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.

 

Can we get an honest vote count?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   
There has been renewed and justifiable belief that the Voting process has for some time been comprimised to control the outcome of the elected President of the U.S and other powerful countries. Many feel that rich and evil people with a personal interest in controlling the globe in a manner only seen in Hollywood films and cartoons have manipulated their way into every level of our government and process. They have rigged elections, started wars, and have been able to maintain a notable cloak of secrecy from exposure. They hold the power of armies at their fingertips.
The question is.........With all our minds working in unison can we find an air tight way to ensure that the Presidential vote cannot be manipulated ?
So that the winner is ACTUALLY the one with the most votes!!!




posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   
The truth is, there will most likely never be a 100% actual vote. too many people have power they don't deserve and nobody can take that power from them because anybody that would take that power from them don't have the power to take that power away. so the honest truth is we may never know what the real results of a vote were, they are almost always rigged. basicly any political vote is rigged in some way, no matter how small. it could be anything from double voting to a full scale conspiracy set up by our own government.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   
As long as political power can be bought with money I'm afraid you'll be stuck with the same old corrupt system we've come to know and despise globally. With the power then comes the riches so the cycle is self-feeding.

Damn depressing



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
62 views and 2 posts, translation
1.We only like to complain about possible conspiracies not expose them.
2. We honestly believe elections are rigged and theres nothing we can do to stop it.

I believe its # 2 and that means that they will continue to place only hand picked puppets into key positions that will ultimately result in the fulfillment of a global agenda. So why waste your time discussing and pondering conspiracy after conspiracy if they all originate as the
by-product of a controlled vote.
Its a little sad really.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
145 views and counting. No takers on how to police the voting process.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:33 AM
link   
I guess it would help to raise awareness towards this issue on a communal level, make people aware of the ongoing frauds by showing them the stuff thats being broadcast on these boards here about Iowa and New Hampshire where evidence is being shown.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Sure...

As long as you remove computerised voting and count each vote manually like the rest of the world....And as long as said counting is scruitneered by all parties concerned....

Sure if you have a voting population of say 200 mill, this isn't any easy task,but surely its preferable to an electronic system where errors a rife ??

We have manual counting and scruitineering here in Aus and it works fine


Peace



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
We were recently discussing how to control this process as much as possible on another thread and this was one of the directions we were going.

I agree there are ways ......I have often thought about using actual money as a voting system, simply because it already exists, is accepted as government approved currency (LEGAL TENDER) and each bill has its own serial #. Its kind of like Fiat D.N.A. You just need to create a way of allowing voters to use the dollar and their ss # to register a vote. Then you need a way to ensure it all matches after the results are in. Kind of like checking a lottery ticket.

Let's develop from there.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   
As of now, there doesn't seem to be any real punishment for false reporting.
That should change, with some sort of fitting punishment.

Perhaps a local ballot elected panel from each zone does the counting, and a secondary panel reviews the firsts results to confirm prior to reporting

No electronic machines...I've picked open the physical locks on some of the little older models and couldn't believe the lack of physical security amongst the worries of the hackers and encryption breakers.

But still, humans are easily corrupted in any number.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   


Once JFK was out of the way, it seems the real power behind the scenes was determined to never let something like this happen again. Never again would they risk exposure, nor would they ever again be challenged by a sitting US President. Since 1964, the tabulation of votes in a national election are handled by a private company, owned by TV networks and wire services, without any official oversight. The name of the company doesn’t really matter because it always changes its name, but is ultimately controlled by the CIA Operation MOCKINGBIRD. Another casualty of the coup de grace is the vote, and the election of our officials. It seems that JFK may have been the last publicly elected President of the United States of America.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 11-1-2008 by the b rain]

[edit on 11-1-2008 by the b rain]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:36 PM
link   
There is only one sure proof way to make sure the vote count is absolutely accurate. Have every ballot cast in paper, using a clear mark. Any ballots with marks that aren't clear (as deemed by at least three individuals who don't know each other) is tossed. Votes are counted by hand, at least three times. Any discrepancies of significance demand the count be repeated.

That being entirely unreasonable, a close alternative is to use paper ballots but MECHANICAL counting machines. Nothing with programming, just cogs, wheels, and levers.

To use electronic voting machines, the only way I can think of that is plausible is to use a system where the software used is stored as code, uncompiled. When the machine is turned on, the code is compiled and run until the machine is shut down at which point the software is deleted and overwritten with arbitrary data. Coupled with a program to detect changes to the code, say a character counter, this system would be VERY hard to dupe.
This could be accomplished with a machine running linux (FREE, no tax money wasted) with a little modification and a partitioned hard drive.

Any voting mechanism that is networked is out of the question, as computer wired to another computer, however indirectly, is prone to being hacked.

Really though, as long as the electoral college (which is in no way required to accurately reflect the popular vote) exists, why bother?

[edit on 11-1-2008 by avingard]



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join