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.

 

And So It Begins:-"Touched the screen for Barack Obama, the check mark moved to McCain"

page: 8
25
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
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...




posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
In Britain, we have a record. The shortest amount of time for a constituency to report back their winner. A few run for this record and then there is a lull of about half an hour because it really isn't that important anymore to get your result in because some one has won. Clearly being the fastest is very important, but when you're in the scrum, you just get on with it and hope you don't come last because that means you'll have no sleep. Triple recounts are crushing in our bid to report as quickly as possible and get a good night's sleep.

The question is, ok, you have timezones so lots of races, but really what 'rational' premise is there to report as quickly as possible?



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   
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]



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
ACORN is the distraction. The "but, but Clinton" argument. You can't steal an election if you get a few dozen people registering as Donald Duck or dead quarterbacks. For one, these were workers just trying to get more entries, or non-serious people and these things get flagged and workers get dismissed. Another is that Donald Duck is not going to show up to vote.

They have, after spending Millions, only about 100 cases and only 15 or so tried, and Anne Coulter got convicted! So out of 5 convictions, one is a Neocon talk show host -- wow, good thing we spent millions and put dozens of prosecutors and FBI agents on this case, rather than all the electronic voting shenanigans or God forbid Wall Street, where we just hand Billions of dollars away, without an investigation to people who lied about their financial positions.

I am so sick of this blather. You cannot bus a few dozen people and impact an election -- rigging a voting machine or the tally is a LOT EASIER. Throwing 90,000 people off the voter roles in 2004 in Florida, where over 95% should have been able to vote -- there is no penalty for those mistakes.

Oh, and while the Media and Republicans, try so hard to get some dirt on Acorn, that isn't based upon errors that THEY submitted -- we have a Republican sponsored voter registration group caught RED HANDED rigging votes -- it isn't nearly as much a threat as Diebold, but this should shut up a few idiots on this subject. BREAKING_Head_of_GOP_Voter_Reg_Outift_Arrested



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Except that the program to count the votes isn't the same thing as a touch screen that needs to be calibrated. Other than that, I agree with you.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Forget whether it favors the Democrats or Republicans, the problem is that the system is flawed. And whether or not someone has skewed the results doesn't matter, it is that people have lost faith in the most fundamental right of this nation.

Don't you see what is going to happen this election?

I can guarantee you that there will be allegations of voter fraud in Ohio for sure, and likely other states. The system which isn't trustworthy will be called into question and the election won't be decided by the voters, but by the Supreme Court.

Your vote won't count.

America without trust in elections is no longer free.

The voters didn't decide the presidency in the last election, the Supreme Court did. There have been serious issues for the past two presidential races.

It doesn't even have to be the candidate who tampers with the process, it can be the rabid supporters we've all seen on television who decide to take matters into their own hands. It could be happening in dozens of small counties across America, staffed by bureaucrats with NO CITIZEN OVERSIGHT. None. Zilch. Nada.

And even if no one tampers with the election, the loss of trust in the process with be the fuse which ignites violence.

Watch.

There will be protests over election fraud. There will be massive hand recounts, arguments over legality and the system will become bogged down because no one trusts the government or elected officials.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 05:58 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   

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]



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by uncover_the_truth
 


Admittedly, I am a little more than confused. Obama rallies are in the 10's of thousands of attendees while McCain’s are only a fraction of the people. Yet the poles show a close race. I’m an old guy and I have not seen this before.

When the Bush/Gore election took place it was easy to see why it was so close, they were both moderates and had almost identical opinions about everything (except global warming) same true for Bush/Kerry.

But McCain/Obama, they are so very different, no way this is going to be a close race, can’t be. Obama has had global support, the likes of which has not be seen. The states have shown overwhelming support for him.

If this turns out to be a fraud vote, blood will spill, IMHO.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by eaganthorn
 


this election isnt even close!

i can find 100 obama people for every 5 mccain supporters where i live. the media is just playing it out for ratings. maybe we are being manipulated to believe its close because the results might not be something we like. im talking about a mccain/rove steal . 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.

[edit on 20-10-2008 by elitegamer23]



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 10:02 PM
link   

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]



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:18 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


250,000 new 'voters' registered by ACORN in Ohio alone. ACORN signature gathers getting one guy to register over 150 times in some cases. Thousands of 'new' registered voter signatures have been thrown out because they could not be verified to drivers licenses or social security numbers. Does that bother anyhone? If you can do this in 'key' electorial states and have massive voter pool coruption it probably won't make a bit of difference, right? Software could be a problem....ACORN is under FBI investigation in 17 states for voter registeration fraud...and IS a problem. Nobody concerned? Everyone does it right?
- rational and objective thinking is dead



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
When stuff like that happens with the GOP you're worried about Donald Duck being signed? You realize that Donald Duck can register, but can't vote. But giving millions to the GOP to rig the vote, actually getting caught rigging the vote, so more republicans can get millions from Freddie Mac to destroy regulation. Yeah, just what we need.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 04:36 AM
link   
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



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 06:53 AM
link   

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.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join