# GAO report upholds Ohio vote fraud claims **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 4, 2005, 9:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457 "2005-11-04T09:55:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/141 "2005-11-06T14:56:02Z")
[QUOTE=xtisme] The government awards the contract and a contracting officer oversee’s the project (perhaps by assigning some GS as a project manager, perhaps assigning additional personnel…it varies) to ensure that goals are met and that the project is completed to satisfaction. An evaluation is done of the final product to make sure it meets the original RFP as well as any changes requested by the government during the project (I’m glossing over a bunch here to save space as you probably realize). Once the government signs off then they have accepted the product as meeting their requirements. [.QUOTE] Correct, as far as it goes, but there is still recourse if the end product is so horrible that no corrections can be made. Usually that is not the case. We’re not talking about minor bugs due to requirements creep or unforeseen gotchas that always crop up, we’re talking about the really horrible stuff, like if it doesn’t work at all. > [@xtisme](#): > > The point though would be…IS Ohio going back with such a motion towards Diebold? I haven’t heard that they are, or even that they are considering it. So, it seems that, flaws and all, the government got the product they actually asked for. They’d have a rough time of it. The defects would have to be so bad, that there is no other recourse. If the flaws are in the government spec or RFP, and the top documents that the government wrote or signed off on, it would be some government guy who’d be in deep shit. The saying “be careful what you ask for” still holds. If the company (Diebold) did what they were told to do, then they are not at fault. Software is complex. You can not account for every “what if” that may (or not) happen. You can only deal with the known quantities. There are numerous versions of the software before you get the final version, and each is a snapshot of the requirements as you saw them at the time. That is why the certification of compliance always includes the words “to our knowledge”. No company would sign off a cert that says the software is completely and absolutely perfect. They will sign off that it meets the Understood requirements and will function - but not that it is perfect. > [@xtisme](#): > > If you accept all that (I’m not assuming you do btw) I ask again: What would the government have gotten had they done it themselves that they didn’t get by going through Diebold (remember my post was in response to not privatizing the vote, i.e. having the government make the things themselves without contractors)? Unless you can show that Diebold didn’t follow the RFP and were in voilation of their contract, then its going to be kind of hard to show that the government would have magically done a better job, or gotten what they DIDN’T ask for.-XT Well, if the government did it themselves, they would get a big increase in cost, with no guarantee that the product would be any better, or even equal. They’d have to hire and train programmers, and then manage them. They’d have to design and install the testbeds. It’s much cheaper to go to a company that already has the resources. Also, the software and the hardware are often designed, built and tested concurently. So, neither the software nor the hardware side knows for sure just what the final system will really be until near the end. This generates more requirements creep, as things get firmed up. Bugs found during FCA/PCA and testing get reflected back into the design. Then back to more testing. Back and forth until everyone is happy. Again, with an oversimplification, if Diebold did what they were told to do in the RFP and performance specs, they are blameless. “Be careful what you ask for, you might get it”. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/142 "2005-11-06T15:15:29Z")
That said, true as it is, it doesn’t go far enough. Government agencies don’t prepare specs in isolation, then toss them over a wall to bidders who have no clue what’s coming and simply work in isolation to meet them. There’s some give and take throughout the process - the agencies will discuss the spec package with potential bidders, taking care to avoid the appearance or reality of favoritism, often by sponsoring Bidders’ Conferences. That helps them take advantage of knowledge that the agencies don’t necessarily possess, and helps refine the spec package. Bidders offer their knowledge of the products and technologies in an attempt to help the end result be better. The motivations of all aren’t nefarious, not necessarily or even primarily; there is a strong sentiment that all want to do the job as well as possible and serve their customers as well as possible, and some give and take is necessarily required to do so. But if Ohio left control of the machinery and software to a contractor, favored or not, anyway, that certainly looks like dereliction of duty _at the minimum_. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/143 "2005-11-06T20:56:47Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Been over that already. It isn’t my fault you refuse to see it. See what? You haven’t presented any evidence. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Where do you see a direct accusation? Again, please stop lying. The title of the OP, and here: > [@](#): > > But not by rigging the equipment. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I’ve made my motivations clear as well - love of country and respect for democracy. It isn’t my fault you refuse to see that, either, or perhaps _cannot_. Well, I don’t believe you for a split-second, if that is what you mean. If the political parties were reversed, you wouldn’t believe that anything untoward happened, and would dismiss real evidence (if there were any) out of hand. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Is this really the best light you can present your “case” in? Do you really think you’re convincing anyone else here? Well, I am not really presenting a case. I am pointing out that you don’t have one. So I don’t have to convince anyone. You do - and it might help if you could convince someone who is not willing to believe without evidence. Naturally the Usual Suspects are going to jump onboard - you might want to try to appeal to someone a little more tough-minded. Which is going to require evidence, and that seems to be hard to come by. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![lawoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/35a633/32.png) [@lawoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawoot)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/144 "2005-11-07T01:12:53Z")
> [@Renob](#): > > 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. Gee… Here in Washington State it’s the _Republicans_ who keep ‘losing’ elections through fraud. Or so they claim. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/145 "2005-11-07T01:25:36Z")
SteveG1, good post. I’m in agreement with you and it certainly LOOKS like thats what happened. Obviously the GAO and their own IG group may turn up some shady dealings…and I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case. But I don’t ASSUME thats the case until more facts are presented than I’ve seen thus far. Especially in light of how I know how this process actually works (as you do obviously). > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That said, true as it is, it doesn’t go far enough. Government agencies don’t prepare specs in isolation, then toss them over a wall to bidders who have no clue what’s coming and simply work in isolation to meet them. If Diebold helped write the specs then they couldn’t bid on the contract…it would be illegal. Thats not to say they might not have helped under the table of course…but if they did the GAO WOULD nail their ass. Do you have any indication that Diebold helped write the original specs or help the government define their RFP? -XT ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/146 "2005-11-07T02:25:25Z")
I can truthfully say that the needs of the voting software are not complex. Considering known hardware, known environment, it should be damn near trivial for any coder to build something more secure than this. I admit I havn’t coded beyond simple shell scripts in a decade, but this sort of thing is _not_ _hard_. This following is a short history of Diebold, and where my ire in their monkeyshines comes from. the source inside Diebold – who “for the time being” is requesting anonymity due to a continuing sensitive relationship with the company – is charging that Diebold’s technicians, including at least one of its lead programmers, knew about the security flaw and that the company instructed them to keep quiet about it. > **[\* EXCLUSIVE! \* A DIEBOLD INSIDER SPEAKS!](https://www.bradblog.com/?p=1839)** > > DIEB-THROAT : 'Diebold System One of Greatest Threats Democracy Has Ever Known' | Identifies U.S. Homeland Security 'Cyber Alert' Prior to '04 Election Warning Votes Can be 'Modified Remotely' via 'Undocumented Backdoor' in Central Tabulator... A California court has approved a $2.6 million settlement between Diebold and the State of California and Alameda County. The state and county had sued Diebold for fraudulent claims about the security of its electronic voting machines. [http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3449691?headline=Diebold~to~Settle~with~California](http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3449691?headline=Diebold~to~Settle~with~California) In a landmark case, a California district court has determined that Diebold, Inc., a manufacturer of electronic voting machines, knowingly misrepresented that online commentators, including IndyMedia and two Swarthmore college students, had infringed the company’s copyrights. This makes the company the first to be held liable for violating section 512(f) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which makes it unlawful to use DMCA takedown threats when the copyright holder knows that infringement has not actually occured. [http://www.linuxelectrons.com/article.php/20040930201813382](http://www.linuxelectrons.com/article.php/20040930201813382) Critics of the Diebold (search) touch-screen voting machines turned their attention Wednesday from the machines themselves to the computers that will tally the final vote, saying the outcome is so easy to manipulate that even a monkey could do it. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133214,00.html](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133214,00.html) At least five convicted felons secured management positions at a manufacturer of electronic voting machines, according to critics demanding more stringent background checks for people responsible for voting machine software. Voter advocate Bev Harris alleged Tuesday that managers of a subsidiary of Diebold, one of the country’s largest voting equipment vendors, included a cocaine trafficker, a man who conducted fraudulent stock transactions and a programmer jailed for falsifying computer records. [http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html](http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html) More Diebold funnies, no longer readable thanks to time lectronic voting machine producer Diebold admitted today that ‘thousands’ of voters were turned away from the polls during the Super Tuesday Presidential Primary because of flaws in Diebold’s machines. Diebold Election Services Inc. president Bob Urosevich said ‘We were caught’, and answered ‘yes’ when asked ‘Weren’t [California voters] actually disenfranchised?’ > **[California Grills Diebold Over E-Voting Foul-Ups - Slashdot](https://yro.slashdot.org/story/04/04/22/1535214/california-grills-diebold-over-e-voting-foul-ups)** > > orthogonal writes "Electronic voting machine producer Diebold admitted today that 'thousands' of voters were turned away from the polls during the Super Tuesday Presidential Primary because of flaws in Diebold's machines. Diebold Election Services... SACRAMENTO, California – An audit of Diebold Election Systems voting machines in California has revealed that the company installed uncertified software in all 17 counties that use its electronic voting equipment. > **[E-Voting Undermined by Sloppiness](https://www.wired.com/2003/12/e-voting-undermined-by-sloppiness/)** > > An audit reveals that a number of Californians voted on Diebold machines that were not properly certified by either the state or the feds. The company owns up to procedural errors, while state officials seethe. Kim Zetter reports from Sacramento. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/147 "2005-11-07T04:18:30Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > I have conceded that Dems have done dirty electoral tricks in the past. There are some allegations that Dems did some dirty tricks in this election, in fact, in Ohio. But not on the scale of the allegations about the Pubs. So the smoking gun in this case is the _scale_ of the _allegations_??? Doesn’t that seem like a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy? “Well, their must be something to what I’ve been yelling about…just look at how loud it’s being yelled about!” I read this thread at several different settings over several days, so maybe I missed it. Has anyone presented and evidence or proof of vote fraud, or is it all just a partisan whine fest as usual? ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/148 "2005-11-07T04:20:45Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > So the smoking gun in this case is the _scale_ of the _allegations_??? Doesn’t that seem like a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy? “Well, their must be something to what I’ve been yelling about…just look at how loud it’s being yelled about!” > > I read this thread at several different settings over several days, so maybe I missed it. Has anyone presented and evidence or proof of vote fraud, or is it all just a partisan whine fest as usual? Need you ask? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/149 "2005-11-07T05:38:07Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > The Pubbies have a history of vote fraud. The governor of Ohio just too a nolo plea to monetary fraud. Governor Taft was guilty of ethics violations (failing to report golf outings and other gifts to the Ohio Ethics Commission). This at worst relates to sleazy influence-peddling. It has nothing to do with “monetary fraud” or vote fraud. One could just as easily say the Democratic Party has a history of vote fraud (Illinois’ vote in the 1960 election, anyone?). It was stupid and ethically questionable for the president of Diebold to announce his intentions to help “deliver” a state for Bush, given his company’s role in tallying the vote. It is also inane to think that he would publicly reveal beforehand an attempt to steal the election. I _am_ concerned about the possibility that voting technologies are susceptible to hacking/rigging, and that paper trails should exist to counter suspicious tallies. I welcome the idea of safeguards. I can do without the hysteria and accusations founded on nothing more than hot air. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/150 "2005-11-07T13:42:47Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > I just think Diebold gave us really, really, really bad gear that we can’t trust. Which is deeply wrong, considering the position it is in. And your opinion is at variance with the facts. I linked to a report from the Sec State of Ohio wherein the equipment supplied by Diebold passed the scrutiny of an independently run test of same. What you _think_ has no real bearing. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/151 "2005-11-07T13:50:49Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > But if Ohio left control of the machinery and software to a contractor, favored or not, anyway, that certainly looks like dereliction of duty _at the minimum_. You, too, seem to not be aware of the facts. Diebold **was not** left in control of the machinery and software. Independent tests of the Diebold’s electronic voting system were undertaken. I linked the Sec State’s report earlier. You can choose to ignore it if you wish, but posting false statements because you choose to ignore evidence will be roundly met with hoots of derision every time you do so. In other news, there’s a election here in Ohio tomorrow - using some new Diebold electronic voting equipment. And finally, what happened to the guy who posted the OP? Seems to me he, of all people, should have something substantive to add to this thing. But apparently not. There’s a rather pungent term for behavior like that. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/152 "2005-11-07T14:11:34Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Governor Taft was guilty of ethics violations (failing to report golf outings and other gifts to the Ohio Ethics Commission). This at worst relates to sleazy influence-peddling. It has nothing to do with “monetary fraud” or vote fraud. I’d say it’s indicative of a general pattern of sleaze and bad ethics. I guess it’s not important to you, IOKIIRDI. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/153 "2005-11-07T14:12:55Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > Need you ask? :rolleyes: Yeah, everybody knows Republicans never get away with vote fraud! :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/154 "2005-11-07T14:20:47Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > So the smoking gun in this case is the _scale_ of the _allegations_??? Doesn’t that seem like a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy? “Well, their must be something to what I’ve been yelling about…just look at how loud it’s being yelled about!” > > I read this thread at several different settings over several days, so maybe I missed it. Has anyone presented and evidence or proof of vote fraud, or is it all just a partisan whine fest as usual? If that were ALL I had, yes. There’s no single bit of evidence you can put down and say, "There, there is evidence of vote fraud … 'cause if there were, I wouldn’t be calling for an INVESTIGATION, I’d be calling for JAIL TERMS. We’ve got software that has HUGE security flaws that Uncle Beer thinks don’t exist because one source ouf of the many that have tested it and found it wanting, did not find it wanting, we’ve got felons employed by Diebold, we’ve got the President of Diebold promising to deliver Ohio to the Republicans, we’ve got widespread allegations of vote fraud, we’ve got Republican officials caught in all sort of unethical scams … yeah, I’d say we’ve got FUCKING GROUNDS FOR SUSPICION.!!! Just because a Republican won doesn’t mean no illegal acts occurred, no matter how dearly you’d love us to believe that. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/155 "2005-11-07T14:23:15Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > And your opinion is at variance with the facts. I linked to a report from the Sec State of Ohio wherein the equipment supplied by Diebold passed the scrutiny of an independently run test of same. What you _think_ has no real bearing. Yeah, but I’m REALLY suspicious of what YOU think. There are many who’ve examined Diebold’s tech and found it seriously wanting … plenty of links to THEM in this thread. But just because ONE test finds them OK, you’re ready to renounce all suspicion. It’s almost like you had a preconceived outcome you would like to arrive at, and the test is just something for you to use to reach that outcome. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/156 "2005-11-07T14:28:33Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > You, too, seem to not be aware of the facts. Diebold **was not** left in control of the machinery and software. There are a whole lot of unrefuted stories suggesting otherwise, pardner. > [@](#): > > You can choose to ignore it if you wish, but posting false statements because you choose to ignore evidence will be roundly met with hoots of derision every time you do so. Indeed that’s how it works here. 🙂 > [@](#): > > In other news, there’s a election here in Ohio tomorrow - using some new Diebold electronic voting equipment. The point of that? > [@xtisme](#): > > If Diebold helped write the specs then they couldn’t bid on the contract…it would be illegal. Only if they had an unfair advantage in doing so. If every bidder had a similar opportunity, it would be fine. Bidders’ Conferences are heavily choreographed to do just what I said, provide a flow of useful information in both directions, while keeping excruciatingly fair. > [@Shodan](#): > > The title of the OP Sigh. Go back and look at who wrote the OP. You just might find it wasn’t me. If you showed any concern about even basic facts, that is. :rolleyes: There’s no need to read any more of your carping, is there? But let’s do so anyway: > [@](#): > > Well, I don’t believe you for a split-second, if that is what you mean. Ri-i-ight. You have no evidence for your claim, is that what you mean? Sheesh. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/157 "2005-11-07T15:16:17Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Sigh. Go back and look at who wrote the OP. You just might find it wasn’t me. If you showed any concern about even basic facts, that is. :rolleyes: So you didn’t recognize the other quote. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Ri-i-ight. You have no evidence for your claim, is that what you mean? Sheesh. No, I meant **your** claims are worthless, because you have no evidence. If you wanted to be believed in your allegations that your motives are actually high-minded, that’s going to be difficult. You might want to try something like applying your standards to Democrats, post something complaining of voter fraud in a blue state - something not so obviously hypocritical as to date. If you are interested. It would be difficult to underestimate the impact you have had on my thought, so don’t feel the need on my account. Laughing at the transparent dishonesty of posts like yours is half the fun of the SDMB. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/158 "2005-11-07T15:35:27Z")
> [@Elvis](#): > > There are a whole lot of unrefuted stories suggesting otherwise, pardner. You got test results from an independent examination by a qualified team, I’m willing to look at 'em, _pad’ner_. But garbage posted in a blog, which is about all I see here in this thread, does not an “unrefuted story” make. And even if you have independent test results, there’s no way they could be called “unrefuted,” since that report issued by the Sec State say the software and equipment met spec and no signifcant reliability issues could be found. While you’re looking for that stuff, keep in mind the GAO report linked earlier doesn’t count. It has next to nothing to say about Ohio. Also remember, that the only point I’m contending is _electronic fraud perpetrated through flaws in the Diebold equipment used in Ohio in the general election held in November 2004._ I haven’t said anything, nor do I intend to, about the allegations of other types of vote fraud. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/159 "2005-11-07T15:38:35Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Yeah, but I’m REALLY suspicious of what YOU think. There are many who’ve examined Diebold’s tech and found it seriously wanting … plenty of links to THEM in this thread. But just because ONE test finds them OK, you’re ready to renounce all suspicion. It’s almost like you had a preconceived outcome you would like to arrive at, and the test is just something for you to use to reach that outcome. If there are credible links here, I’ve missed them. Can ya he’p me out? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457/160 "2005-11-07T15:40:12Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > So you didn’t recognize the other quote. > No, I meant **your** claims are worthless, because you have no evidence. > > If you wanted to be believed in your allegations that your motives are actually high-minded, that’s going to be difficult. You might want to try something like applying your standards to Democrats, post something complaining of voter fraud in a blue state - something not so obviously hypocritical as to date. > > If you are interested. It would be difficult to underestimate the impact you have had on my thought, so don’t feel the need on my account. > > Laughing at the transparent dishonesty of posts like yours is half the fun of the SDMB. > > Regards, > Shodan Look who’s talking. As has been repeatedly been pointed out, the kind of evidence you are calling for would result in calls for JAIL TERMS, not investigations as to whether or not fraud had occurred. “Trasparent dishonesty” indeed. Denying the rationale of an investigation on the grounds that the sort of evidence that a successful investigation would produce does not already exist is just putting the cart before the horse. Transparently, as it were. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gao-report-upholds-ohio-vote-fraud-claims/329457.md?page=9)