"It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes." -- Joseph Stalin

The ghastly dictator Stalin said "It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes."

Problems in the new voting machines are concurrent with the fact of exit polling in areas with audited vote trails vs. unaudited vote trails.

It is not difficult to envision that the results of this election are unreliable at best, and outright fraud at worst. Face the facts Republican businessmen own the companies who manufacture the unaudited machines.

Have a good look at Black Box Voting

I read about machines that started with votes on them. I have heard of ones with 1000 votes for bush as the first voter used it.

* Edited for spelling-as is normal for me

[edit on 11/3/2004 by mrmonsoon]

I heard about that to Mon. There are problems with the machines used to vote. Some machines weren't working somewhere and the people at the voting ploace said "tell us who you want to vote for and we'll vote for you later." Politics are corrupt. IMO

Originally posted by SkipShipman
The ghastly dictator Stalin said "It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes."

Problems in the new voting machines are concurrent with the fact of exit polling in areas with audited vote trails vs. unaudited vote trails.

It is not difficult to envision that the results of this election are unreliable at best, and outright fraud at worst. Face the facts Republican businessmen own the companies who manufacture the unaudited machines.

Have a good look at Black Box Voting

Well this is a common happening, people were voting in Warsaw pact countries but it was always the same people winning Same in Belarus now...
Anyway why is Kerry better than Bush? Bush is worse than Nader but not than Kerry...

maybe there was a anti-kerry-pro bush-virus in the computer?

The only way to defeat this is to never vote republican / democrat again and only vote libertarian.

Even then, the election will be controlled.


LONG LIVE THE NEW WORLD ORDER

nader dont even had a chance...The U.S. should have a only one vote system: counting each vote by human..you are even enough in the u.s.?!

[edit on 5-11-2004 by dacruz]

Hush hush now little sheep, soon this debacle will go away just like it did in Florida 2000 and Dubya will continue playing with the worlds greatest toys!

Yehaw! Yeepie kaiyeaye everybody!

Any liberals that believe this is evidence that suggests Pres. Bush should not have won, or committed fraud, are delusional and should further scrutinize the source. The case sighted on the front page took place in Washington, a Kerry state. Unless I am blind, the other cases, as listed in the PDF files, do not even sight examples from the 2004 presidential election. No clear-cut evidence is provided that suggests the results of this election were ensured due to fraud or that your dearest friends of the republican party had any hand in its instigation.

�Move along people noting to see here.� Correct me if I am wrong.

Machine Error Gives Bush Extra Ohio Votes


COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said.

Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct.

Bush actually received 365 votes in the precinct, Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, told The Columbus Dispatch.

State and county election officials did not immediately respond to requests by The Associated Press for more details about the voting system and its vendor, and whether the error, if repeated elsewhere in Ohio, could have affected the outcome.


Bush won the state by more than 136,000 votes, according to unofficial results, and Kerry conceded the election on Wednesday after acknowledging that 155,000 provisional ballots yet to be counted in Ohio would not change the result.



The Secretary of State's Office said Friday it could not revise Bush's total until the county reported the error.



The Ohio glitch is among a handful of computer troubles that have emerged since Tuesday's elections.



In one North Carolina county, more than 4,500 votes were lost because officials mistakenly believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did. And in San Francisco, a malfunction with custom voting software could delay efforts to declare the winners of four races for county supervisor.



In the Ohio precinct in question, the votes are recorded onto a cartridge. On one of the three machines at that precinct, a malfunction occurred in the recording process, Damschroder said. He could not explain how the malfunction occurred.



Damschroder said people who had seen poll results on the election board's Web site called to point out the discrepancy. The error would have been discovered when the official count for the election is performed later this month, he said.



The reader also recorded zero votes in a county commissioner race on the machine.



Workers checked the cartridge against memory banks in the voting machine and each showed that 115 people voted for Bush on that machine. With the other machines, the total for Bush in the precinct added up to 365 votes.



Meanwhile, in San Francisco, a glitch occurred with software designed for the city's new ``ranked-choice voting,'' in which voters list their top three choices for municipal offices. If no candidate gets a majority of first-place votes outright, voters' second and third-place preferences are then distributed among candidates who weren't eliminated in the first round.



When the San Francisco Department of Elections tried a test run on Wednesday of the program that does the redistribution, some of the votes didn't get counted and skewed the results, director John Arntz said.



``All the information is there,'' Arntz said. ``It's just not arriving the way it was supposed to.''



A technician from the Omaha, Neb. company that designed the software, Election Systems & Software Inc., was working to diagnose and fix the problem.


� Copyright The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Originally posted by Jimi Hendrix
Any liberals that believe this is evidence that suggests Pres. Bush should not have won, or committed fraud, are delusional and should further scrutinize the source. The case sighted on the front page took place in Washington, a Kerry state. Unless I am blind, the other cases, as listed in the PDF files, do not even sight examples from the 2004 presidential election. No clear-cut evidence is provided that suggests the results of this election were ensured due to fraud or that your dearest friends of the republican party had any hand in its instigation.

�Move along people noting to see here.� Correct me if I am wrong.

Black Box Voting says:

Please excuse our temporary reconstruction
This site went down recently when we posted sensitive information.

Keep posted on the earlier link. The site was hacked by who knows who?

Originally posted by SkipShipman
The ghastly dictator Stalin said "It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes."

This is why the U.S. holds 51 individual elections, instead of a single, centrally controlled national election. This is why we have the Electoral College in the U.S. Even within the 50 States & D.C., every county holds its own election, then reports the results to the State, before the State reports its tabulated results nationally.

There are usually a few isolated cases of fraud in a few counties during every major U.S. election -- whether the President is Republican or Democrat -- but fraud on a statewide or national level in the U.S. is a physical impossibility.

Also, some people have complained about different places using different voting methods -- this variety makes fraud all the more difficult.

Originally posted by ThunderCloud

Originally posted by SkipShipman
The ghastly dictator Stalin said "It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes."

There are usually a few isolated cases of fraud in a few counties during every major U.S. election -- whether the President is Republican or Democrat -- but fraud on a statewide or national level in the U.S. is a physical impossibility.

Also, some people have complained about different places using different voting methods -- this variety makes fraud all the more difficult.

Comment: Here are some of the exit polls verses official vote counts. Note there are discrepencies, but hardly when paper ballots, or audited machine votes are present. When unaudited, these machines go hog wild and pig out for Bush votes. Yes pigs do fly!



Also try this link for discrepencies:
Voters Unite!

[edit on 5-11-2004 by SkipShipman]

I would like to see numbers on more than 9 of our 50 states and 1 district.

Electronic voting machines with no paper trail are a bad idea.
I would imagine this would go without saying,but we are using them any way.So i guess i have to say it.

ELECTRONIC(DIGITAL)VOTING MACHINES WITHOUT PAPER TRAILS ARE BEGGING TO BE MANIPULATED!!

Remeber when W said
"Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice, a fool can't get fooled again" or something like that. Apparently he got the passage screwed up with lyriks from the rock band "The Who". We thought he was screwed up in the head when he said that, but what he was saying is that he was going to fool us again.

FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida (AP) -- Voters nationwide reported some 1,100 problems with electronic voting machines on Tuesday, including trouble choosing their intended candidates.

The e-voting glitches reported to the Election Protection Coalition, an umbrella group of volunteer poll monitors that set up a telephone hotline, included malfunctions blamed on everything from power outages to incompetent poll workers.

But there were also several dozen voters in six states -- particularly Democrats in Florida -- who said the wrong candidates appeared on their touchscreen machine's checkout screen, the coalition said.

In many cases, voters said they intended to select John Kerry but when the computer asked them to verify the choice it showed them instead opting for President Bush, the group said.

Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way Foundation, which helped form the coalition, called the summary screen problem "troubling but anecdotal."

He and other voting rights advocates said the disproportionate number of Democrats reporting such problems was probably due to higher awareness of voter protection coalitions.

"Overall, the problems of outright voter intimidation and suppression have not been as great as in the past," Neas said.

But the reports did highlight computer scientists' concerns about touchscreens, which they say are prone to tampering and unreliable unless they produce paper records for recounts.

Roberta Harvey, 57, of Clearwater, Florida, said she had tried at least a half dozen times to select Kerry-Edwards when she voted Tuesday at Northwood Presbyterian Church.

After 10 minutes trying to change her selection, the Pinellas County resident said she called a poll worker and got a wet-wipe napkin to clean the touch screen as well as a pencil so she could use its eraser-end instead of her finger. Harvey said it took about 10 attempts to select Kerry before and a summary screen confirmed her intended selection.

Election officials in several Florida counties where voters complained about such problems did not return calls Tuesday night.

A spokesoman for the company that makes the touchscreen machines used in Pinellas, Palm Beach and two other Florida counties, Alfie Charles of Sequoia Voting Systems Inc., said the machines' monitors may need to be recalibrated periodically.

The most likely reason the summary screen showed wrong candidates was because voters pushed the wrong part of the touch screen in the first place, Charles said.

He said poll workers are trained to perform the recalibration whenever a voter says the touchscreen isn't sensitive enough.

"Voters will vote quickly and they'll notice that they made an error when they get to the review screen. The review screen is doing exactly what it needs to do -- notifying voters what selections are about to be recorded," Charles said. "On a paper ballot, you don't get a second chance to make sure you voted for whom you intended, and it's a strong point in favor of these machines."

The Election Protection Coalition received a total of 32 reports of touch-screen voters who selected one candidate only to have another show up on the summary screen, Cindy Cohn, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a coalition member.

David Dill, a Stanford University computer scientist whose Verified Voting Foundation also belongs to the coalition, said he wouldn't "prejudge and say the election is going smoothly just because we have a small number of incident reports out of the total population.

"It's not going to be until the dust clears probably tomorrow that we have even an approximate idea of what happened," Dill added

If you haven't read this thread, please do so before you come on this one trying to suggest there is no evidence of fraud or conflicts of interest, I added some additional information to this one this evening...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
If you don't smell that, you need to pull your head out of your neoconditioned nether reigon.

Originally posted by twitchy
If you haven't read this thread, please do so before you come on this one trying to suggest there is no evidence of fraud or conflicts of interest, I added some additional information to this one this evening...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
If you don't smell that, you need to pull your head out of your neoconditioned nether reigon.

The Diebold factor has been posted for quite a while, it was never really monitored. It seems the Democrats have taken a dive, presumably waiting for their own rigged results when it suits the next stage of racheting down our freedoms.

These future Democrats will in the end be the good Republicans that Bill Clinton was, realizing that all those "bond traders," kept him from implementing his stated goals.

For the time being getting involved in a Solari seems to be a viable alternative

Voting economically in other words with your monetary decisions, is the only alternative, now that your voting choice is totally meaningless..

Originally posted by SkipShipman

For the time being getting involved in a Solari seems to be a viable alternative

Voting economically in other words with your monetary decisions, is the only alternative, now that your voting choice is totally meaningless..

The Solari link is great - thanks SS - your graphs were hot too.

...Back in the 60's, women were told that if they were getting raped they should "not fight, and think of God." Sort of like the Victorian view of sex in marriage. Funny how these guys can't come up with a new line...


.