Actually, when the CEO of Diebold, Inc., which makes voting machines, publicly states that he will “help deliver Ohio’s electoral votes for the Republican Party” is it THAT unreasonable to suspect shenanigans?
I don’t think the Republicans have any evidence quite that unsettling for their claims.
Well, yes, it is unreasonable.
There is exactly as much evidence of a vast Democratic conspiracy to rig voting machines in their favor in 2014 as there was evidence of a vast Republican conspiracy to rig voting machines in their favor in 2004.
What “vast conspiracy” do you think I am alleging? I am making a VERY specific claim: that the CEO of Diebold promised to help deliver an essential swing state, Ohio, to the Republicans in the 2004 elections. If he had said something along the lines of “I will help convince Ohio voters to go Republican” or something along those lines it woudl be different, but “deliver” has a certain ominous tone to it, y’know? And I’m not saying the haxoring by Diebold actually occurred, only that Democrats had every RIGHT to be suspicious of a statement like that, coming from the CEO of a voting machine company. He’s entitled to his political views, but he should probably be a LOT more careful in how he expresses them, mmmkay?
“Shenanigans,” no, it’s not unreasonable. More precisely, it’s not unreasonable to question oversight when the maker of the machines makes such a statement and the states which are using the machines have failed to demonstrate that proper oversight exists, which was the case ten years ago, but no so much now. However you view the suspicions of Dems in 2004 and 2006 (and I expressed such suspicion at the time), suspected electoral skullduggery involving the recording of votes by machine software is quite different than the very visible problems with touchscreens as cited in the recent article, and as complained about in similar news stories (and on these boards as well) by Democrats in some subsequent elections.
It’s not “vote flipping” if you can see it on the screen and correct it before you submit your ballot.
Well, no, there’s much more evidence against such a conspiracy now than there was in 2004, and AFAIK, there have been no Dem-supporting manufacturers or programmers of such machines making the same kind of promise to “deliver” a state to the Democratic Party.
If his intention was to actually rig the voting machines to ensure a Bush victory, and he had the ability to do so, do you actually believe he would have been stupid enough to say so in public?
No reasonable person would, and as such it is not reasonable to be suspicious of his statement.
Perhaps you do know of examples of smart, even reasonable, people saying things stupidly, even if this isn’t one.
There was a whole lot more going on than that, too.
You’re confusing your dystopian ideal (a world where people do not have private communications) with reality again.
Why, it’s as ridiculous as believing that someone could be smart enough to be elected President of the United States and stupid enough to tape-record himself orchestrating a criminal coverup conspiracy!
Idiot Ben Stein says that Obama is the “Most racist president there has ever been in America”.
Brilliant… I guess Obama is more racist than the presidents that, say, owned black people?
He is two races.
“White” isn’t a race, white is the absence of a race.
Well she certainly is. I don’t know if you can extrapolate much from that fact. Bottom 51% that is. Not Democratic. Although now that I think about it, I don’t think we can assume she is female even. At least not a human female.
Coulter seems the type who likes to shoot off her mouth to create controversy. It’s debatable if she even believes half the stuff she says because it’s so outrageous
Ann Coulter’s never been a fan of women’s suffrage. Although it would be nice if women would get as involved in following and participating in politics as men do. The vast majority of political bloggers, activists, candidates, writers, etc., are men. And I’d expect that the vast majority of SDMB posters are male. Would I be wrong about that?
Quite possibly (“vast majority” is rather risky language to use), you are so very wrong about so much.
Which is a nice way to evade the question unnecessarily. Let’s say, 75% of SDMB posters are male. Do you think that’s overstating the maleness of this board?
Try a poll. I honestly have no idea.
And I am not sure 75% would be a “vast majority”.
It would be men outnumbering women 3-1. And since this is the ignorance fighting board, kinda like how Fox is fair and balanced, then that means more men are being smartened up than women.
Quick look through the Portrait Gallery looks like 30-35%.
I know, poor sampling but it’s all we’ve got until **Zeldar **springs to the rescue.
Adaher, my dear little munchkin of moronitude, you personally skew the sample by your ongoing efforts to be smartened up.