Why do it this way when they can just bribe the people who counts the votes?

Im pretty sure McCain will get into office one way or another. And then there will be wars...

It doesn't matter who wins because the other will cry foul anyways. It wouldn't matter if we used paper ballots or touch screens. From 2000 until the end of time people have been and will continue to cry foul each election. Their will never again be such a thing in the United States as a humble loser. Why? Because we as a nation think that just because we want something we should get it. We have developed into a nation of sore losers and that will be our downfall.

If we continue down this path their will be riots because the person you think should be president lost. If that happened on a large enough scale the government would discontinue our right to vote for our own good and we will then be in a dictatorship.

I'm voting for McCain, flame me if you want, if he loses then congratulations will be in order for Obama. That should be everyones mentality. After all you get another chance in 4 years.

Simple question; I hope it hasn't been asked already. If the Republicans wanted to cheat, why would they make it so obvious as to allow the voter to see the check mark move from Obama to McCain?

Has anyone considered that this might be a ploy by the Democratic party?

1. Make it look like the machines are rigged to vote McCain even after Obama is selected.
2.News of this spreads through the media.
3. Republican party labeled as cheaters.
4. Election results called into question should Obama somehow lose.

I don't know. I'm just trying to play Devil's Advocate here. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if it were nothing more than user error on the part of the voters. I haven't gone to vote yet and I can't remember how the machines were set up during the Primaries but I'm pretty sure that they have some sort of confirmation screen before your vote is actually cast, so I really don't see the problem. If the picks on the screen aren't what you wanted, don't confirm and just try again. If it keeps messing up, ask for an alternative means of voting ie paper ballot or something.

And last but not least.. Don't worry, the next President was selected a long time ago. All of this "voting" is for show, so have fun with it.

Who in their right minds trusts a computer for something as important as voting? The only suprise is that more of us haven't insisted in getting a paper ballot for voting. And if they can't give us one- you HAVE to believe the results are flawed.

The point here is they've done it before what's stopping them this time? Are you going to complain and demand either paper votes or push this button nothing more voting machines? Because if you don't you'll ge another bush wannabe.

Thank god i live... oh yea uk is just as screwed, our prime minister wasn't even voted in !!

also there was a video on tube in court with a software developer admitting he was told to create untraceable bar source code voting machine app's that ratioed the vote out to look realistic in favour of hmm I reckon McCain is the riggee in this case, time will tell.

Also if anyone could point me in the direction of an island void of any current dictatorship of any kind please pm me. I have lost all faith in the system.

[edit on 20-10-2008 by KKinsane]

I am of the opinion that all code must be transparent if it is to be used for public service. If a vote machine manufacturers was to contract for sales of voting machines, they must accept that the code must be transparent.

And let's face it, it shouldn't be difficult to write code to count votes. No need to "recalibrate" if it is honest and properly programmed. And if the code was transparent, anyone could look to see what the code is doing.

We should demand that this be the rule for voting machines, and any other public software that might be subject to special interest tampering.

My thought is that this is not an attempt at fraud. The reason is that the votes are flip flopping in front of the voter. When someone commits a crime, they don't want witnesses and this is happening right in front of said witness. If they really wanted to commit voter fraud, they would just let you pick anything you wanted then change it behind the scenes where nothing can be seen.

So no voter fraud, just crappy uncalibrated machines and inept, lazy personnel maintaining them.

Originally posted by jfj123
My thought is that this is not an attempt at fraud. The reason is that the votes are flip flopping in front of the voter. When someone commits a crime, they don't want witnesses and this is happening right in front of said witness. If they really wanted to commit voter fraud, they would just let you pick anything you wanted then change it behind the scenes where nothing can be seen.

So no voter fraud, just crappy uncalibrated machines and inept, lazy personnel maintaining them.

I think they are becoming brazen, enjoying how stupid the sheep are that don't see, don't correlate, don't believe that they are in danger.

Notice whether this makes the MSM news... That will tell you something about whether it was purposeful or not. No MSM, and it will not reach tipping point in all likelihood, so what will they care?

[edit on 10/20/2008 by Amaterasu]

Originally posted by elitegamer23
if the polls say 60%-40% for obama there is no way they could steal this election.

yes im saying obama is that far ahead.

What poll did you get that figure from? I'm asking because I'm curious. The one on the Yahoo page says McCain 44% Obama 49.8%. Just has me wondering why the polls would be that different...

Edit to say, yeah Yahoo probably isn't the best place to find out what the polls say but it's there and it's the one I see every time I open a browser window.

[edit on 20-10-2008 by Jenna]

They have to keep the polls close. Imagine if the polls said 80-20 and then "somehow" McCain won? It would prove voter fraud and the GOP would be ripped apart. Also, with the National poll, you can't rely on that. You have to look at the state polls. Why? National polls include all the states. So say when Texas has it 99McCain and 1%Obama it throws off the poll.

I have seen this happen with touch screens on microwave ovens.
the "right mix of skin oils and dirt can mimic the Resistive or Capacitive effect of a human finger.
I wonder how offen the polling places clean the screen IF EVER.

I don't know what type of touch screen system they use but someone might be able to mix up something that if put on the screen would effect it and cause the vote to change.
A little on the fingers and you go in and vote and the the machine would remember where you touched and change other votes to match yours till it was cleaned.
Or till other peoples fingers rubbed it off.

Something to think about rednecks would more likely have dirty hands and vote for Mccain
Liberals would be more likely to have clean hands and vote for Obama.

Maybe that is why the vote in rural area of Calif goes GOP and the city vote goes to the democrats.

The next election may be decided by DIRTY HANDS

Originally posted by ANNED
Something to think about rednecks would more likely have dirty hands and vote for Mccain
Liberals would be more likely to have clean hands and vote for Obama.

Maybe that is why the vote in rural area of Calif goes GOP and the city vote goes to the democrats.

The next election may be decided by DIRTY HANDS

Now what on earth makes you think that rednecks don't wash their hands? Can't say I know a single redneck that doesn't wash their hands, and I know quite a few. Heck, I could probably be considered one. You were making a pretty good point until that single sentence shot it all to heck. You know what they say about assuming things.

Back to your original point, I wonder if they do clean off the screens occasionally or if they even do it at all. Makes sense to me that the oil coming off everyone's hands each time they touch it could cause the screen to not register where it is being touched correctly.