The bolding and italics are mine. :eek: :eek: :eek: Bev Harris has been investigating and writing about electronic voting machines for a number of years and AFAIK she is quite credible and knows her stuff. She is making a very bold statement here and is sure enough of herself that she’s willing to risk trouble with the DMCA and, apparently, the White House. I suppose that she could simply have evidence of electronic manipulation in some Senate or House race but that’s not the impression I get.
So, is this for real? Does she have something? Is this a case of a grief stricken Kerry supporter seeing “evidence” that’s not really there? I guess time will tell but this could be VERY big.
Oh, thank goodness. It’s all untrue. Kerry DID win after all. The Republicans just cheated! That explains everything. The People are still with us! Whew!
tagos, Yep. The whole Diebold security thing isn’t new news. Ms. Harris has been trying to publicize this since at least last year. What’s new is that she seems to feel that she has concrete evidence of electronic fraud in Tuesday’s election. If she’s correct then it is indeed “Bigger than Watergate”.
Indeed. If electronic voting systems aren’t as tamper-proof as is humanly possible and don’t have a physical audit trail then they should not be used. Even if there was no fraud, and I’ve little reason besides sour grapes to think so, we should ensure there is no possibility of it in future. Trust in the ballot is the absolute bedrock of democracy.
If there is evidence it should be investigated, not gloatingly dismissed.
Bricker,
As I said, time will tell. And, contrary to what you may think, I would not be at all happy to find that this kind of fraud has been going on (although I would be glad to see it exposed). For now I’m leaning toward it being a paranoid conspiracy theory, but who knows? I know enough about software to know that it is very possible, but it seems like it would be incredibly stupid to try something like this on such a massive scale.
They’re claiming a massive FOI action. Surely such an action would be picked up by the news media. Has anyone seen any reports of these requests coming into local election offices?
Take your pick of polls, friend. Right up to Election Day, the percentage of People (your mocking capitalization, not mine) who believe the country is going in the wrong direction outweighed those who think otherwise right across the board. Yeah, I’d say they’re with us.
Please, major news organizations. Dive into the fray! How sweet it would be if Dan Rather could announce that CBS had hard proof that the Ohio election was stolen at the instructions of Bush! Diebold should publicly release the source code for their machines. And Bush should appoint a special prosecutor with power to investigate this fully and independently.
I would love to see George Soros devote maybe $50 million to a fund for investigative journalism. This would be a good starting point: while I’m skeptical of their claims, this is an issue that we ought to be able to put to rest.
For one thing, I think it’s perfectly clear that by 2008 we need a paper trail on every single ballot.
I’ll believe this when I see some hard proof, not simply sour grapes or hand wringing over the exit polls vs the hard number. Its been pretty clear for months that this was going to be the rabid element of the Dems strategy post election if they lost…so its no big surprise that its coming out now. I think they were counting on it being VERY close if they lost so they could get more traction with this…didn’t quite work out that way though.
Basically it would have taken hundreds of thousands of votes in OH and FL to rig this election…something thats going to be pretty hard to cover up. However, this is a fool proof tack by the rabid element of the Dems…if they find something they can howl. If they DON’T find anything they can howl about a cover up by the evil 'Pub vote stealing machine.
At a guess, if Kerry thought something like this was happening he’d be pursueing it big time. The fact that he’s not (nor is Edwards, who was urging Kerry to hold out until the last vote was tallied) says something to me.
Yes, if the question on the ballot box had been, “Is the country going in the right or the wrong direction?” then your poll might be relevant. But this thread is about the number of people that voted for Bush over Kerry, and whether evidence exists to suggest that electronic voting machine fraud influenced that number.
So the relevant poll to this discussion would have simply asked, “Who will you vote for?”
And those neutrally-conducted polls consistently showed Bush leading or tied within the margin of error with Kerry. Which the Democrats confidently dismissed by explaining that there was a legion of unpolled cell phone users poised to vote for Kerry.
Electronic voting is a solution in search of a problem. Are we so wrapped up in processing returns quickly that we don’t give a hoot about integrity? The solution is to our north (well, actually somewhat south from my perspective). The Canadians do it all by paper. Print ballots, make marks, count marks. Hi tech? No. But why should we care? It’s accurate and auditable.
As has been pointed out in numerous other threads about the electronic voting machines and votes in Canada, our ballots are a lot more complex. We lump on multiple questions, bond issues, and other local races. It would make processing a LOT more time consumming and difficult than what the Canadians do.
Also, I don’t understand this knee jerk reaction to the electronic machines (well, ok, I do…its part the left wing nutball section of the parties strategy in case they lost the election…its not working though so I wish they would give it a rest).
We are just scratching the surface with the things, feeling our way through them. We live in an electronic information age and people want to go back to punching cards? Christ, lets give the technology a chance to prove itself and evolve to our needs. Perhaps a paper trail WILL eventually be put in…or perhaps we will get to the point where we understand and trust the technology enough that we don’t need such outdated things. Time will tell…but only if we give the technology time to evolve and change to meet our needs. NO technology is 100% the first time used…but only using such technology in a live environment will we find the problems or see things we want or need so that it does what we want it to do…and so we come to trust it.
There is/was nothing magical about our old system of analogue machines (or punch card ballots for that matter). Corruption and cheating were rampant there too. Until I see some proof that the machines are seriously out of wack with non-electronic voting machine tallies in other states or counties within states (its my understanding that they are pretty much within the margin of error in the states they were used in…i.e. in states like Florida there are counties that used e-voting machines and counties that use non-e-voting machines, and they have similar results, all within the margin of error) I don’t see why we need to even think about throwing the baby out with the bath water. Hell, even if it IS eventually proved that some cheating was done with the machines I don’t see the need to throw them out…simply fix the problem so it doesn’t happen again. But before we can even evaluate if there IS a problem, there needs to be some hard proof that something might have happened…and so far I’ve seen exactly zero such proof. Exit polls vs real votes doesn’t cut it.
Forget this past election. Why would you want a system that is hackable, and untraceable? At least with paper ballots, while fraud occurred, you had a fighting chance of catching it.
No, to use a better system going forward all we need is proof that the system is very easy to corrupt.
As I pointed out in another thread, solid statistical evidence has been used as the sole evidence in at least one successful court decision I’m aware of. What proof are you envisioning?
You missed the point. IF its hackable (something I’ve seen no evidence of…certainly I’ve seen no evidence that they WERE hacked) then fix the problem, don’t toss out the technology. If trace-ability is important then incorporate it into the next generation of machines or retrofit it to existing machines. Why would you have a fighting chance of fighting or catching fraud with paper ballots?? If the ballots were stuffed or other methods were (and they WERE) used to tamper or cheat how would that be easier to find?? And if they WERE, then why has such fraud been rampant in the past?
Fine…show the proof the machines have been corrupted then. Show they have been hacked. Show they have been manipulated in such a way to cause VERY wide spread cheating (i.e. hundreds of thousands of votes).
Where is the solid statistical evidence HERE? I’ve seen nothing more (so far) than exit polls…which have also been shown to be in error in the past. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs…or even SOME proofs. So far I’ve seen NO proofs. Why should I even consider this until some come out? Or to put it another way, do I get a pass from the board the next time I make an unsubstantiated claim with no proof to back me up?