Electronic Voter Fraud

maybe the great triumverate of Chretien, Chirac and Schroder can teach us naive Americans how to run an election, as well as impart their great wisdom on economic, social and political issues…

“maybe the great triumverate of Chretien, Chirac and Schroder can teach us naive Americans how to run an election, as well as impart their great wisdom on economic, social and political issues…”

Again, attacking someone else. Another “good guy” trying to divert people from the US election fraud issue. At least in Canada we’ve got a system where the votes can’t be tampered with.

monsiour quebec,
you are right, that was not a very constructive post on my part. But some of the things i read here just seem to get me fired up. Having been about 30 yards from the WTC when it was hit, seeing innocent people killed (including some of my friends) it sometimes baffles me that people outside of the US are so quick to condem our leaders and our system…anyway, this probably isnt even the right thread for my rant.

I voted for Bush the first time around and i’ll vote for him the next time around…if you want to believe in the conspiracy theory, that is certainly your right. Back to work for me

I don’t normally get involved with any of these political threads, but I thought I would add my two cents for a change. I am not that knowledgable about the American electoral system, but I do understand that while Bush won the election, Gore had more total votes. I am not going to address issues like voter fraud or who “should” or “should not” have won the election. What’s done is done and you cannot change the past. If the system is flawed, fix it, and quit bitching about the last election. While I my own political views lean more to the right, I still give the views of others who might disagree with me the respect and consideration they deserve. This should be the same with elected leaders. Bush has his convictions about how things should be done and if he truly believes that a certain course of action is best for the country, then he should follow it. However, even though he won the election, he should respect the fact that more people voted for Al Gore than for himself. Therefore, as the leader of a democratic country, he should give the views, wishes and opinions of those voters the same respect that he gives his own supporters. Once you are elected, you are no longer a Republican or a Democrat, you are the President and you are responsible for doing what is right for everybody and not only those who share your own political, moral and religious convictions. I am sorry if I hijacked this thread and changed the subject and I certainly did not mean to ramble on so much, but I think many people here get so caught up in supporting “their side” that they sometimes miss the bigger picture. I truly believe that there are people here on both sides of the political spectrum who would be on the exactly opposite sides of major topics if roles were reversed. What I mean by that is, that some of you who are telling Democrats to stop crying about the election, would be bitching the exact same way if it had been an equally close and controversial election that had gone the other way. Likewise, I think there are those who would not be opposed to the war on Iraq if the President was a Demoncrat, rather than a Republican. When you start to support parties instead of issues, how sure can you really be about your own beliefs and convictions?

Cheers,
SKman

SKman, that all sounds fine and dandy but if someone truly led by that it would be called “leading by polls” or “putting the finger up in the wind” and things of that nature.

Problem with peeps trying to lead like that is they are wishy washy. They cant make a decision without polling, and we all know how polls can be manipulated.
So then you have a “leader” who is actually just a “poll watcher” and is voting based on how the very few poll makers want him to vote.

I thought SKman’s post was right-on.

During the election, Bush promised to “bring people together” and “end bi-partisan bickering” and that type of thing.

Post-election, he has surrounded himself with arch-conservatives and tried to ramrod an ultra-right wing agenda. This administration certainly does not “bring people together”.

The guy was elected by 24 percent of all voters, hardly a mandate for the right wing.

Getting back on topic, the problem is that there is no accountability with the current voting system. Everything is secretive, with no paper trail. There is no oversight on the private companies assigned to tally the votes. It is a system that enables corruption.

And yes, this corruption can be bi-partisan. As someone pointed out, it could easily be rogue precinct captains, or tampering on the local level, altering the outcome of national as well as local races.

I think this is an issue that needs to be addressed, no matter what someone’s specific political beliefs are.

Ok lumpy, what is your plan for a voting system that is fast & accurate enough and of course doesnt cost a lot more than current method?
Have you ever worked in your precinct as a voting judge?

BTW, that was a cheap shot about the “bringing people together” thing that the president said… We both know all politicians say that same lame crap so why bring it up again?

I think we all agree that the system isnt perfect. The truly hard part is coming up with something that is better on most counts without requiring massive increases in spending or hours to accomplish. If there is one thing that i’ve learned about election time every year, it’s that people by and large dont really care.

Good example will be this question:

Have you ever worked in your precinct as an election judge?

Wasn’t it in Louisianna the last election when the election was overturned and the Republican won when at first they thought the Democrat won but they found out in one county twice as many people voted for the Democrat as even lived in the county!??

Anyone know what that was? It was the election for Senator I believe.

“Have you ever worked in your precinct as an election judge?”

Why no… no I have not.

Did you read the article I posted a link to, to start this thread?

I assume not, because you’re challenging me to come up with the solutions, when there are suggestions for solutions made in the article.

Note: I am tired of being so serious, so I have a very serious statement below, and for my sanity I have added the word penis to the end of every paragraph.

It is so fun to see people calling Bush an ultra right-winger. He is a liberal plain and simple. He has expanded government, and increased spending. Penis.

The basics are this (penis):

Conservative - believes in smaller government, and lower taxes. A less intrusive government. Penis.

Liberal - believes in larger government, and higher taxes. That the government should help people. Penis

I think it is funny that liberals seem to be the most afraid of the government, and yet want to give the government more power and money. (Ok, there are some militia’s that are more afraid of the government.) Vagina, oh I meant penis, sorry

I would admit that a hard copy signed by both an election rep, and the voter, with each having a copy, might help. Then an online record of all votes, with a code number, not names, so people could verify their vote. And if it does not match, they report it. If incorrect then it is changed. If the records do not mach, and neither can be proven to be fake, then the vote is simply voided. (And a serious investigation ensues.) Penis.

Also there should be a time limit to a change. After about a week, only an investigation should be done. The biggest problem with this solution is voter remorse. (This is why there should only be a week, or less.) Penis.

Also anyone could opt out of having their hard copy, or having it signed. (If you aren’t going to check it then why waste time.) This is just one possible idea.

Penis.

Lumpy, yes i read the article. Mostly just a drivel written by someone who obviously doesn’t like the owners/semi monopoly of who currently is winning the voting machine contracts.

Those “solutions” they offer are typical in that they are merely just suggestions that anyone would say and have no idea of cost/implementation.

I mean everyone knows you want to make it tougher to hack, what kind of solution offer is that?!?

Having code open sourced is a double edged sword. If it’s open then you will essentially invite haxors to crack it, and not just high level ones since it’s already open the lower ones can start working without knowing how to crack the code.

And the paper idea isnt the easiest thing on earth. You imagine how slow voting would be if everyone waited for paper to print? Not to mention the costs of toner/paper. And the required wastebaskets/fancy paper shredding service that would be needed on site since most peeps would throw it away.

I mentioned election judge since I merely wanted to make a point. You are someone who is even talking about this idea yet has never volunteered to do some of the work. Even caring (talking ) about this whole thing puts you into the small minority, and if someone like you hasnt volunteered yet, where do you think you will find volunteers?
It’s getting harder and harder to do every cycle since less and less old retired people are truly retired nowadays.

Essentially I agree we need to work to make this system more secure, but in reality I accept that it probably never will be. If people can haxor high level govt crap they surely are going to be able to do the same with something not considered nearly as vital or funded as well. And going back to the old days of voting on paper isn’t going to happen.

BTW, ive found that when i post and get that “log in screen” again even though i was logged in, just use the back arrow and your post is there… Then you can copy/paste and not lose/retype it all. At least it worked for me this time…

RESTLESS:

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

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

If you want to support a thread that will lead nobody nowhere, go on.

Rights without might aint worth shit. You can have all the rights you think you want, like the right to talk or post a thread about vote fraud, if youre not in a position to change things, you`re wasting energy (dreaming).

Since most probably nobody here has the power to change the system by himself or through his contacts, this original thread is pure speculation. Hence, deal with it personally and keep it to yourself.

MON Q:

Again, attacking someone else. Another “good guy” trying to divert people from the US election fraud issue. At least in Canada we’ve got a system where the votes can’t be tampered with.

Yeah, sure.

What good is the Canadian system worth?

Can it be taken seriously when representative voting (% in voting booths = % of seats) is inexistent? Cases like 18% of votes get translated to 2.4% of seats is soooooo representative and might I add…democratic?

And I am sure you know how Quebec redraws its regional/county limits to fits its upcoming voting schemes. Hummm…why was that not mentionned?

In the end, people get the politicians they deserve. At least in the US, democracy is a vital pillar of the nation, not just something you talk (passively) over coffee. US citizens can challenge the system and its representatives far more (and expect more accountability) than elsewhere in the world.

I therefore believe that you are not in a position to point fingers or give lessons on democratic matters to US citizens. Tamperable results or not, if your house has worthless (read: illusion of democracy) foundations, was is it really worth? Specially when you look elsewhere…

“At least in the US, democracy is a vital pillar of the nation”

What a joke. In the USA you’ve got stage-managed elections with the PR industry determining what words come out of people’s mouths based on tests on the effects of the words. Somehow people can’t figure out how profoundly contemptuous that is of democracy. And when you’ve got basically 2 choices, R or D, each of which represent the same narrow elite interests, when what, 1/2 of the eligible voters actually take part in the election, which turns out to be a statistical tie, how can you say you live in a democracy? LOL Even if Bush didn’t steal the election & Gore won with whatever votes he would have had, the variations would have still been well within the margins of error & been a statistical tie. There is a simple explanation for such results: people were voting at random. Now, in such a case where an election is a meaningless statistical tie, a victor has to be chosen somehow by some arbitrary choice, like flipping a coin. That’s what kind of democracy the USA was in 2000.

As for Canada, we’ve got a parliamentary system, so we don’t vote for a leader, we vote for a party whose members represent us. The PM/Premier is just the leader of the party.

MON Q:

  1. Give the Canadian people a real choice to change systems;
  2. Let them decide what they want for real, not based on historically meaningless shit, like political parties using line of party (read: dictatorial) decisions;
  3. Give them representative voting systems;
  4. Give them something stronger than the Bill of Rights. Like a REAL Consitution;

THEN you could start talking about something called a Canadian democracy.

All voting systems are based on selling intagibles and using emotion. Expect manipulation. Dont expect people, at large, to vote using their brains. They vote on how they FEEL about a candidate far more than what the guy has to say. And dont expect people to be consistent. In Canada, before Chretien`s last election, people rambled that they regretted their choice, and still wound up re-electing him. Fear of the unknown is far stronger.

Goes far in explaining how people think and remember…no wonder why politicians feel no problem manipulating them…Based on how people react, large scale, I can`t blame them…