It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chicago-area voting machine casts GOP candidate’s vote for... his Democrat opponent

page: 1
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Well nothing new in the Chicago area.

Except the same old story about [cough] *Possible* vote fraud.

Seems a Republican running for a State office cast an "early" vote for himself.

But much to his surprise, the machine apparently tallied his vote to his opponent


Who would'a guessed a machine could be a Democrat !!!



SCHAUMBURG, Ill. – Admitting his confidence in Cook County ballot integrity is shaken, State Representative Candidate Jim Moynihan (R-56), was shocked today when he tried to cast a vote for himself and the voting machine cast it for his opponent instead.

voteballotbox“While early voting at the Schaumburg Public Library today, I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent,” said Moynihan. “You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”

While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race. It is unknown if the machine in question (#008958) has been removed from service or is still in operation.


Chicago-area voting machine casts GOP candidate’s vote for... his Democrat opponent



original article

Well What Do Ya Know About THAT !!







posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Anybody who thinks this stuff hasnt been rigged for a very long time is in denial. You cant leave decisions like that to the serfs. Should be headline news, probably wont even get mentioned on the news anywhere.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
I'd guess the touch screen needed calibration. The candidates are likely arranged in columns and if the calibration is off, touching one column could easily register in the other (or above or below or neither). I used to see it all the time with handheld data terminals.

I know that lacks the sinister appeal of what you're insinuating but it's highly highly unlikely that it was hacked by a polling station worker. Anyone possessing the competency to pull that off would have just recorded the votes for Democrats discretely and the voter would have been none the wiser.
edit on 2014-10-21 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Heard about this a little earlier X, glad you got the scoop>F&S.
And that scoop needs rinsing, it's kinda stinky from this article.
I think the only time a voting machine is removed is when it
won't work at all. I was a greeter judge (address checker) in two
previous cycles, and I believe the one Mr. Moynihan was using
still worked for Democrats, so... what?

By the way I was an almost Rockefellian Repub until I recovered
some-- and went Inde/wish there was a 3rd party guy or gal that
wouldn't just water down the opposition to the Machine....

As of the last two major elections it became evident to the
election commission that I shouldn't be tapped for duty, because
I might know what was going on... probably why I haven't been
called for jury duty since I had that short conversation with the
judge after a slip-and-fall settled in chambers... 15 years ago.

Hey this awareness thing can get you out of a lot of civic drudgery.
I should write a pamphlet. NOT



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: inbound
Anybody who thinks this stuff hasnt been rigged for a very long time is in denial. You cant leave decisions like that to the serfs. Should be headline news, probably wont even get mentioned on the news anywhere.


Yah but, why is it the Dems always doin' the riggin' ?????



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
I'd guess the touch screen needed calibration. The candidates are likely arranged in columns and if the calibration is off, touching one column could easily register in the other (or above or below or neither). I used to see it all the time with handheld data terminals.

I know that lacks the sinister appeal of what your insinuating but it's highly highly unlikely that it was hacked by a polling station worker. Anyone possessing the competency to pull that off would have just recorded the votes for Democrats discretely and the voter would have been none the wiser.


But still quite possible.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:42 PM
link   
This is such a gregarious and monstrous offense, it is sickening. No matter who is doing it, there needs to be a fail safe. Be it pen and paper voting, internet with ID voting....I don't know but SOMETHING needs to be done to secure an honest vote.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: inbound
Anybody who thinks this stuff hasnt been rigged for a very long time is in denial. You cant leave decisions like that to the serfs. Should be headline news, probably wont even get mentioned on the news anywhere.


Like a lot more besides Rabbi Carlin have said, we have
no choice. By the time you get past that room full of purple
cigars in you you're no good for your constituency anymore
anyway.
But I WOULD prefer to be the least of three evils. An old
friend who presently occupies a reasonably high municipal
post nearby suggested I run for a seat.
I told him "Will you tell me in advance when the music stops?"
There-- that'll shut him up. It sure did.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: StoutBroux

Couple years ago this was on Slate when there was a big to-do about Obama votes being cast for Romney:

Should We Be Concerned That This Voting Machine Selects "Romney" When You Press "Obama?"


I spoke with David Dill, a computer science professor at Stanford and founder of the nonprofit watchdog group Verified Voting, to get his take on the apparent glitch. Dill told me it looks like a classic case of "vote-flipping," a problem that has cropped up sporadically in U.S. elections since the dawn of voting machines. In many cases, Dill said, vote-flipping appears to be the result of improperly calibrated machines. Because the touchscreen surface is a separate transparent cover over the machine's display, computer software is required to translate the position of the user's touch to a position on the screen. Some models of voting machines must be calibrated by workers at the election center, e.g. by touching a rectangle in the corner of the screen. If they're improperly calibrated, the user might think he's touching one spot on the screen, while the machine thinks otherwise.

edit on 2014-10-21 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   


The cynical phrases "Vote early -- and often" and "Vote early -- and vote often" are variously attributed to three different Chicagoans: Al Capone, the famous gangster; Richard J. Daley, mayor from 1955 to 1976; and William Hale Thompson, mayor from 1915-1923 and 1931-1935. All three were notorious for their corruption and their manipulation of the democratic process. It is most likely that Thompson invented the phrase, and Capone and Daley later repeated it.

Source of "Vote Early and Often"






posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: StoutBroux

originally posted by: inbound
Anybody who thinks this stuff hasnt been rigged for a very long time is in denial. You cant leave decisions like that to the serfs. Should be headline news, probably wont even get mentioned on the news anywhere.


Yah but, why is it the Dems always doin' the riggin' ?????


I'll get a lot of buckshot in me for both of these probabilities,
but:
1. They KNOW they'll probably have to in order to get even close.
I have conversed at some length with both sides of the local
aisle. I won't name names, nor do I claim any notoriety.. but
more of the blue candidates in my neck of the woods appear
to have a need for slo-blo fuses somewhere important upstairs.
2. Law of probability dictates as often as they do it, they get
caught more? Or let's just call it the luck of the Irish in Bridgeport.

Oh wait, this is the northwest suburbs, a supposed Republican
stranglehold. Belay that last libelous flapkey. Maybe we need a flip.

3. Lady friend of mine works in Schaumburg. She wastes no time
going home. 'Nuff said there.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:00 PM
link   
To be fair, the touch screen on the jukebox at my local bar sucks pretty bad too. But I bet the touch screens at the new NSA facility in Utah work pretty well. I guess it's a matter of priorities. Which is more important, an accurate vote count or spying on people's cell phone calls? Does it really make a difference if a Republican or a Democrat wins?



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

How else can you sell a senate seat if you can't guarantee a victory?



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:18 PM
link   
A small technical question.

After the machine is calibrated, don't they test it before they put it into use? That would have caught the problem.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Funny!

But the democrats never ever cheat! (rolling eyes)

What'll be even funnier is in 2016 and they'll come up with votes towards Obama.




posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: charles1952
A small technical question.

After the machine is calibrated, don't they test it before they put it into use? That would have caught the problem.


Of course they do, Charles.

Oh wait.

You meant to say if it worked correctly, didn't you.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Hmmm? Can't they be purposefully calibrated wrongly? All it takes is one crazed partisan from either side with access to change an election. To say that should not be possible on a voting machine is to state the obvious. They are designed so they can be rigged for some reason. Surely those creating them could create machines that can't be calibrated wrong or tampered with. A first year engineering student could likely design one that is idiot and tamper proof, so why don't they?

Personally I'm sick of both sides and find both Parties suspect and dishonest since they think elections are sporting events. Your probably right about the calibration, but how many machines, which way are they slanted and who is calibrating them?



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:40 PM
link   
never mind



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Dear beezzer,

Excellent answer. But I think I have a stumper. What do they do with the other votes cast on that machine? Get in touch with everyone who used it and get them to come in again? I'm sure the problem they had with his vote wasn't the first time it added a "D" to the vote totals.

With respect,
Charles1952

Of course, it might be too late for stumpers.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

The RIGHT thing to do would be to trash all the votes on that machine.

What they are actually going to do?

Not a clue.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join