "

This is not a partisan issue, this is a question of whether the citizens of America are actually governed by the politicians they choose. This is still America, isn't it???

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html


#2

Come on, Lumpy, stop it already! (Sorry, 'Cake, I tried.)

I got a great idea. How about a nice, intense workout?


#3

For Christ's sake, I've said this a bunch of times already. Greg Palast got his hands on the actual CD with the names of known Florida democrats (more than 1/2 were black) were made ex-cons or something so they wouldn't be allowed to vote. Their were 57,000 names on the list. Someone was convicted for speeding in the year 2007 somehow for example. He goes through all the details in chapter 1 of his book "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy." That's what happens when everything is electronic, people can make typos.

http://www.gregpalast.com


#4

Fraud or not, muster things and ideas all you want, you won`t get those in power out of there even if you bet your life on it.

Administrations change, the system remains. DEAL WITH IT. ALONE. SILENTLY. Thanks!


#5

Mr quebec, you do realize that speeding isn't a felony?

Only felons are banned from voting in the states that choose to do so.

Several states ban felons from voting until they have fully served their sentence and paid their debt to society.

Only a few (like florida) ban felons even after that, basically a life ban for committing a felony. The problem is (like in most everything else) felons aren't always honest and still try to vote using different stats to hide, or move to another state.

Now the whole question of felons being allowed to vote isnt an easy one, in my mind I could see allowing it if the societal debt has been paid, but I would still consider permanent bans on certain felonies (murder, rape..)
It's just another punishment for the crime.


#6

"Administrations change, the system remains. DEAL WITH IT. ALONE. SILENTLY. Thanks! "

Who are you to tell anyone what should or shouldn't be discussed?


#7

If an article was written on the internet about it, it must be true!


#8

Jesus Christ, when will people stop believing everything that they read? I'm sure that if George Bush won Florida through voting fraud the writers of an extremely left-wing website would be the only ones that knew about it.

"It just so happens that 3 companies manufacture the vast majority of voting machines, and these 3 companies are owned by right wing fundamentalist Christians."

I'm sure this statement is 100% true as well. You do recall that the last president before Bush was a Democrat, correct? I wish that I could claim that I was an independant, because my views don't align closely enough to either party to say that I'm without a doubt a Republican or Democrat, but because of pathetic shit such as this, I say that I'm a Republican so as not to be associated with Democrats in the least bit.

What is really behind this is the fact that the Democratic party has absolutely no quality candidates to face Bush in the upcoming election, so they have to lower themselves to slander and mudslinging instead.


#9

Lumpy: Type in votescam in the yahoo search engine and read.


#10

"If an article was written on the internet about it, it must be true! "

Books have been written about it. If you would read the article, you would know that.

This is a non-partisan issue, this is a matter of national security.


#11

Isn't it very strange that out of all the newspapers & television stations in the United States this wasn't reported at all by any of them? People in Canada & Europe know more about the election theft than Americans do! It took Greg Palast, an American reporting for the Guardian & BBC to get the story out. Do I sound like I'm from another planet in thinking there's something fishy about that?

  • it's true that speeding isn't a felony. It's also true that the person didn't get convicted in 2007 like the disc said.

#12

Well whatever. What is well known is that Gore won the general election. The difference was in a state run by the candidate's brother where it was clear there was some rather bad voting irregularities that seemed to be centered around highly democratic locations.

Maybe its because the people there didn't care, but from what I gathered from the general media is that the people there were poorly trained and the equipment was in bad order with nobody around to fix it. That is a state issue that the governor is solely responsible for. Why not just have a revote and a recount; what is anyone afraid of? That someone is going to change their minds, or that people would be watching for "poorly trained" people running crappy voting machines? I would have to go with the latter in this case. If there was a revote, people would be watching everything like a hawk. I think the Bush camp clearly didn't want this to happen for some very good reasons.

At the end of the day, its pretty much over. I'm not a democrat or a republican either but I find all of these circumstances highly suspect. Gore isn't running because he knows that something like this would happen again; he won. That's got to be a tough pill to swallow.

Bush has failed to show WMD, people are getting pissed about the number of GI's that are dying, there is a lot of blame placing and name calling going on in the administration, and Bush hasn't affected the economy. Economic change takes time; probably longer than what a lot of impatient people are willing to deal with.

I feel that when people start grilling him about shortcomings and pushing him, the haze of 9/11 isn't going to protect him and the truth is going to come out about all his shortcomings; mostly dealing with a protracted occupation of a country that will probably end up hating it, and the state of the economy. Ever since he took over the USA has been teetering on the brink of a recovery, but nothing has happened.

Maybe Clinton rode an economic boom, maybe this isn't Bush's fault; but the current state of public opinion is going to decide the next election. I personally think Bush is going to win anyway, and that doesn't bother me per se. I do wish there were more to choose from however, just to see where things could go.


#13

Mr. Quebec from another planet:

Don't you think the liberal media in the U.S., who hate Bush, would jump all over this if there was even a remote chance it was true? Hmmm?

(Dammit, I swore I'd stay out of these political arguments!)


#14

monsoiur quebec: Goes to show you the length and depth of U.S. media propaganda.


#15

Oh holy crap, here we go again. People have to stop jumping on every single conspiracy just because it supports their party, or political position.

Yes there is voter fraud in America, and everywhere else. It is mostly a local problem though. Some overzealous idiot decided they have the right to think for others, and often they get into legal trouble. But this happens on both sides. There are a large number of illegal aliens who vote, and they aren't voting to the right.

And once again Bush won. Gore got the popular vote, but he didn't get the Electoral College. And those are the rules, not popular vote.

If you remember, people were trading their votes on the Internet. Those who were supporting Nader were agreeing to vote for Gore, and those voting for gore would vote for Nader. This was due completely to the Electoral College.

If the Electoral College were not in place then the whole dynamics of the election would have changed. So nobody can ever say for sure what would have happened. A good example was the people in Florida's panhandle who after being told that Florida went to Gore got discouraged and went home instead of voting. Those that supported Gore were more likely to vote in celebration. They would have still voted if the College was not in place.

Also the West Coast has been complaining that when an election goes strongly for one candidate, many people don't vote just because they think it is over.

If you don't like the rules, get them changed. Don't complain about them after the fact.

Now if we are done Sunday Quarterbacking, let's discuss the real issues. Like how Lumpy can only get his information through whatreallyhappened.com? Once again I linked to his link, and then went to his favorite little ANTI-AMERICAN website (he still does not understand this word) and there is the link, highlighted showing that I was there.

If he doesn't get off of this mind controlling propaganda website his brain is going to be mush. The signs are obvious.


#16

Who said that Democrats have never done it?

I think this idea freaks people out so much that they can't even deal with the concept.

The solution is to have each vote generate a hard copy, so that tallys can be spot checked or double-checked later. Right now, every time an electronic vote is cast, there is no documentation or evidence.

It's already been shown that voting machines can be hacked into, that votes can be added or subtracted, and that the hacker can cover their tracks.


#17

Lumpy,
I find this extremely disconcerting, but even more disturbing is the people's apathetic attitudes in here. Like the OCEAN of other evidence about this group of war profiteers/RW Christians/criminals that currently hold office... they will just keep sweeping it under the rug until at some point they will connect all the dots and realize that you were right. But even then they won't admit it... they will act like they felt this way all along. Just remember though, the current republicans don't have the majortiy of the country's best interests at heart, so if they are to win, they HAVE to cheat. This article didn't surprise me at all.


#18

Lumpy, Do you honestly believe a hard copy could be checked? Couldn't that be faked also?
Or are you saying everyone who votes gets a hard copy and takes it home with them?
If so, imagine the speed & cost of such an enterprise..

Roy Batty, are you saying that you believe there are truly people who are moderate in all beliefs and those people actually work in govt?

Take something like moral issues. Moderacy is in the eye of the beholder there. What one person considers "moderate" is another person's idealogue when it comes to morality.
Let's look at abortion. Where is a moderate stance on abortion? Then, go out and ask 10 others about it and see if they think it's moderate..

Even in socio-economic issues you have that trouble in places. Some issues are pretty obvious as to having both edges and a middle ground, but others are not.

Humans, being human, will most often try to align themselves with people who are on their side of the fence. Some will try to select people who are in the "middle", but still in the end they want them on their side.


#19

Good old lumpy. Your gore in 2000 shirt continues to fade. Your boy has ducked a rematch. Your candidates are a bunch of pandering whiners. Here is an idea to invigorate the party, hillary in 2004!!!
By the way lumpy, I noticed you didn't want to take me up on my bargain. Supressed the memory? OK, here it is again.

If the Good Guys win, you must say, "United States=Good Guys. The Republican philosophy is stronger. I lumpy should accept the truth and become a Republican." If howarddean or another democrat wins, I will express the democratic equivalent. Bargain?


#20

RE: so-called "liberal" media

I've said this before but here I go again. The media must APPEAR to have a heavy liberal bias because that will serve to bound thought & debate very effectively. (btw make sure lots of debate happens in this narrow range & then people can think they've got freedom of speech) The so-called liberal media wouldn't touch this issue because it would probably be too controversial. People would expect this sort of thing to happen in a totalitarian state, but Americans for some reason canNOT ask this question about their own country. If someone says the USA is just like a totalitarian state, they'd sound like they're from another planet. Think real hard.