READER COMMENTS ON

"Diebold Voting Machine Failures Found Across State During New Hampshire Primary"

(100 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Jon in Iowa said on 1/12/2008 @ 11:01 pm PT...





Genuinely beautiful. By the way, Brad, did you and Hajjar ever have that debate?

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Shannon Williford said on 1/12/2008 @ 11:05 pm PT...





Why doesn't anybody ask about why these machines fail and fail and fail; and yet election officials keep using them and having to get someone to come out and change out memory cards during the election, not knowing what is on them or the legality of the change??? Why should a machine that is almost new, having only been used a few times, be failing in any way???

If anything fails in an election at all, the election is a failure. Yet officials plan on failure, they're not suprised by failure, and for what? I don't know. Why not just write on a paper ballot that's counted by a group of folks in the neighborhood - with anybody welcome to observe the count? WHY HAVE MACHINES AT ALL? WHY? WHAT'S THE POINT? SPEED? CERTAINLY NOT ACCURACY! Why sacrifice accuracy for speed in any election? Would it be so bad to wait an extra few hours for results? For an election to be a success, every vote should be counted and every voter should have full assurance that his vote would be counted. Is that impossible to do?

Transparancy. We gotta have transparancy...

Let's fight for that. We need to be positively sure that every vote is counted correctly. A transparent election should do that... shw

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... frogmarchbush said on 1/12/2008 @ 11:34 pm PT...





I'm so glad we're only at the primary. Oh wait - they had four years to fix this problem.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/12/2008 @ 11:50 pm PT...





Jon in Iowa asked: "By the way, Brad, did you and Hajjar ever have that debate?" Appears he was just bluffing about having one. I'm sure you'll be surprised to know. I also confirmed with Bev and Harri, that he lied about debating them as well. Apparently, that's his game. Nice that he runs elections in all of New England, eh?

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... Adam Fulford said on 1/13/2008 @ 12:03 am PT...





Will the spineless corporate sycophants of the Democratic party or the Overwhelmingly Fascist War-Profiteering Media report on this? We shall see... (notice how NBC and ATT and now want to

filter the internet, purportedly to stop copyright piracy? Of course, the real reason is to suppress dissent)

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... Chris Christian said on 1/13/2008 @ 1:16 am PT...





So now we know why Karl Rove predicted that Clinton would win?

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... Dredd said on 1/13/2008 @ 4:23 am PT...





The AG and the election warlords seem to have the Fox "news" attitude, i.e. that they will take the election law and the election facts "under advisement":

After I told Fox it wasn't true --- and this is the surreal part --- they kept reporting it anyway. In fact, Fox's Garrett told me he'd "take it under advisement." Take it under advisement? I realize I'm generally seen as just another liberal with an opinion, but this was not a matter of opinion, it was a matter of fact. Fox now knew their story was flatly, factually wrong, and they took it "under advisement." Apparently that meant repeating the falsehood with added detail: the "fact" that I had been on a conference call the previous day with the Hillary high command. Again, false. My worry is that if this is what one of Fox's best and most respected reporters is doing, what are the hacks up to? (Paul Begala, Huffpo, emphasis added). They will take reality "under advisement" and it may or may not phase them depending ... on what ... who is paying them to run the story? And so it goes, you tell these guys we don't care what script the pre-election drama queens use to conjure up "meaningful analysis" of election dynamics, that we just want to know what would happen if the ballots were counted by honest people instead of defective machines. We care. They "take it under advisement" which means they ignore it. LHS must pay lots eh?

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... Reader said on 1/13/2008 @ 4:38 am PT...





How can ANYONE have faith in this system? Seriously, I have no idea if there was some crookedness in the NH election but with all the problems- these elections are too dependent on having trust in Corporate America and if you think Corporate America has our best interests at heart.....There is just way too much room for fraud here. Why on earth are we still using these machines and allowing their employees access to them?! Thank you to Brad Blog and the other sites that are covering this issue- with the mainstream media devoting round the clock coverage to Britney it would seem they don't have time to cover the death of our democracy.

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Dredd said on 1/13/2008 @ 5:15 am PT...





Reader #8 I know, they act as if these things have no effect on our everyday lives, but that Britney does. When guys come back from the Iraq debacle they keep on killing:

Town by town across the country, headlines have been telling similar stories. Lakewood, Wash.: “Family Blames Iraq After Son Kills Wife.” Pierre, S.D.: “Soldier Charged With Murder Testifies About Postwar Stress.” Colorado Springs: “Iraq War Vets Suspected in Two Slayings, Crime Ring.” Individually, these are stories of local crimes, gut-wrenching postscripts to the war for the military men, their victims and their communities. Taken together, they paint the patchwork picture of a quiet phenomenon, tracing a cross-country trail of death and heartbreak. (NY Times). They need treatment before they come back, but the psycho in chief resists that kind of treatment as if it was witchery. He is deluded that the only way to get his "popularity" back to 42% is more war. He seems to want more of it by war with Iran:

President Bush said Sunday that Iran is threatening the security of the world, and that the United States and Arab allies must join together to confront the danger "before it's too late." (Yahoo News). What he means by too late is "before a sane individual is elected president". We don't want these defective machines used to bring us another defective president.

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... Lois G. said on 1/13/2008 @ 6:11 am PT...





I'm worried that New Hampshire is going to come up with some astronomical estimate for a recount to discourage continuing. IN my opinion, the recount should be free. New Hampshire has a burden to keep that first primary status. Why should the rest of us allow that state to have so much power when they want to operate the election counting in secrecy and make recounts prohibitively expensive so that we cannot have confidence in their result.

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 1/13/2008 @ 6:35 am PT...





Dredd, remember a while back when the fundies were all ranting about the end of days ?

Maybe they still are...I think they better start packing their bags, that fuker is nuts

COMMENT #12 [Permalink]

... Dori Smith said on 1/13/2008 @ 6:51 am PT...





Shannon Williford is asking the right questions above. Why doesn't anybody ask about why these machines fail and fail and fail; and yet election officials keep using them and having to get someone to come out and change out memory cards during the election, not knowing what is on them or the legality of the change??? What we learned in Connecticut is that a lot of the energy behind LHS is in sales and marketing strategies. What better way to sell you product than to make yourself seem essential at election time? The profit factor in this story is very important. As Florida reporter Mary Moewe reported in the Daytona Beach Journal in September of 2007, her research at the polls led to the discovery that a large percentage of Diebold's memory cards for the AccuVote machine are failing just prior to or even during elections. The memory cards are by the way obsolete. They are not being manufactured from what I can tell, and it's difficult to get them. Diebold provides them through the vendors. Thus the entire support services effort by LHS and other vendors needs close legal scrutiny. If they have a profit motive to keep telling states that they are essential, that they can't pull off an election without them, they will become more and more fully ingrained in the voting system to the point that we will have completely privatized the elections. LHS President John Silvestro fully supports that idea and while he is a politician himself he says we shouldn't trust the parties to run elections. As things stand now the 'parties' do not run elections though a given Secretary of the State from one party or another can indeed have influence as we saw in Ohio. This may be of interest: Transcript of Talk Nation Radio interview with John Silvestro In August of 2007, just prior to a meeting between LHS President John Silvestro and Connecticut voting officials within the Secretary of the State’s office we phoned Silvestro to ask him about violations of CT election law. Our call was made from Radio Station WHUS at the University of Connecticut where the computer science department has been looking into problems with the Diebold AccuVote Optical Scan Voting machines Silvestro conveyed to the state as vendor for Premier Election Solutions, a subsidiary of Diebold. “You have employees in Connecticut who were doing recounts and as a matter of fact a couple of the people who were there were not even in Connecticut for the election. They were people who were in other states for the election in November and because of the resources we had uh had to be dispatched to Connecticut or the recount at the request of the Secretary of State OK? So there were people who may have been confused about protocols between New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Massachusetts and Connecticut. I mean I do support you know five states and they may have spoken to you about the average or the way things are done in other states which is different than the way it’s done in Connecticut. So I mean it’s not like its a uniform protocol between all of the states. Some of the states allow us to handle equipment. Some of the states do not allow us to handle equipment. Some of the states allow their local people on site to open the ballot box. Other states do not allow them to open the ballot box without calling in to the Secretary of State’s office first. So I mean there’s different protocols. We are allowed in New Hampshire, you know, in New Hampshire to do one thing that we are not allowed to do in Massachusetts. We are allowed to do some things in Massachusetts we are not allowed to do in New Hampshire”. LHS President John Silvestro

COMMENT #13 [Permalink]

... clara said on 1/13/2008 @ 8:30 am PT...





It looks to me like this isn't a matter of machine error (although there may well be plenty of those too). It looks like this is a classic case of vote swapping, that is, simply switcing one column for another. It also truly looks like was done not by the Republicans OR the Hillary camp but rather by someone who, like us, detests these machines and is trying to get rid of them once and for all. If that is the case, and it's not caught in New Hampshire, I would expect this individual to just keep going from state to state where these machines are still being used, and make it more obvious each time (eventually, if necessary, giving Mike Gravel 100 percent of the vote). Can't wait for the hand count! I'm eating this up with a spoon!

COMMENT #14 [Permalink]

... Kenfolk said on 1/13/2008 @ 9:24 am PT...





Brad, are there any organized groups working at a grass roots level on behalf of getting rid of all voting machines and in support of HAND COUNTED PAPER BALLOTS? If not, what about any groups working to get rid of private companies counting our votes and/or insisting on major (15%+) random audits with strict chain of custody. (A poor 2nd choice, admittedly). What can we at the local level do? I'm talking about at a local level that people can get directly involved in. Given that our democracy is now a deMOCKERY, while we appreciate the work of you, Bev Harris etc., we need a powerful grass roots movement.

COMMENT #15 [Permalink]

... molly said on 1/13/2008 @ 9:33 am PT...





#10 My sentiments exactly.N.H. lost their right to 2nd primary state for dems when they ignored the facts presented to them that Diebold was hackable.Iowa and N.H. are lily white and don't represent US anyway.

COMMENT #16 [Permalink]

... bedir than average said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:07 am PT...





What strikes me as odd is that in all four of the towns mentioned with issues there are ZERO reports of handcounting going on in those districts. How do these machines count write-ins? Also, if the towns had run out of ballots and needed to print more, yet the newly printed/copied ones are unable to be read how were they not handcounted?

COMMENT #17 [Permalink]

... barbara said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:10 am PT...





Brad...

Would it not be worth your while to do your own diary at DKos?

Would they let you?

I just think that people over there need to get the truth....

I have been horrified at the "front page" people's response to this issue.

Not sure that I will ever fully trust that site again.

COMMENT #18 [Permalink]

... Alex Stromeyer said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:38 am PT...





What about Tabulation?ya, the machines are unreliable,but tabulation is how bush stole '04.Until tabulation is secure, the elections will be a sham.

COMMENT #19 [Permalink]

... Dori Smith said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:39 am PT...





Again, these are good questions. More research would be needed to establish any fraud but where there is confusion over authority during elections, access to machines and memory cards and so on, you have a serious problem. Voting rights organizations have been keen on getting air tight voting machine security protocols in place. That means poll workers, officials, and vendors, must follow strict rules under state and federal law. The issue is, who is going to train people and run interference when a vendor wishes to keep problems quiet and/or maintain control over a system that is set up to profit them? I found consistently in Connecticut that there was little oversight at the polls. I was literally the only one asking certain questions and that was true throughout the process. Apparently, that is true in New Hampshire though a more in depth investigation needs to be done. I think private citizens can do that and do it very well, and document everything, and then submit whatever complaints are required to help push the system back in the direction of fair and accurate voting with transparency. People in various states have been playing tremendously important roles. The race is now on to get the states to study the problem as an emergency, and to take immediate corrective action.

COMMENT #20 [Permalink]

... H Matheson said on 1/13/2008 @ 11:38 am PT...





Go to the following URL taken from "Counterpunch". It states that pre election polls, ballot hand counts and exit polling all indicated a substantial Obama victory. http://www.counterpunch....rg/lindorff01112008.html Polling is usually quite accurate. For two polls to be so much in error is suspicious.

COMMENT #21 [Permalink]

... Bill Stettler said on 1/13/2008 @ 12:03 pm PT...





America needs International Election observers just like some of the third world elections.

COMMENT #22 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean in FL-13 said on 1/13/2008 @ 12:07 pm PT...





I think someone touched on this earlier, but has anyone noticed that the results HANOVER and several of the largest "critical" swing districts came in late?...For Hillary? In Sarasota County 2006, we hung out at the Board of Elections 'till midnight/ STILL didn't get the results in before the next morning. Later, of course, we learned of all the increased activity in and out of the S.O.E warehouse, that night/ swipe cards used by employees who had been terminated years earlier/ PEB's and memory cards

diddled with... Could this be an important part of the pattern?

Maybe it still takes them a few hours to PHYSICALLY allign their numbers/ systems with what we all know is likely a NON-LOCAL job?...

COMMENT #23 [Permalink]

... Jack Nauti said on 1/13/2008 @ 12:19 pm PT...





To answer the questions above regarding "why do these machines fail and fail and fail..." they fail for the same reason your home PC, your cell phone and your automobile's computer controller fail: they're full of technology, and technology fails. In reality, the percentage of "failures" is statistically quite low. In any given election, they actually work "most of the time". And when they do fail, in virtually all cases it's not the core machine that fails, it's a peripheral piece of equipment like a printer or a memory card. These memory cards are really the exact same thing as the memory card in your digital camera or the USB jump drive you carry on your keyring, although usually embedded in a different package. These things are technology commodities and they fail all the time in virtually all applications. Jump drives won't read, printers jamb, photos are corrupted, cars stop running. It's an everyday thing. When a voting machine fails, it's almost always due to one of these commodity parts that fails, not the machine itself. In just last week, my cell phone has failed, by Bluetooth headset stopped turning on, my cable TV was out for almost a week and I had a flat tire. Technology fails. Period. So what? Will we have good elections if we can only get rid of the machines? Not a chance. Are hand-counted paper ballots the solution? No. For example, take a look at the web page at http://www.reformation.o...dent-lyndon-johnson.html that describes the Senate election stolen by future president Lyndon Johnson in 1948. Or the picture on that page at http://www.reformation.o.../large-ballot-box-13.jpg showing LBJ and friends grinning in possession of the infamous "ballot box 13". There's not a computer in sight and won't be for decades to come. And yet, history was changed by this infamous stolen election. The problem always is and always has been the election officials themselves and the standards, practices, policies, protocols and enforcement they employ and are held to. Most of these people are relatively low-paid local government employees who normally do their best, but often their best is not good enough and/or they are operating under woefully inadequate state and local laws. In a few cases, they are incompetent and in even fewer cases, outright criminally negligent or inclined. Our best bet for improving election integrity lies in improved election laws that call for control and audit precedures, policies and penalties that ensure clean elections REGARDLESS of the technology used. If these laws were firmly in place and consistently enforced, it wouldn't matter what technology or methods were used in an election as long as the entire process conformed to those laws and the elections were auditable and verifiable. The vendors would be forced to modify their systems to conform or leave the business. This is where our efforts should be directed if we're going to ensure clean elections in the future. Complaining about failing machines and demonizing "secret" corporate evil-doers (who also, in most cases, employ similar people trying to do their best to ensure clean elections) will ultimately get us nowhere. Get the right audit and control laws in place and only that will solve the problem.

COMMENT #24 [Permalink]

... Ram said on 1/13/2008 @ 12:24 pm PT...





#17 Barbara: My understanding of the situation at Dkos is that Kos does not want to hear about election fraud for two reasons: 1. The right wing calls us conspiracy nuts for mentioning it and 2. The purpose of Dkos is to get democrats elected --- it's all about the game during a campaign and Kos doesn't seem to listen if anyone tells him that the game is fixed. Occasionally a diary gets in about election problems, but it's usually the peons (like me) that respond to it and not the front pagers. But that's okay! We have Bradblog to keep us informed of what's really going on --- and sometimes the media actually pays a little attention. And then there's Randi Rhodes --- she really pushed the issue of fraud after the 2000 and 2004 elections. So this week when she pooh-poohed any possibility of election problems in New Hampshire, I was stunned. Randi's opinion lately seems to always go both ways --- that way she can say "I told you so" and play a tape of opinion A or opinion B and prove that she had said it all along. There are few heroes that stand the test of time --- Brad is one that fights to the end. I do believe in heroes.

COMMENT #25 [Permalink]

... R F Allen said on 1/13/2008 @ 1:01 pm PT...





Nice Coverage.In the interest of accuracy you should note that the local news story you link is from "Seacoast online", not SeaCrest...Thanks

COMMENT #26 [Permalink]

... Kristin said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:13 pm PT...





"If this happened in Canada (it wouldn't we hand-count all 15 million votes in about two hours), you'd see me and about 15 million other polite, laid-back Canucks tear down the whole system, and rebuild it from scratch."

Copied and pasted from a Commenter on Arianna Huffington's Sunday Roundup

***************

I hope you will look into the statistics on Canada hand counting their votes,and publicize the information. Two weeks (what the NH Sec of State says) sounds like an awfully long time to count those far, far fewer votes. Why the huge difference?

COMMENT #27 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:36 pm PT...





Thanks R F. Will correct that!

COMMENT #28 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:44 pm PT...





Oh this is just straight up bullshit. And I don't mean the f-ing Bradblog NEWS report. I am in California (obviously) Here is my idea, for the diebold/premeire/premiere op scan's. You walk up to the scanner, you ask the poll worker, how can I validate this vote was actually counted in the official tabulation? Answer, the paper ballot. NO. I say's the paper ballot is worthless when there is no chain of custody, and there would have to be a recount of the paper ballot to be an official tabulation. It costs money, it takes political motivation and the recount is worthless if the chain of custody is b0rked. I say's further, your machine has just removed my constitutional right to vote. Poll worker, well, just run it through. No. I say's call the SOS. Poll worker, shall I call the cops? No, but I want to file a complaint that my constitutional right to vote has been removed because the official tabulation is electronic and can not be seen by the human eye. So where do I stand legally? OR, WHAT SHOULD I HAVE SAID SPECIFICALLY? OR should we be hitting Debra Bowen with this scenario right now? To find out BEFORE IT HAPPENS IN CALIFORNIA?

COMMENT #29 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:46 pm PT...





The zapkitty has been banned from Daily Kos. That sure didn't take long... This was the thread:

http://www.dailykos.com/...13/105314/137/225/436062 I was busy replying to someone who'd confused "potentially compromised chain of custody" with "accusations of ballot tampering" and without warning... *poof!* Agent #69 was forcibly retired Thing is... none of my comments appear to even have been troll-rated. http://www.dailykos.com/user/the zapkitty/comments Daily Kos: Fighting for Democracy ... er... to elect ever more Democrats so they can capitulate to accusations of "Conspiracy Theorist!" even faster ... {Zap, I can't believe you let them think you're related to me! CONTROL agents never give anything away to the forces of KAOS! Back to basic for you, dude. --99}

COMMENT #30 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:49 pm PT...





The "Comeback Kid" are the news stories you get in the corporate-controlled media...

COMMENT #31 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:50 pm PT...





And "racist white New Hampshire voters lied in the polls about voting for Obama", where'd that story go?

COMMENT #32 [Permalink]

... PoliticalSpazz said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:58 pm PT...





Maybe someone should compare the failure rate between Diebold's ATM machines and their Optical Scan Voting Machines. I'll bet the failure rate is alot less for Diebold machines handling cash all day instead of votes.

COMMENT #33 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 2:59 pm PT...





I may be just joe friggin 6-pack, but I think #28 is the key to the answer to this nations electronic vote tabulation devices problem. If the poll worker told me, look the counter incremented by one. Would my vote be validated by myself? NO. Once it's electronic, it can't be validated. UNLESS the electronics are only printing a ballot to be hand counted. But I just shoved a printed ballot in that already was printed, only to get NO VALIDATION out. Therefore my vote has been removed, no matter what the fuck they say, they're fucking wrong. They CAN NOT VALIDATE my official vote. They can not tell me my OFFICIAL vote as per the OFFICIAL VOTE TABULATION is VALIDATED. Is it worth going to jail over this?

COMMENT #34 [Permalink]

... Mac said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:00 pm PT...





Does anyone know if the NH recount is "hand-counted" across the board, or will machine-counted ballots just be machine-counted again? Mac

COMMENT #35 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:02 pm PT...





I must be honest here. LAST time I voted, I refused to put it in the diebold scanner. Instead I had them open the fucking AUXILIARY SLOT with a KEY and I placed it inside. Was it scanned later? I don't know.

Was it removed from the AUX slot? I don't know.

(IT COULD STILL BE IN THE AUX SLOT RIGHT NOW!) were talking 2006. And these people want me to use this same crap again? I DON'T THINK SO. I am ready to tear my fucking ballot up and raise hell. Go to jail for disturbing the peace or whatever the fuck.

COMMENT #36 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:04 pm PT...





Don't bury this thread. ANSWER MY QUESTION!

COMMENT #37 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:04 pm PT...





Please.

COMMENT #38 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:07 pm PT...





... Mac asked... "Does anyone know if the NH recount is "hand-counted" across the board...?" Hand-counted... ... but the questions to ask are "How much" of the total will be recounted and "where" the ballots have been in the interim... and with whom?

COMMENT #39 [Permalink]

... Reader said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:07 pm PT...





"Agent #69 was forcibly retired" NOOOOOOOO! That's just wrong. Oh well, I liked your style while it last #69. Screw those fascists! In terms of intolerance for diversity of opinion that place is looking more and more like some rabid reichwing site.

COMMENT #40 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:08 pm PT...





The reason why I am SCREAMING for a fucking answer is. I see that the new rules by the SOS of California (which are printed on the sample ballot) say that you *MUST* put that fucking ballot in the slot for the scanner. And I am saying right now NO I WON'T. so I guess if nobody fucking answers me, then I am basically done voting. Go ahead bury this thread with some more fucked up irrelevant KAOS SHIT.

COMMENT #41 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:09 pm PT...





CHAOS = SHIT

COMMENT #42 [Permalink]

... Jack Nauti said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:10 pm PT...





Hey, Phil. It's relatively easy to know whether your ballot was counted. There's a running total of all voters who check in at the polling place. There's another total of all ballots voted and submitted. These are balanced at the other end with the totals that come out of the tabulation process. Believe me - these ARE checked in most jurisdictions. So we can know whether or not all ballots voted were counted. But note that I didn't say your votes were accurately tabulated. You're right - there's no way to know that. But, then, there never has been even before computers. If you've ever watched ballots being hand counted, then think about how many can be counted in one minute. Then do the math. Hand-counting is no panacea. We need new laws, standards and enforcement and then accurate, reliable means - electonic or otherwise - to implement those laws.

COMMENT #43 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:10 pm PT...





And when I say DONE VOTING I mean, I lost my right to vote.

COMMENT #44 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:14 pm PT...





If I am right. Like Jack just said, then how do we stop this before it happens? Because if it is allowed to happen, then we are back to the same old scenario... Swear the FAKE CANDIDATE IN.

FAKE CANDIDATE BREAKS OATH OF OFFICE. This is a NATIONAL SECURITY PROBLEM PEOPLE!!!!!

COMMENT #45 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:16 pm PT...





who is going to stand up to this shit? Anyone? Or shall we keep arguing about DRKos

COMMENT #46 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 3:28 pm PT...





Look, I've seen enough.

I've read enough. I know electronics.

I know digital logic.

I know transmitters and receivers.

I know networking.

I know common sense. If I am a tin-foiled-ass-hat fine. HISTORY will show that I tried to say this right now as a PATRIOT. Go ahead and break your oath of office, you are officially my enemy of state. You are a domestic terrorist. FIX this voting problem, or I am going on a permanent hiatus. I mean, might as well bide my time doing whatever the hell I want before it all comes to an end, and mark my words if this problem ain't fixed it's all coming to an end for you too even if you refuse to see it right now. I don't give a fuck. I am a veteran, I served.

I tried to give you a fucking head's up! Blesed be those who understand this. You don't just see shit and not say something. I don't just see shit and not say something. Well I said it, I said what Needed to be said. I told you my idea for action. Pissin in the wind? Fine. Then the US Constitution is pissing in the wind.

The United States of America are NOT UNITED and not a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, because OATH BREAKERS FUCKED IT UP.

COMMENT #47 [Permalink]

... Dori Smith said on 1/13/2008 @ 4:07 pm PT...





We will be discussing LHS Associates, New Hampshire's vote, and the recount; at KPFT

Radio The Monitor with Pokey Anderson http://www.kpft.org/ Listen live now and I will be on at around 6:40 PM Texas time Dori Smith

COMMENT #48 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/13/2008 @ 4:10 pm PT...





Phil, The dismissive attitude toward EI issues that seems to pervade the top of the dkosian hierarchy... that attitude is very much a part of the whole problem. And yeah, it's the same ol' same ol' with EVMs. Little enough assurance for you that your vote will be counted as you intended. But Phil... if you don't vote, or throw your vote away, then there is no chance it will be counted. Voice your observations and concerns here. Volunteer to help with elections in one capacity or another. Vote. Verify where it's possible and to the extent that it's possible. Visit us afterwards and tell us what went down. And when we get a decent election reform bill passed, celebrate a Victory with us... ... and then we'll go back to work on the remaining problems the next day

COMMENT #49 [Permalink]

... Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 1/13/2008 @ 5:09 pm PT...





Went to the grocery store and every headline at checkout was about the treasonous anti-environmental lying terrorists in the White House who it's been said have staged false flag attacks on 9/11 to increase their executive powers, reduce the rights of American citizens and bring death to 1000's and 1000's of innocent people while increasing their personal wealth. This includes the recent revelation about the selling of nuclear secrets to Pakistan and the indictment of the 25 U.S. government officials named by FBI translater Sibel Edmonds and their involvement to the mainland attacks on 9/11/2001. This event has been used as the mother of all excuses for bush/cheney administration policies and actions such as pre-emptive war and allowing for bush to become sole dictator not even having to answer to Congress IF HE DECLARES ANOTHER 9/11 NATIONAL EMERGENCY. Total total 1%er corporate mass media BUSHIT COVERAGE IS REALITY in a U.S. supermarket. Every magazine has a picture of Britney Spears but NO TALK OF BUSH'S TREASON. These bastards could care less if she self destructs because then then will just move onto the next pop star/actor who's personal life they can destroy while protecting their 1%er interests and the bush/cheney administration. Becaue the truth about these terrorist destructors who advocate secretly listening to Americans phone conversations and eliminating habious corpus, turning the U.S. into a militaristic country who illegally tortures prisoners, directed passage of the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act that successfully reduced their constitutional citizen's rights. Their continued presence has allowed our U.S. elections to be run with the pathetic criminal fascist attitude of the inbred elitists who pirated the last 2 Presidential elections with a plan to destroy our world for their own person gain. These parasitic losers are going to jail this year in and their corporate mass media will be stripped of it's propaganda monopoly. 2008: Life sentences in prison will be the next stop for the bush/cheney administration as well as past accessories who have since left serving cheney to spend more time with their families.

COMMENT #50 [Permalink]

... Kristin said on 1/13/2008 @ 5:10 pm PT...





"If this happened in Canada (it wouldn't we hand-count all 15 million votes in about two hours), you'd see me and about 15 million other polite, laid-back Canucks tear down the whole system, and rebuild it from scratch."

Copied and pasted from a Commenter on Arianna Huffington's Sunday Roundup

***************

I hope you will look into the statistics on Canada hand counting their votes,and publicize the information. Two weeks (what the NH Sec of State says) sounds like an awfully long time to count those far, far fewer votes. Why the huge difference?

COMMENT #51 [Permalink]

... Linda said on 1/13/2008 @ 5:33 pm PT...





PoliticalSpaz #32, I HAVE read that Diebold's banking machines do just fine, thank-you very much, in stark contrast to their voting machines. Could this be because banks hold them accountable for the products they sell, while the government does not? Inquiring minds would like to know.

COMMENT #52 [Permalink]

... elliott said on 1/13/2008 @ 5:55 pm PT...





These machines were quietly ushered in late last year into NH. Who was the force behind putting these into a small state that has easily counted hand ballots since I can remember? Was it the Dem govenor Lynch, or Repubs, Sununu or Gregg? Whos brilliant idea was this?

COMMENT #53 [Permalink]

... M.L. said on 1/13/2008 @ 6:07 pm PT...





This cannot be happening in America

Land of the Brave and Free

They told me in Florida that no such mistakes could ever happen with American technology

COMMENT #54 [Permalink]

... Guy Honda said on 1/13/2008 @ 6:22 pm PT...





I wouldn't worry too much about this. I'm sure once Diebold changes their name the problems with these machines will vanish

COMMENT #55 [Permalink]

... Laura said on 1/13/2008 @ 6:32 pm PT...





Who counts your vote? Only the shadow knows! http://www.rense.com/general80/mdro.htm

COMMENT #56 [Permalink]

... GWN said on 1/13/2008 @ 7:45 pm PT...





Kristin # 50. I am not sure many Canadians would make a fuss if machines came into the picture.There's lots of apathy here too. This is why I am following Bradblog. I want to be ready for the fight. (Optical scanners are being used in the Municipal elections now)We are too trusting of our politicians IMO. PM Harper is doing lots of "behind the curtain" things and our bobble heads on TV don't investigate. "News" has become entertainment on most stations. CBC being the exception.

COMMENT #57 [Permalink]

... Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 1/13/2008 @ 7:52 pm PT...





i've heard the atm dispensers do just fine argument before. You cannot compare the 2. 1 dispenses money based on a bank card and pin # or records a deposit transaction. Cut and dried. Bank personal ensure the deposit transaction. You tell me how this relates to computer voting machines that can eliminate or flip votes anytime even by remote or by changing memory cards from when the vote is cast to final tabulation? Why should an election of the American people be subjected to having their votes counted in secrecy without transparency by a voting machine company on riggable computer systems? No less a company with known ties to the bush/cheney campaign who cheated in the 2004 election? uhh uhh wake up American people! The whole system is geared for pre-selection that why. The corporate elite 1%ers are called 1%ers for a reason. Because they make up less than 1% of the population and use the US banking system/multi-national corporate business model to CONTROL THE INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES. The United States is still the most powerful richest nation in the world and while the country of China was industrialized by these multi-national corporations by outsourcing work for the production of cheap manufactured goods, the U.S. STILL LEADS THE WORLD in the total amount of energy used and carbon dioxide gases heating up the planet. Multi-national corporate 1%er interests ARE NOT the interests of most of the American people and the entire election process unless taken back, monitored closely on paper ballots, and openly, (transparency) the election outcomes will continue to be pre-determined. As long as corporate contribution$$$ are used as the watermark as to which candidates are involved in debates and party positioning, the American people will only be voting 1 corporate 1%ers candidate over the others. 2004 example: Kerry vs. Bush. Even though we know bush lost and kerry conceded before the votes in Ohio were confirmed, half this country still felt good about voting for bush over kerry. Pretty good for a treasonous, lying, murderous, anti-environmental, anti-constitutional careless loser who only gave a tax break to the ultra rich. 2008: Abolish all electronic computer voting machines before the next election. Ensure all votes are recorded on paper ballots.

COMMENT #58 [Permalink]

... Johnny On the Spot said on 1/13/2008 @ 8:22 pm PT...





I finally figured out what's going on. The Clinton sock puppets at BlueHampshire.com clued me in because they kept going on about how there is this upstate/downstate divide in New Hampshire that somehow always favors the establishment candidate in the machine districts (Kerry/Gore/H Clinton) and "explains" the ludicrous flipped Obama result and wildly inaccurate polls. Notice how it doesn't matter whether one wins in Iowa (Gore, Kerry) or loses in Iowa (Obama), starting in 2000 (possibly as early as 1996) winning a New Hampshire primary became all about being the establishment choice. And that choice was confirmed only by the machines. This just didn't jibe to me. I've been to New Hampshire many times and the place is one big homogeneous bowl of nowhere. The "big cities" are nothing of the sort. They are essentially little cow towns, all of them up and down the state. One New Hampshirite is more or less like another North, South, East or West. Why would the rurals vote for the black guy? Why would those closest to Boston suddenly be "the poor". Proximity to Boston is expensive and anyone commuting into Boston from NH is as likely as not to be an executive. Why would these "rich, young and educated" Obama voters be over-represented in polls when these are exactly the profiles of people without landlines? People who frequent places like, oh, I don't know, Boston? This shit just does not add up. Until now. Here is what is going on: New Hampshire votes homogeneously, Obama beat Clinton by that exact count both upstate and downstate because the 20,000+ vote sample represented by the hand count represented the most accurate state primary exit poll in the history of mankind. Beginning in 1996/2000 Accuvote machines were widely distributed across the bulk of the lower part of the state. Suddenly, there were two New Hampshires. The hand-counted one that votes for the "people's choice" (Bradley, Dean, Obama) and the machine-counted one that votes for the Washington DC choice (Gore, Kerry, H Clinton). I contend interested parties have propagated this myth that there are two New Hampshires that just happen to bifurcate (to the fourth decimal point!) along geographic and optical scanner lines. They are flogging this myth everywhere in the media right now. And yes, this does mean it is possible Bill Bradley and/or Howard Dean were cheated out of victories in 2000 and 2004 respectively as they too "won the hand count" and "lost the machine count". One can easily prove this. Look at the 1992 and 1988 and 1984 county-by-county results for the New Hampshire Primary and suddenly this mysterious delta between an upstate New Hampshire voter and a downstate New Hampshire voter disappears! These results show almost complete homogeneity up and down the state in tallies for winners like Tsongas and Dukakis. THERE IS YOUR SMOKING GUN. New Hampshire didn't split into two alien cultures in 2000, it was split into hand-counted and machine-counted towns and a myth was created to explain this extremely strange and convenient new voting schism. I think Pat Buchanan's win in the 1992 primary may have set off alarm bells in elite circles that New Hampshire voters needed to be brought to heel and Accuvote and Optech machines were quickly deployed downstate (where most New Hampshire voters live) to keep the rabble in line. Unfortunately, with no secure ballot chain of custody, there is almost no way to trust the results of the forthcoming Kucinich recount in light of this. You can be sure ballots will be or already have been swapped in that will confirm the machine reported totals. So there you go, folks: the machines deliver the result Washington DC wants, the hand counts deliver the result the people want. Washington wins, you lose. And you are force-fed the lie that downstate New Hampshirites just love Washington DC on primary day. Mmm mmm mmm they love it. Please Washington, suh, can we has more of the same?

COMMENT #59 [Permalink]

... Carolab said on 1/13/2008 @ 9:33 pm PT...





I'm sorry to say that every indication in this article is that the local elections officials are insufficiently techno-saavy to understand the ramifactions of all this, and simply rely on "trust" of the voting machine programming companies. They are trained with whatever information those companies decide to provide, not what the poll workers really need to know. And, the Secretaries of State are severely remiss in not making clear all election legislation regarding protocols surrounding elections and prohibited activities. This is a ridiculous situation. If they cannot hire people who even comprehend the ways that machines can be hacked, then decide not to educate/inform them about these methods and the security measures that ought to be in place, what in the world can we expect? EVERYONE should on the backs of their respective Secretary of State ALL THE TIME. I know I am on the back on mine here in Minnesota, Mark Ritchie. One thing I can be sure of: he cannot claim to be uninformed about all of the problems with opscans, because I make it my civic duty to constantly send him relevant articles, and BradBlog is my number one source! Please, if you are not working to educate YOUR Secretary of State, start now! Get their e-mail address and START BOMBING THEM WITH INFORMATION!

COMMENT #60 [Permalink]

... barbara said on 1/13/2008 @ 9:54 pm PT...





zapkitty..

I can still read your comments on the thread..

did they TELL you were banned?

Or can you not post anymore..?? And why? What the hell....??

COMMENT #61 [Permalink]

... Brett said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:09 pm PT...





I have an idea. I haven't seen this suggested anywhere. What I want to do is find the results from the 2004, 2000, 1996 etc. New Hampshire primaries, and take a look at the differences between the Diebold and Hand-count votes for those elections. If we could show that it is very rare to have such a large discrepancy between machine vs hand, I think we'd have a pretty strong case. But I can't find those documents. Anyone know where we can find them? This would be a smoking gun if we could prove it.

COMMENT #62 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:27 pm PT...





Brett Well, Elliot, upthread at #52, just said the machines are new... so... that may be why you can't find that information. I don't know if that's right, but....

COMMENT #63 [Permalink]

... boston dan said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:40 pm PT...





google cache LHS Asssociates employee directory You're welcome

COMMENT #64 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:43 pm PT...





#48 the_zapkitty "But Phil... if you don't vote, or throw your vote away, then there is no chance it will be counted."

That's really not what I said. If my ballot is scanned, and the scanner converts the information on my ballot to an electronic signal, the moment that that happens, there can be no chain of custody or validation of my vote, I can NOT validate what is now invisible. And less you say that the paper still exists, I remind you that the paper isn't what is OFFICIALLY being counted/tabulated. I think you misunderstood what I am saying here. Verify where it's possible and to the extent that it's possible.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to verify electronic signals that I can not see with my eye. If they were to get RID of that electronic vote tabulation device (in this case an Optical Scanner) and if I knew my vote was going into a WOOD or METAL box with a LOCK on it I can then VALIDATE my vote and it's chain of custody up to the point where I put it in the slot. And OBSERVERS could watch that box all the way up the chain of custody. But you see this is not what's happening, they are using the Optical Scanner for the OFFICIAL vote tabulation. (Otherwise why scan it at all?) From the movie Zorro--"Zorro need to fight and defend the vote box with pistols blazing, BUT with electronics tabulating the votes, it's the bad guys actually stealing the whole vote box instantly! Zorro can't defend vapor / ether or what is now invisible. He can however keep a chain of custody over the paper ballots. But if the paper ballots are not counted then the bad guys win every time." Visit us afterwards and tell us what went down.

I already said what is going down. It's the way I'll be forced to vote again. (This time specifically the SOS says you *MUST* put that ballot into the scanner. (So I won't get away with refusing to put it in that slot and forcing the poll worker to whip out a key, open up the Auxiliary Tray again.) But I am saying to you all that my vote can not be validated with this system. I CAN'T VOTE! YOUR constitutional right to vote with this system is gone, it's done. Stick a fork in it. Do you get what I am saying. I can't take what this problem is doing to my life anymore. I don't enjoy life anymore, I don't relax anymore, I can't relax, I can't just let it go, everywhere or time I try to go do something else, something always reminds me of what is going on here. Always brings me back. Always pisses me of, Always makes me start screaming again. Here is my problem. I can't resolve it. On the CALIFORNIA PERSIDENTIAL PRIMARY ELECTION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2008 * OFFICIAL VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE * signed on the cover by Debra Bowen. Flip to page 31, and look at:

VOTER BILL OF RIGHTS Go to number 9. "9. You have the right to ask questions about the election procedures and observe the election process.

You have the right to ask questions of the precinct board and elections officials regarding election procedures and to receive an answer or be directed to the appropriate official for an answer. However, if persistent questioning disrupts the execution of their duties, the board or election officials my discontinue responding to question." -=-=-=-

note in bold it say's OBSERVE the election process. I am telling you that once the ballot is scanned you can no longer OBSERVE anything about the election process. Unlike if the ballot was put into a BOX with a lock on it to be counted, you could watch the BOX, travel with the BOX, watch them open the BOX, watch them remove the ballots from the BOX, watch them count the ballots, and watch where the counted ballots go.

-=-=-=- Now let's whip out our County of Sacramento Voter Registration and Elections SAMPLE BALLOT AND VOTER INFORMATION PAMPHLET Los materiales para votar estan ahora a su disposicion en espanol. Encontrara mas informacion en el interior. PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY ELECTION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2008 DEMOCRAT Ballot TYPE 004 (Warning The location of your polling place may have changed) And in that document we shall open up the page to County of Sacramento DEM Ballot Type 004 page 3 www.elections.saccounty.net Under TIPS FOR VOTERS

Under WHILE YOU ARE AT THE POLLING PLACE

Under AFTER VOTING, REVIEW YOUR CHOICES There's three bullets "

* Compare the selections you made on the Sample Ballot to the selections you have made on your Official Ballot. * After you have voted, place the ballot in the secrecy sleeve. Take the ballot to the Precinct Ballot Scanner unit and feed the ballot into the scanner. The scanner will accept the ballot or note on the screen that you need to review your ballot. * If a review of the ballot is needed, press the "Return" button. If you want the ballot accepted as is press the "Accept" button. Once the ballot is accepted and deposited into the scanner it cannot be retrieved. Hand the empty secrecy sleeve to the precinct officer.

" -=-=-=-

Now look, I am trying to be as CLEAR as possible here while describing this. Once that ballot is accepted into that scanner, I can no longer OBSERVE the election process. Unlike if the ballot was dropped into a slot where a chain of custody could protect that vote, the vote once digitized is no longer under ANY chain of custody. The election process can not be observed. You can not prove that my vote was counted correctly or not counted at all. For all you know a quick glitch in the electrical grid could make all the votes disappear. So what I am saying is I HAVE NO RIGHT TO VOTE, because my RIGHTS were taken away electronically. I have complained to the SOS, I have complained to HAVA, and so here we are. I guess technically if someone wanted to be a 'word smith nazi' I had a right to vote, but I didn't have a right to have that vote actually count, since it cannot be proven that it did count. You can't tell me that some stupid incremental counter on the top of the box that adds +1 to a stupid LCD output is validating my vote, I don't know what happened inside the electronics at the logic level, I can't SEE that. You can't SEE that. If we open the box open and pull out the paper ballots I can see that. But that is not what is tabulated for the official count. If it was, then I wouldn't care what the "scanner" does. So I guess, I COULD BE WRONG HERE. I am making the assumption that the official vote is tabulated electronically. If the official vote is NOT TABULATED ELECTRONICALLY, then I am wrong. And I admit that right here, right now, but if the vote IS TABULATED ELECTRONICALLY, than I am right. If I am right, then where is Zorro to protect the vote!? It doesn't say on the voter bill of rights that citizens can whip out a shot guns to guard the paper ballots. (Don't take what I am saying here the wrong way. I am not advocating going to the polling place with a shot gun. DON'T DO THAT.) So I guess everyone can keep bitching about how DrKOS acts no different than corporate media, but meanwhile some nasty things are going to happen to your vote again. And they all begin with OBSERVATION and your loss of that ability. To Recap:

You can't observe the "election process" because electronic signals which represent tabulated votes are invisible, you can observe a box that HOLDS paper ballots to be hand counted. But if they are not hand counted then you can't observe the "election process." This denies the voter his constitutional rights. We are allowed to ask questions but not to get an answer in time for anything to matter about fairness or accuracy. Furthermore if our questions are too technical they can be ignored altogether. This system is broken, and you have lost your right to vote, because you've lost your right to OBSERVE the election process as long as the OFFICIAL TABULATION is digital OR if the paper ballots have broken chain of custody. All of the Policies and Procedures can NOT change the fact that the ballots can no longer be OBSERVED transparently. I could vote republican and it could switch to a democrat and no OBSERVER could possibly know because they can not see electronic signals and therefore can not observe the election process. I usually scream this out. It's hard to try to calm down and talk it out. I am sorry if I offended anyone. This issue is my hot button. Argument with me in public about this is likely to lead to a fist fight. e.g. I am running out of patience with this problem not being addressed. For this problem to be ignored yet another cycle of elections is to tell me that Debra Bowen is no better than Gray Davis or any of the other scum that has passed before. (I hope she rolls out paper ballots hand counted everywhere and no more electronic tabulation devices.) While all the other crap is going on in the world I don't see how we can even begin to change it until we change this fundamental underlying problem at the FOUNDATION of our NATION. Right now, I have No confidence in this system at all. You shouldn't either. Forget about DrKOS.

It's really time to start drawing some lines in the ground, just how much crap are you willing to put up with? You can punish them by making a donation to Brad Blog instead.. You can punish me, by not addressing, "Hey I can't observe the invisible electronic election process." Cause then you know I am just going to go all ape-shit about it.

COMMENT #65 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/13/2008 @ 10:56 pm PT...





Barbara, Banning at Daily Kos means you cannot post diaries or comment on diaries others have posted. No explanation. No revocation. My account is still there, undoubtedly racking up data when I visit the site, but I've been permanently silenced as far as the admins at Kos are concerned. As to why, there is literally only one explanation: One way of getting banned is to have too many of your comments "troll-rated" by Trusted Users. "Troll-rated" comments are hidden from readers and too many such comments trigger an automatic ban. Another way to get banned is to post conspiracy theories or "recommend" diaries or comments about conspiracy theories. Or anything an admin thinks is a conspiracy theory. Then an admin will ban you. And none of my comments at Daily Kos were ever troll-rated... It's ridiculous, of course, but not surprising. Immediate threats of banning ensued the instant the first questions about the NH primary appeared over there. And yes, it's all just as sad as it seems. As far as the "upper crust" at Daily Kos are concerned, and as their statements have shown repeatedly, they believe the Election Integrity movement is literally one giant conspiracy theory... ... and they seem to be terrified of it and its members But a lot of everyday users and Trusted Users at Daily Kos are not kowtowing to the the party line... they are insisting on the facts and I wish them every success in their quest. (The zapkitty returns to pondering upon how to properly fold his new tinfoil hat to fit over his ears...)

COMMENT #66 [Permalink]

... oppositionradio said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:09 am PT...





Perhaps its time for a Free And Fair Elections amendment to the constitution? Yeah? Let's bring it up at our Caucuses on Feb. 5. A great wedge issue for the Dems, but one what any honest libertarian or old school main street republicon should support. http://www.freeandfairelections.org/

COMMENT #67 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:20 am PT...





Ugh, zap. You get an A for effort anyway....

COMMENT #68 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean in FL-13 said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:21 am PT...





A brave and noble effort, Zap. I could only stand it over there for a moment to read up on you before I was made ill by your reasoned posts being lamb-basted by idjits. I resigned from DKos AND Alternet months ago when it became clear they were COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE to prevailing logic. JOHNNY ON THE SPOT--(#58)

HHHHOoooooly-Whaaa! GREAT theory/ I had COMPLETELY FORGOTTEN the NH demographic breakdown of BRADLEY and DEAN! I had missed the "North vs. South" fallacy coiciding with the machines until YOU crystalized it. And YAH! PAT BUCHANAN IN 92!!!

That's RIGHT! I think you're really onto something there...thank you for posting that. Struck a chord of gut-truth in me. You just KNOW Rove n' Crew would've made N.H. top priority years ago.

BRETT--yes, I'd like to find that data too.

Probably long gone or altered by now.

COMMENT #69 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:26 am PT...





Well, Phil, you keep constructed a basic games theory conundrum and keep reiterating it as if it was some truth we all were unaware of. Kinda strange, actually. But if you can't trust the system (and currently there's no reason you should) and if you feel you can't work to change the system... then I'm at a loss as to how you think we should respond to your questions, much less have any idea as to how you might proceed. It's an information war, and has been from the beginning (the mid 1770's ) Amomg other goals we fight to overcome the general public's lack of knowledge concerning election integrity... and the fact that dkosians are getting involved in spite of the dkos management's heavy-handed crap is probably as much a sign of good news as anything else you'll hear this week.

COMMENT #70 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/14/2008 @ 1:00 am PT...





Oh, fer fucksakes! I've been trying to read that thread, zap, and I only made it about a quarter the way down before my contact lenses started shriveling and the frontal lobe of my left hemisphere exploded. So many feeble minds in hard heads out there! I have a good supplier for heavy-duty tin foil and there are some interesting patterns for tin foil balaclava helmets and even ski masks now. Can't go a day without one!

COMMENT #71 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/14/2008 @ 1:32 am PT...





I've had to resort to my favorite insult generator to blow off steam. Sample: Thou dissembling clapper-clawed joithead! It would almost be worth it to log-on to that many-headed beast to call him that!

COMMENT #72 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/14/2008 @ 1:38 am PT...





Or: Come, come, you talk greasily; your lips grow foul. I should, like, maybe, go to bed....

COMMENT #73 [Permalink]

... Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 1/14/2008 @ 1:44 am PT...





Hey Phil i hear you loud and clear. i completely agree with you statement of the facts accurately describing the "election" theater as a simple precursor for the continued control by these inbred parasitic criminals. What the bush/s and the cheneys cannot predict is how significant numbers of like minded individuals in the American population can bring about change outside the brainwashing propaganda of the corporate 1%er mass media. The reality of it is is that U.S. elections are laid out as by the people for the people. So we can go back to Zorro and the verifiable paper ballot. The American people own the airwaves so we can break up the multi-national media conglomerants and bring back FREE airwaves.

COMMENT #74 [Permalink]

... Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 1/14/2008 @ 1:47 am PT...





Just got an email from the Kusinich camp. 1st he was going to be included in the Nevada debate and then the powers that be CHANGED THEIR MIND. Who do you think would do that??? He is trying to raise money to include his opinions and comments to the American people by other means like comcast and the internet. Lastly, i often talk about the bushit/cheney anti-environmental stance and my low regard of the mass media as an investigative agent for reporting the truth as oposed to the crap they collectively serve up. i have to give props to the NY Times on this 1 dated 1/08/2008. In an article linked below titled NATURE OVERRUN, it descibes how Utah's prestine wild lands are up for destruction by off road vehicles with the support of the careless anti-environmentalist in Washington. But they are doing such a good job. The fact that other Presidents have set that land aside for future generation doesn't stop this group of despicable destructors who belong in jail. You can actually submit a comment however since bush changed the rules of US Forestry in 12/04 after theft #2. The people DO NOT HAVE A VOICE OR FINAL SAY on issues of the wild lands techically owned by all Americans. http://www.nytimes.com/2...ink&exprod=permalink Here is the link to post a comment to the Federal Bureau of Land Management. http://www.suwa.org The only other option will be to face these bush/cheney adminstration losers in court with not for profit environmental groups trying to save these wild places and the species who live there. Hopefully, not in front of a bush fascist appointed judge.

COMMENT #75 [Permalink]

... Mostaque said on 1/14/2008 @ 4:09 am PT...





There has always been fraud before in Ameican politics, but people never questioned, because there weren't the multiple problems the country faced back then as it does now. It focuses peoples minds. Anyway here are a few general points about Ron Paul: Lets be realistic. No Republican will be elected as a candidate for the party if he accused his own president and Republican administration that they did 9/11——not in a million years. Nor should we expect Ron Paul to do so, IF WE REALLY WANT HIM TO WIN. For me his got the core issues right, and that’s all that matters. By the way if he wins his one term will not solve most of the problems, he will merely amelioriate some of them. I think the American elite on the one hand like him, and obviously with all the mess globally and domestically they would like to see a extremely competent manager clean up the mess for the USA. On the other hand obviously given his support base, they may feel a little apprehensive. Such apprehensions can easily be dispelled if he is given a fair hearing like all the other ‘mainstream’ candidates. I can’t see the other candidate clowns cleaning up America’s mess, but merely making things worse, and I must assume a certain % of the American elite have a stake in maintaining American stability and prosperity. Huckabee, McCain, and Romney are not serious challengers against Obama, or Hilary. They have no chances against these two, but Ron Paul does. So my message to any serious Republican is if you want to see a Republican become the next President then vote Ron Paul, because he is significantly different from the current administration without compromising his political principles. Are there any organised group of hackers out there who would like to back Ron Paul? Either that or its the draft. Just kidding!

COMMENT #76 [Permalink]

... Mugzi said on 1/14/2008 @ 6:10 am PT...





The beat goes on!!! This has been going on since May 2003 when the Prez of Diebold in a memo promised the votes in Ohio to bushie. Guess what - the election was certified and here we are! The only thing is now more people are upset. We won't have a true election until all electronic machines are out of the election process.

COMMENT #77 [Permalink]

... poe said on 1/14/2008 @ 6:49 am PT...





It's amazing that voting machines are faulty only when democrats lose.

COMMENT #78 [Permalink]

... Badger said on 1/14/2008 @ 7:39 am PT...





Poe said,

"It's amazing that voting machines are faulty only when democrats lose." No, the voting machines are faulty when the establishment and vested interests "win," against pretty substantial odds, and then the media scams the issue by carrying on about exit polls. This issue is not about party, it's about money and control. Albert Howard, Republican, is also challenging the New Hampshire results. Seems his vote totals went negative. Remember the sudden "comeback" for Kerry over Dean- don't forget the 2000 Republican primary race "lost" by McCain. In my opinion, McCain was a much stronger candidate against Gore than Bush. Or haven't you registered that the particular issue of concern is a Democratic primary? Are you calling Hillary a Republican?

COMMENT #79 [Permalink]

... Bluebear2 said on 1/14/2008 @ 8:12 am PT...





Hillary is Bush Lite!

.

COMMENT #80 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/14/2008 @ 8:22 am PT...





Why is it so hard to believe a private corporation (e-vote machine corporations) is in bed with our government? What about all the telecom companies giving our govt free records, etc...? So, you think they draw the line with e-vote machines? Our govt is probably telling the e-vote "maintenance" people how they want the vote to turn out! What is so hard to believe about that? Why do you think it's secret code and secret counting?

COMMENT #81 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/14/2008 @ 8:24 am PT...





Coincidence? Australia Able To Vote Out Pro-Bush PM Howard, And Their E-Vote Machine Software Is Not Secret Like U.S. E-Vote Software! http://bigdanblogger.blo...ia-able-to-vote-out.html

COMMENT #82 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/14/2008 @ 8:42 am PT...





Ron Paul backers also claiming vote fraud: "There is overwhelming evidence of computer vote fraud in New Hampshire. A small town tax collector has admitted to dumping 31 Ron Paul votes but has excused herself with “It was a mistake.” Town Clerk/Tax Collector Jennifer Call was forced to take her phone off the hook the day following her state’s primary in response to the hundreds of phone calls. She did not accept or return AFP calls." "One of the earmarks of computer vote fraud surfaces when all the candidate’s percentages remain almost the same throughout the evening as the totals increase. This was reflected in the first hour of TV reporting in New Hampshire on January 8. The purpose of torpedoing Paul at this early stage is to keep his name out of the news. He cannot be allowed to win or even make a strong showing in any of the primaries lest the power structure be jeopardized." "Paul finished (officially) with a dismal 8% of the New Hampshire vote, but those aware of the computer operator’s ability to defraud the citizens of honest returns were skeptical. Jim Condit of Ohio has exposed vote fraud for 15 years. Condit pointed out some interesting discrepancies. For instance, how can Paul be near the top in every straw vote and No. 1 in most of them, yet (officially) finish with but 10% in Iowa and 8% in New Hampshire? In a poll from the “Primary New Hampshire” website, Paul was leading even the eventual “winner” John McCain at noon on voting day: Paul: 26.5%, McCain 26.4%, and Giuliani at 5.9%. But the finish showed Rudy had jumped to 9%, McCain added nearly half again at 38%, while Paul somehow fell back to 8%. Such a scream from the wilderness could be cast aside as mere “sour grapes” except for the fact that Dr. Paul has scored highly in poll after poll on the Internet and with local straw votes all over the country. His national following is enormous. One NewYork radio station has him running as high as 60% in recent weeks. " http://www.americanfreep.../html/vote_fraud121.html

COMMENT #83 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/14/2008 @ 9:12 am PT...





... Big Dan said... "Coincidence? Australia Able To Vote Out Pro-Bush PM Howard, And Their E-Vote Machine Software Is Not Secret..." Most likely it was because Australia really doesn't use e-voting. They use paper ballots. Their experimental e-voting system is limited in scope... and limited to the visually disabled. https://bradblog.com/?p=4985#comment-251376 And you might wish to reread that entire thread. Open source is often better than closed source, but open source by itself is not a magical cure for e-voting's fatal flaws.

COMMENT #84 [Permalink]

... NateTG said on 1/14/2008 @ 10:22 am PT...





Phil: It's mathematically impossible to simultaneously ensure anonymity and that your vote is counted correctly. This is true regardless of the voting system. If you're willing to accept some compromise of anonymity and a reasonable confidence of correct counting, there are methods available. (For example , using ballot serial numbers, and including test signals as part of the system.) However, any such process also creates a potential point of compromise.

COMMENT #85 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/14/2008 @ 10:47 am PT...





Here's the "wired" article about Aussie's e-voting: http://www.wired.com/tec...media/news/2003/11/61045 Open source code for e-vote machines is a good thing. Are you sure Aus e-voting is experimental and limited to the disabled? I haven't found that anywhere, where does it say that? There's flaws in everything, including paper ballots. But the secrecy surrounding e-vote machines code & counting is unacceptable, far more than any other method.

COMMENT #86 [Permalink]

... MarkH said on 1/14/2008 @ 11:01 am PT...





I sympathize with the Paul supporters. And, it's that bipartisan concern about the elections which shows this isn't a Democratic complaint, it's a question of Right and Wrong (as Brad says). Maybe the recount in NH will help highlight this problem, so we can get it fixed. On the Democratic side the rigging of the vote in Iowa by importation of temporary voters is pretty clear (and perhaps legal). Did any Republican feel they were cheated in Iowa?

COMMENT #87 [Permalink]

... Brett said on 1/14/2008 @ 11:28 am PT...





@ Agent99, #62 thanks for the heads up, I must have missed that comment. this is a shame, since there's really nothing to compare it to. However, what about other states? Does anyone know where we can find past year's primary results from states that have been using the Diebold machines for a while now?

COMMENT #88 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/14/2008 @ 11:57 am PT...





... Big Dan inquired... "Are you sure Aus e-voting is experimental and limited to the disabled?" There also turned out to be certain military trials I was unaware of, but yes... aside from the disabled and military experiments, Australians filled out paper ballots as usual. What happened to Australia's wonderful e-voting system? It never was. The Aussie e-voting supporters do love to talk up their system, especially those in the government, and by the time Wired got through with it... it had somehow become "Australia's Universally Used and Much Beloved E-Voting System and Cure for Cancer"... which, it seems, is how much of the world still thinks of it today. "I haven't found that anywhere, where does it say that?" A most disreputable source... the Australian government http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/e_voting/index.htm The extension of the trials to certain of the Aussie armed forces on foreign deployment did take me by surprise...

COMMENT #89 [Permalink]

... Badger said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:06 pm PT...





Brett, You can search for 2004, Election Primary results, or that sort of thing, and come up with sites. I hit one from NH state, but would prefer the raw data. Maybe a search of each county website, if they have one and keep that stuff on line?

COMMENT #90 [Permalink]

... molly said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:12 pm PT...





Ron Paul's dismal showing in N.H. is another big tip off the election was rigged. My son has libertarian tendencies..told me a few years ago that N.H. has a libertarian colony. 20,000 or so. They would have all voted for Ron Paul.I live in Maine...my dem. gov. is a Clinton guy. Clinton came here to raise money for him in '06. Didn't give a penny to the excellent dem. challenger ,who was broke, to Snowe.

COMMENT #91 [Permalink]

... Lindy said on 1/14/2008 @ 12:21 pm PT...





Perhaps voters should receive a receipt for their vote which can then be used for recounts if needed.

COMMENT #92 [Permalink]

... NateTG said on 1/14/2008 @ 1:38 pm PT...





"Perhaps voters should receive a receipt for their vote which can then be used for recounts if needed." Or sold to the local Clinton/Obama campaign office?

COMMENT #93 [Permalink]

... Linda said on 1/14/2008 @ 8:04 pm PT...





Lindy #91, that receipt means nothing. It's only meaningful if (1) the voter signed a statement after voting that the receipt accurately reflected her vote, (2) a precinct clerk/inspector verified the accuracy of the receipt (which cannot be done in a secret election), and (3) every single voter who votes on an electronic voting machine does this, saves the receipt, and then brings it to the registrar of voters in the event of a recall. The only reason I'm explaining this to you is to show you that it's a complete waste of voter/taxpayer time and money to get a computer printout (receipt) of your electronic voting machine transaction. The only sensible way to go is with hand-counted paper ballots. Period. As unbelievable as that may sound in this technological time, it's true.

COMMENT #94 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/14/2008 @ 9:17 pm PT...





... Linda pondered... "The only sensible way to go is with hand-counted paper ballots. Period. As unbelievable as that may sound in this technological time, it's true." Actually, from a technical standpoint... if you regard elections as matrices liable to manipulation by external parties, then properly secured hand-counted paper ballots are, quite literally, the most sophisticated solution available. That is because an election process that uses them can leverage the most sophisticated AI construct on the planet. (Yes, you. And you over there. And you eating corn chips on the couch...) The only drawback is that the symbology used in the matrices must be represented in tokens that have a discrete and stable form that the particular AI in question can grasp and manipulate. But given the appropriate tokens then nothing else on this world can keep up with that AI... and nothing can match its reasoning abilities with regards to the tokens it is manipulating. And thus the current crude state of computerized AI manipulating electromagnetic patterns and EM-based records of same just can't cut it in that particular competition.

COMMENT #95 [Permalink]

... Jack Nauti said on 1/15/2008 @ 7:47 am PT...





ZapKitty... you've obviously never worked with real, live poll workers. And hand-counting would require a gazillion more of them than are used currently and would require really scraping the bottom of the barrel. For a frightening experience, visit a few local poll-worker training classes and ask yourself if you'd want that motley crew counting your ballots. Be sure to include some large urban areas in your visits, not just comfortable suburbs. It's truly amazing elections come off at all.

COMMENT #96 [Permalink]

... George Barnett said on 1/15/2008 @ 8:12 am PT...





Thanks Brad, and special thanks to Dori Smith, from my home state of Connecticut, for some excellent investigative reporting. Both of you, keep up the good work.

COMMENT #97 [Permalink]

... the_zapkitty said on 1/15/2008 @ 9:14 am PT...





"ZapKitty... you've obviously never worked with real, live poll workers." Your powers of observation need work... I've been a volunteer poll worker "And hand-counting would require a gazillion more of them than are used currently" "a gazillion"? non sequitur. standard anti-paper scare tactic sans any underlying logic or hard numbers. "and would require really scraping the bottom of the barrel." non sequitur. why would you think that? "For a frightening experience, visit a few local poll-worker training classes and ask yourself if you'd want that motley crew counting your ballots." "Frightening?" You don't get more "urban" than the near-Northside of Indy in that regard and yet my fellow poll workers were still human, believe it or not. And I'd trust them further than I'd trust the unknown last person who happened to handle Diebold code. You should be made aware, though, that piling up these particular non sequiturs like this is actually a standard scare tactic often used by e-voting shills.

COMMENT #98 [Permalink]

... DES said on 1/15/2008 @ 1:55 pm PT...





Posting this on all applicable threads... PLEASE NOTE: This is not about Candidate A winning or Candidate B losing. This is solely about the hackable, unsecure voting machines (optical scan in NH) that have been investigated and proven to be crap and yet are still deployed to count the majority of elections in this country. Whenever and wherever there is a discrepancy with electronic voting machines involved --- no matter how big or small the race, no matter if it's Repub or Dem --- Voting Integrity advocates look into it. It's what they do. Please do not assume or assign motives, intentions or conclusions to anyone here that are not EXPLICITLY stated. Brad makes crystal clear that he doesn't care who won or lost, just that the results are ACCURATE. Period. The site owner is not responsible for the opinions of commenters in this open forum. No endorsement of commenters' opinions is either intended or implied. In addition, please note that The Brad Blog does not allege that fraud (or "rigging") has actually occurred --- only that the results of any contest that incorporates electronic voting systems should be subject to exacting scrutiny and independent verification prior to certification. Thank you.

COMMENT #99 [Permalink]

... nigeldh said on 1/16/2008 @ 8:15 pm PT...





Memory cards failing??? If this was the case us digital photographers would be up in arms. I have shot over 100,000 digital images on multiple memory cards and I think that maybe one image was a bit funky. But a recovery program got that image mostly back. I have used one recovery program to recover images I accidentally erased. And unlike a hard disk, memory cards don't write data to the same areas all the time. They vary the location so they don't exceed the 10,000 writes per memory cell design spec. (probably higher) Those failed cards should be impounded. If these failed cards had evidence or pictures of illegal activity you bet that the police would do everything to recover them.

COMMENT #100 [Permalink]

... JB VONGRABE said on 2/27/2008 @ 4:55 am PT...

