A quick scan through the GAO website has turned up this report in PDF format which sounds to me like it’s the one that this news article is based on. I’m at work, so I can’t read the whole thing: my initial impression is that it’s still pretty damning, but that the news report is slightly hyped. Hope the GAO report helps.
No coverage in the liberal national media? How peculiar!
I knew the winds of fate sent you back to us for good reasons, lissener.
After reading the article, I see that the GAO report is even worse than I thought.
Some excerpts:
There’s a lot more.
According to this article, the United States is the only democratic nation in the world that permits private partisan companies to count and tabulate the vote in secret, using privately-held software.
That does sound kind of stupid. If there’s any application in the world where the technology ought to be in the public domain and accessible to public scrutiny, it’s recording and counting electoral votes in a democratic society.
And it’s not as though you couldn’t get people to do the work, either. Open-source programmers have been talking about how to make transparent electronic voting systems for years now; if they had the chance to create one that would be actually used, they’d be all over it like pink on a pig. I say we should get the National Institute of Standards and Technology to hold a contest for the software design and have a public judging. Wouldn’t that be cool?!
The article doesn’t really support its own headline. The details in the article describe findings of vulnerabilities and possibilities, which are not good, but which are not fraud. They create an opportunity for fraud, but do not prove or even suggest that fraud actually happened.
I agree. The possibility of fraud is absolutely something to be concerned about, and hopefully this report will get it off the back burner, but there is nothing to prove that fraud did occur.
I do see a problem with open source software, though. Agreed that you get the best and the brightest to write some damn good code, but you also get the best and the brightest hacking it. There needs to be some intermediate level of transparency. I think.
Except for that pesky little speech where the president of Diebold promised to deliver Ohio to the Bush campaign, prior to the 2004 election. While this is not PROOF it is certainly thought-provoking. And disquieting to those of us who would like to think our vote means something.
Although those aren’t even close to the same thing.
I COULD sneak into house tonight, bash your sleeping head in, and have sex with your goldfish before I leave. Your house is not well-secured.
That hardly warrants accusing me of the crime.
yeah, and if the president of the firm who makes all the “sneak into houses, bash sleeping heads in and have sex with goldfish” kits used in the stat promises that he will ensure that a lot of houses are broken into, heads bashed in and goldfish molested, aren’t the police justified in doing some hard investigative work?
A Hispanic, a conservative, and a goldfish perv. I form a more fully rounded picture of you every day.
Was there anything to prevent vote-flipping in favor of Kerry?
Maybe the national media isn’t reporting this because there’s no actual evidence of vote tampering. The OP can’t seriously be claiming that bad news about Bush is routinely supressed. His recent low ratings are plastered all over the place.
Hard investigative work? Of course.
“GAO report upholds Ohio vote fraud claims” ?
Not so much.
“GAO Report Shows Need For Stronger Investigation” ?
Sure.
The “liberal” media serves their corporate masters and the corporate masters make more profits with Republicans in control. There is evidence of fraud in Ohio. I’d assemble it, but it would be the longest OP in the history of message boards.
But, since the head of Diebold didn’t say anything remotely similar to this, no real justification exists.
Regards,
Shodan
Right. "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year’’ is not remotely similar. :rolleyes:
You do realize, don’t you, that he wasn’t talking about fraud? When people say things like this they mean that they will do all they can by contributing money, helping get people to the polls, etc., to help deliver the state. Simply saying what the Diebold guy said is certainly not an indication that he’s intending to commit fraud. It’s also certainly not proof that any fraud exists.
I’m always amazed that liberals seem to think the only reason they keep losing elections is through fraud. If they keep up this whining about things then they will never get their act together and present a positive agenda for change to the American public.
So what’s the plan to fix it?
In other words… let’s say that I break my omerta and concede that, yup, sure enough, we snowed you. We won Ohio through vote fraud, and we plan to do it again, maybe in more states since it works so well. Really not too concerned about scandals and such, because whoever we nominate is gonna win.
That is seemingly what you actually believe… so how are you realistically gonna stop us?
What you do is win the next election so convincingly that a fraudulent attempt to steal it would be obvious even to diehard Republicans. Given that right now Bush’s popularity is about five points below bird flu, it may not be hard. Genuine election reform is needed. I don’t understand why some states put party preference on the registration, that’s just an invitation for unscrupulous officials to keep people off the voter list, and that happened all over Ohio. You need open source code for the machines that can be verified and security on a par with ATMs. Technically, it wouldn’t be impossible to make a much more robust system, yet obviously those with a vested interest in fraud will block it.