Forum Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Forum Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Forum Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Forum Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| (US) 11/06 - They have us right where... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Priscilla Parvenue
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Priscillawho
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 2:58 pm: | 
|
There's a concept in psychology, and forgive me for not knowing the exact name for it, which concludes that a better way to re-inforce behavior is not to repeat it over and over, rather to insert that behavior somewhat irratically.
I am NOT convinced that we "won" the election- we may have been given an opportunity to hang ourselves and be held responsible for when things really start to hit the fans in the next 2 years. Mark my words. Iran will start something, a few countries in the middle east will switch currencies to euros, we may have an attack on our own soil, god forbid, and the economy will tank(regardless).
All the while, everything WILL be blamed on the "Democrats who are in control" - which may be used against democrats in 2008!!!
Which is, psychologically speaking, perfect timing to re-inforce the perception that Democrats cannot govern!!!!!
Cynical I know..........but, perhaps good reason to be? - p |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 25
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 5:33 pm: |
|
Priscilla,
Even without the name of the concept, I get your drift and you very well may be correct.
I guess you can call me cynical too. I think this total change of power could also be a way to quell the growing concerns and subsequent actions being taken by citizens questioning the security and safety of electronic voting machines, which could result in a major push for a return to hand counted paper ballots.
Since the release of the documentary Hacking Democracy, it's clear to everyone this kind of irrefutable evidence cannot be easily spun nor dismissed by voting machine advocates, so what better way to convince people that the machines can be trusted than to have an election turn out the way this one did, considering the overall consensus by the talking heads that, despite some Democratic gains, the Republicans would still retain their majority? It's a clever short-term strategy because it kills two birds with one stone:
It effectively counters any arguments raised by hand count advocates against the machines without having to take a hard line stance against the evidence presented in the documentary, which could backfire on them and convince citizens the findings in the documentary are correct; and
It puts an end to an out of countrol, in your face, bull in a china shop administration whose domestic and foreign policies have awakened a sleeping America, prompting them to start asking questions and talking about actually taking back their country and sounding like they really mean it. This awakening must be curbed at all costs.
Something else that caught my eye. Tonight on Lou Dobbs one of the Republican political pundits on the show coined a phrase that Lou liked so much, he repeated it again himself: this is not an election-proof congress. That phrase translates to me that the election can be viewed as being accurate because the people's voice was heard. Another subtle way of opening the door to revitalizing the argument that the machines counted the votes accurately, end of discussion.
I expect to hear many more such subtle phrases, which will eventually grow into outright statements made by voting machine advocates defending the machines' accuracy as a way of countering any possible citizen uprising demanding that we rid our elections of these machines.
I think the psychological concept for this behavior is called the power of suggestion. Don't fall for it.
Kathleen
(Message edited by wynnek on November 08, 2006) |
Bev Harris
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Site_admin
Post Number: 163
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 8:48 pm: |
|
Priscilla: Variable reinforcement schedule. Suckers people every time. Astute post. |
Priscilla Parvenue
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Priscillawho
Post Number: 5
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 9:14 pm: |
|
Kathleen, I actually had the same thought about the machines but forgot to mention that toooo!!!! Exactly, it may be "proof" that these great machines work "properly"!!!!! And, why not give away the house and the senate when you can assure a presidential bid in two years!!!! for the next 8 or more!!!!
And, yes, they saw the awakening of the electorate and they want us quickly back asleep!!!! Fast
By the way, it's already started; claims of near "perfect voting with few glitches"! It HAS begun!
God help the future!!!! We have a LOT to do between now and 2008! |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 27
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 5:10 am: |
|
Priscilla,
Others agree with us as well. Now, we have to build a critical mass of these like-minded, who aren't so easily swayed by propaganda and effectively use this enlightenment in anticipating what strategy we need to take to cut them off at the pass.
Kathleen |
Brian (Cricket) Rakita
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Briancricketrakita
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 5:32 am: |
|
Either way, we need to push for machines that make an auditable varifyable paper trail . If the goofballs that just got elected/erected can't/won't do it, then they are not on my (our) side!
I remember the 80's, don't trust Democrasts to manage congress! Power corrupts, and our job is to catch them at it and force them to stop. |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 29
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 5:49 am: |
|
Brian,
I'm no mathmatician, but I do remember them saying the shortest distance between two points is a straight line.
I believe this formula should be used when choosing the method of counting and verifying our votes. If we truly want transparency, citizen oversight and management of our own elections and to no longer rely on experts to do our job for us, we should go straight to hand counted paper ballots at the precinct. We cannot afford to waste precious time by continuing to take side trips in an effort to include these machines in our voting process. These side trips will only lead to a dead end when it comes to security, transparency and integrity in our elections.
I hope you'll have a chance to watch the documentary Hacking Democracy because we proved that an audiable, verifyable paper trail generated from a machine is woefully insufficient in protecting the integrity of our votes because it can be altered without detection.
Kathleen
(Message edited by wynnek on November 09, 2006) |
Brian (Cricket) Rakita
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Briancricketrakita
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 6:27 am: |
|
Unfortunatly, I don't own a TV and I have a slow download speed, so I cannot watch the movie right now. Perhaps I can get it from Netflix. |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 142
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 6:38 am: |
|
We also need reasonable guidelines with regards to general procedures. Take recounts for example:
It is pretty standard to just recount the single race, but if you recount multiple races you make it much harder for someone with access to the ballots to have "fixed" the recount, as many people suspected in Ohio in 2004. |
ed metis
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Neutralsam
Post Number: 39
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 7:42 am: |
|
Hacking democracy has made it to 3rd in Google videos.
Because the name of the party in power changes that doesn't mean that or masters have given up control of our lives just yet. We still have the shadow government in place, taxing us on things that the Supreme Court says they can't.
Watch America: Freedom to Fascism at Google video!
The battle for freedom has just started... |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 30
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 7:42 am: |
|
Ami,
We proved, at least in Cuyahoga County, the election officials counted the ballots prior to the recount to ensure the machine and hand count matched.
I videotaped them lying about it to the observers at the recount and then caught them on tape admitting to the Board of Election members at the certification of the recount meeting that they had indeed counted the votes in private. Then the Board members voted unanimously to certify the recount as legit.
Although 3 election officials were eventually indicted for violating Ohio election code, the case is still pending and we're almost into 2007! Whatever the outcome of that trial, the election was certified, the candidates who were supposedly elected by a majority of the people were placed into office and nothing can change that.
Kathleen |
Bruce Sims
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ubetchaiam
Post Number: 915
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 9:52 am: |
|
The results -for me- (c'mon Dems, prove me wrong,please?)is this:
"Meet the new boss,Same as the old boss"
From the Who's 'Won't get fooled again:
We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!
I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
Though I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?
There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Are now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 148
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 9:56 am: |
|
Kathleen
Thanks for the reminder on the details. What happened in Cuyahoga County shows that hand-counted paper ballots alone aren't a panacea, since the problems which occured would be possible even on a recount after a totally computerless election. In fact, one place where computers can be useful is in verifying recounts, since it is no more difficult for a computer to recount all the races than it is to recount just the one in question. (You still probably want to recount the one in question by hand though.) Discrepencies in the recount of the other races can raise strong suspicions about the validity of a recount which proves the original count on the race in question. (Of course, allowing them to recount in private means that they can just make up any numbers they want.) |
Jack Fitzgerald
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jackboxvoting
Post Number: 11
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 9:59 am: |
|
Here's a New Variable to Re-inforce:
http://www.safevote.org/html/mission.html
Safevote needs everyone's help!
We need BBV to help us make this stick!
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061108/NEWS/611080465/ -1/xml
Sarasota County favors a paper ballot
By DALE WHITE
dale.white@heraldtribune.com
SARASOTA COUNTY -- By a wide margin, voters here Tuesday decided to scrap the county's touch-screen machines and restore paper ballots.
The measure calls for eliminating a $4.7 million touch-screen system by the 2008 election. Its supporters prefer paper ballots counted by optical scanners.
"I feel strongly about a paper trail," said Kim Morris, a 34-year-old nurse and Republican who counted herself among those emphatic about the switch.
Through a petition drive, the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections got the referendum on Tuesday's touch-screen ballot.
The matter isn't settled, though.
Florida Secretary of State Sue Cobb wants the 2nd District Court of Appeals to rule on the constitutionality of the referendum question.
A circuit judge has already ruled that the ballot language was constitutional.
At issue is whether the county would require that the paper ballot, rather than the electronically recorded vote, be the official instrument for recounts. If so, state officials say, that would make Sarasota's election method different from that of every other county in Florida.
SAFE argues that it merely wants an optical scan system, which other Florida counties, such as Manatee, use. A computer tallies the votes, but if necessary, a paper trail exists to verify the count.
Last modified: November 08. 2006 6:25AM |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 713
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 1:26 pm: |
|
All,
I like this thread. I've been asking exactly this question for months now because I saw this coming. There are SOME people who were convinced that all elections were hopelessly hacked and the Republicans would win this time again because of it. Those people now undeniably have egg on their faces.
Now we hear that this one was a diversion or a ruse, and that this was done to throw people off the trail. Okay, that's at least POSSIBLE. I won't go to "likely", but I'll give you "possible".
But what's ALSO possible is that election fraud is a human endeavor, and almost COMPLETELY local, and there is no vast national conspiracy to flip elections, and it all has VERY little to do with DRE or opscan voting.
Look, election fraud is exactly as old as elections, and some jurisdictions run dirty elections, just as MOST do NOT! All electronic voting has done is give the crooks that already existed more capable tools to do their thing. Tools much slicker than pencil lead under the fingernail, or filing off teeth in a lever machine, or punching out extra chads to artificially create overvotes. The tools are now potentially way scarier.
It is my opinion that that is ALL that is going on. It has very little to do with "black boxes". It has EVERYTHING to do with corrupt election officials, who would be screwing people out of being elected, no matter what system was used. The most effective tools have nothing to do with voting machines. They have to do with seeing to it that your opponents' likely voters never SEE a voting machine. It's about registrations, and purges, and phone bank calling with false information, and racial intimidation, and targeted poll watching, and machine allocation, to make certain that your opponents' voters have to wait in longer lines than yours do. (That favors R's in Ohio, and D's in Pennsylvania.)
We have to be able to admit that it's possible we've all been falling for the old sleight of hand. While we watch the voting machines where nothing's actually happening, the real damage is being done in all the old low-tech ways. |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 152
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
"We have to be able to admit that it's possible we've all been falling for the old sleight of hand. While we watch the voting machines where nothing's actually happening, the real damage is being done in all the old low-tech ways."
Even if this is the case (and I'm not saying it isn't), there is enough evidence that the voting machine software has massive security problems, not to mention just plain old bugs, and is a masterpiece of how not to incorporate computerization into a business process. |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 32
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 2:20 pm: |
|
Ami,
quote:Even if this is the case (and I'm not saying it isn't), there is enough evidence that the voting machine software has massive security problems, not to mention just plain old bugs, and is a masterpiece of how not to incorporate computerization into a business process.
Thanks for keeping this discussion from taking yet another side trip.
Kathleen |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 715
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 6:02 pm: |
|
Ami and Kathleen,
I agree totally with Ami's point. The software is alarmingly both buggy and insecure, and that's well worth having a hissy fit over all by itself. So I'm still committed to this effort.
But that's a far cry from how far many have taken this, especially as it pertains to past elections. The evidence, what there is of it, is less than compelling in the past tense. Circumstantial at best, and when the "evidence" relies on EXIT POLLS, it gets almost laughable to me. The future is scary enough all by its lonesome to justify this movement. |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 33
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 8:29 pm: |
|
Kurt,
Perhaps the theories being banteed about on this forum aren't so farfetched after all. If you haven't already, maybe you should read the following post by Doug Carson, which was posted in the "General Discussion" forum:
I am convinced that BBV is detrimental to our democracy and needs to be stopped.
However, I was also convinced that Diebold and the like were in the pocket of the neo-conservatives. I was convinced that the manipulation of voting machines was how they remain in power.
Many Americans are sure that the current administration has committed some crimes and if only the Democrats were in power, they could be stopped.
From the point of view of the Neocons, losing this election could be dangerous. All they needed to do was hold the house and senate, even losing a few seats, to stave off investigations that could land them in jail. They have the machines in their pocket. There has been a lot of discussion in the press about how exit polls can't be trusted - I saw that as a sign. There has been discussion of how the Republican get-out-the-vote machine is legendary - I saw that as a sign. The weekend before the election, the polls showed the republicans in a dead heat in several races - I saw that as a sign. On election day, everything was in place to cover up a rigged election.
So here is my question: why didn't the republicans win? They could have kept control while losing a few seats. No one would be surprised if those races that were razor thin went instead to republicans. With investigations at stake, it is inconceivable to think that if the neocons had the ability to alter races, they wouldn't do it.
But so far, even with the inevitable irregularities, it appears that the election was what we hoped to see: it was on the level. That doesn't fit with my convictions, and so I must presume that the republicans do not have a way of throwing elections via BBV.
So I ask, what happened here? I don't get it.
This is a red flag, as far as I'm concerned. To ignore it and others like it would be foolish.
In fact, there have been other similar posts on the BBV site questioning the validity of the findings presented in the documentary Hacking Democracy. One of them was from a troll passing misinformation about the machines.
I expect to see more and various efforts to spread doubt in people's minds in trying to convince them that the machines can be trusted to accurately count our votes because the democrats won! -- some will come from people who have always believed the machines were safe/secure, but mostly it will come from those who have both a financial and political stake in keeping machines in our elections. I cannot believe either big business nor politicians will sit idly by while citizens continue to gain the upper hand in regaining control of their own elections. The minute we allowed our elections to be privitized, we created a beast. We've finally got it cornered and it won't go away without a fight. To believe otherwise would be incredibly naive.
I anticipate these efforts will be subtle, somewhat like a slow boil, and will increase in intensity over time. If we aren't paying attention, we won't realize we are in hot water again, until it's too late.
Why not, at least, take a wait and see attitude and keep a watchful eye out to see if what we have theorized becomes a reality. In the meanwhile, what would it hurt to begin developing appropriate strategies that would effectively counter any such misinformation thrend?
We have too much at stake to become complacent now.
Kathleen |
ed metis
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Neutralsam
Post Number: 45
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 10:01 pm: |
|
It's not the Republicans or Democrats it's the third Party, the one we don't elect, the Shadow Government. Look at the Kerry, Bush run for president, both were bones men and related to boot.
What happened in the end Kerry gave up, why would a true contender do something so stupid?
A dog or En shiyeñ they're both the same, it doesn't matter what side they take. If someone wants to control the country they wouldn't just join one party but both, that way they'd not attract so much attention. Skull and bones brings new blood in each year.
So they could have a secret plan to control the worlds economy? |
Susan Spector
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: S3times
Post Number: 1
Registered: 06-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 9, 2006 - 10:29 pm: |
|
You're all so knowledgeable and enlightened. I haven't visited this sight in years but stopped by tonight to see what you're thinking. And, to thank everyone here for helping America win our country back. But I have to admit that somewhere beneath the joy I am feeling, is an inkling of suspicion.I want to believe that we have won America back, but the fact remains that this victory could very well be a part of a much larger conspiracy. And, like the radical muslims, the neocons have all the patience in the world. We must remain vigilante. And that, to me, is the most important thing BBV has taught America. Thank you! |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 34
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 4:58 am: |
|
Ami,
Quote:
hand-counted paper ballots alone aren't a panacea, since the problems which occured would be possible even on a recount after a totally computerless election.
A recount is not the same as an election. What happened in Cuyahoga County had nothing to do with inaccurate hand counts. It had everything to do with the loss of chain of custody and total lack of transparency, which enabled a behind the scenes manipulation of the ballots by election officials in order to make certain the machine count matched the number of ballots cast. They did this because they didn't trust the machine count to be accurate. Not the other way around.
Hand counted paper ballot advocates would require the ballots be put into a ballot box at the precinct and counted at the precinct in front of everyone and the results posted prominently at the polling place and videotaped.
This was a prime example of how important chain of custody is to the integrity of the votes and exactly why citizens should maintain total oversight of those ballots on the night of the election and count them right then before they leave the polling place.
Kathleen |
Brant Lamb
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brantl
Post Number: 1026
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 5:18 am: |
|
Now, I have to disagree with you the second time after having you agree with me, Kurt. Evidence of voting machines mis-behaving exists in this election as well. Straight-party dem votes being changed to straight-party republican votes. Touch screen machines where the user repeatedly touched a dem and got a republican (I've read this from a score of locations.) I don't know if this went both ways, these are the only ones I've seen, though. How widespread was it? Who the hell knows? And why would we know right now? We only see the tip of the iceberg in the days just following an election (remember 2004?, it started out with issues, we were told that we were whiners then the anamolies rolled in...) and if the results seem to have gone the way we expected them to go, then we think that they weren't rigged.
But what can we base that on? We base it on our expectations, and from whatever data we can gather to base those expectations on. What's the best data, (in fact the only data)leading up to an election? Wide, sweeping opinion polling of registered voters, done in as thoroughly honest a way as possible, isn't it? What else is there? And then polling place polling numbers after that, right? What else is there?
And this time, the polling place polling numbers were kept inside the major media's consortium and not released. There is no reason that you can point to and say "this is concrete proof" that this wave shouldn't have been even bigger than it was. There's just no way to tell. You may find, when push comes to shove that this was softened as much as people thought they could get away with. Crazy? How would you know, one way or the other?
And the argument that this is local-only is in fact irrelevant. If you get caught in the face with an axe and killed, do your relatives think your less dead if it was thrown from 20 feet, or a thousand? It only makes a difference in where you look for the thrower. Hackable machines have to be removed.
I'm saying all this because I feel that there is a background feel to your post that maybe the machines aren't that important any more. I think that how important they are can go up dramatically with how long they're around. You didn't learn how to jimmy your locker door the first day back at school, did you? In many places, the voting machines are new, and unknown.
You have no evidence that what has gone on has little to do with opscan or DRE voting, you just can't know. Neither of us knows either way, which is a wonderful argument for the fact that if they can be hacked they have to go, and until they are fully tested (and my definition of fully tested is more extreme than anybody else I've read here) they can't come back.
But, that being said, yes, all those other avenues that amount to cheating an election must be shut down, too. All this points to the elections fraud faction needs to be loud and frequent on speaking into our legislators' ears about all of these methods. And campaign finance reform (can you say, publicly funded or common-pool election funding, with equal shares for any candidate who qualified with petitions?).
We need to get safe, fair voting equipment and just as importantly we need to have a level playing field in election campaigning, and truth in advertising in campaign commercials. And trhe fairness doctrine needs to be re-legislated back into the media, as well.
Is this pie in the sky? I don't think so, not if we hound these people enough. Look at how much say the Christian Right has gotten in the Republican Party by being very vocal. Let's put our money where our mouths are and back the people that will vote this through. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3401
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 6:09 am: |
|
All,
The trouble is that with the current election systems in place it is not possible to know whether elections have been tampered with to the extent of influencing the result, or not. There is no objective, evidence-based means of knowing one way or the other. We are stuck in endless debates about "likelihood" which can never be resolved.
With the exception of the NH elections where there is citizen-observed, precinct-based hand-counting and tight control of ballot chain of custody, there is no basis for assuming that any election result was accurate or not.
The fact that any particular party won a particular election should never in itself be considered to be an acceptable indication of either rigging or lack of rigging.
We need to put in place election systems and procedures that are so fair, transparent to every citizen, and well-enforced, that everyone knows the election results are an accurate reflection of voters' actions. This includes making sure that election systems, including voter registration and polling place location, do not disenfranchise particular segments of the voting public, either by the nature of their design or by how they are used. |
Kathleen Wynne
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wynnek
Post Number: 35
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 6:29 am: |
|
As Ross Perot would say, it's just that simple.
Thanks, Catherine. |
Priscilla Parvenue
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Priscillawho
Post Number: 6
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 10:04 am: |
|
In the early 90's I remember reading a study that put our US electorate 2/3 democratic and 1/3 rep. I have had the feeling that over time that we have been told to believe that republicans make up 1/2 the electorate and frankly I just don't believe it! I really believe that if we had "citizen-observed, precinct-based hand-counting and tight control of ballot chain of custody" that we would soon discover that republicans make up far less of the population.
I really believe that if there was true transparency that democrats would have had gained more seats in this recent election and would have had dominance for in a Major way for the past 25 years +!!!!
Somewhere I am inclined to also believe that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes, beyond this two party system, than meets the eye!
Along, with "citizen-observed, precinct-based hand-counting and tight control of ballot chain of custody" . I also believe we need to implement "run-off-voting" and get special interests out of the political system!
Wishful thinking... |
Bruce Sims
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ubetchaiam
Post Number: 916
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 10:44 am: |
|
As Catherine said, "The fact that any particular party won a particular election should never in itself be considered to be an acceptable indication of either rigging or lack of rigging. "
In San Diego,CA voters were NOT checking the vvpat to see if their votes were recorded correctly; as reported from one precinct where a male did check the vvpat, he discovered that his votes were NOT recorded correctly even tho the Diebold TSx screen indicated that his votes were correct(they allowed him to re-vote and this time the vvpat did print his votes correctly).
Since in CA the 'official record' of votes cast is the vvpat, one does have to wonder given that almost no one bothered to check the vvpat.
And if it isn't enuf to say 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss', look to the Gates nomination and then read this:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/09/1444242
and look at the media coverage related to this nomination.
Yes, there does appear the chance that the 'imperial presidency' may be 'reined in' but it is still the elites refusing to empower the'common man' that are in charge.
And the unwillingness shown by the Dem leadership to insist on accountability, to speak out forcefully about the Military Commissions Act, the so called 'Patriot's Act', the ongoing genocide by the government of Israel, or even to say ANYTHING about the problems that occurred with the machines in this past election is but part of the proof of what I say. |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 156
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
Priscilla,
Based on party affiliation in voter rolls, the Republicans and Democrats have always been fairly evenly matched. What happened on a national scale in 1992 though is that the unaffiliated and more liberal Republicans voted for Clinton, just as in 1980 the unaffiliated and more conservative Democrats voted for Reagan. Both partys have, over time, evolved their overall platforms to try to maximize their share of the electorate. They move to the center enough to capture fence-sitters without losing too much of their base. It turns out that there are probably several equally good points to stake out, depending on circumstances. In the 04 vote with a strong "get-out-the-vote" among Evangelicals, and an emphasis on the three "G"s (G-d, Guns, and Gays), a valid strategy for the Repulicans was to move to the right to build a stronger base, and rely on the war and terrorism issues (and the incumbancy) to capture the middle. It worked then, but really backfired later.
And lack of transparency is probably not the major reason why the Democrats didn't do as well as some might want, another reason is that most of the House districts are designed to be essentially one party districts. Did you notice that there were many districts with only a single major party candidate? |
Brant Lamb
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brantl
Post Number: 1032
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 12:50 pm: |
|
'Probably not' doesn't cut it, Ami. There needs to be more validation of fairness in elections before any of us should accept 'probably not'. Our evaluation of where our country is politically is measured (and grounded) in polls and in how we vote, if either one (or both) is being skewed, it skews the evaluation as well. Much more when it's both being skewed.
Throw in 'news media' with an axe to grind and a 'fair and balanced' political agenda to promote, and how far can the nation's self-evaluation be skewed? Let's face it folks, 99% of our perception of the world outside of your eyesight's reach is from communications media, of which, %80 percent is MSM news or MSM electronic media. 'This is what we think most people think, because we hear it the most often, and loudest.'(People on the net are the exception, not the rule.)
And Priscilla :"Along with "citizen-observed, precinct-based hand-counting and tight control of ballot chain of custody" . I also believe we need to implement "run-off-voting" and get special interests out of the political system!
Wishful thinking..."
As long as we all think it's wishful thinking and do nothing to espouse it as our choices to our representatives), it is. Let's all lobby this long and hard. The petitions and protests shouldn't stop at the elections, they need to continue. We got their attention, let's keep it! |
Priscilla Parvenue
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Priscillawho
Post Number: 7
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 3:00 pm: |
|
Brant, you are correct. I am cynical but I should give up a little pessimism and be hopeful (which I am, SECRETLY, by the way) that "wishful" becomes actual! Thanks for the reminder .-P |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 157
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 3:39 pm: |
|
The discussion below should not indicate that I don't think that Congressional elections have been fixed in the past, but the fix, in many cases, is really done well prior to the election, in the drawing up of districts. Texan's voted in about the same proportions for Democrats and Republicans in the Congressional races in 2000 and in 2004, but a lot more Republicans were elected (from Texas) to the House in 2004.
Brant, do you really think that a district where the vote split 75%-20%, or where a party didn't even bother to put up a candidate is really due to lack of transparency, or to gerrymandering. They (both party's) have gotten much better at gerrymandering due to more sophisticated analysis tools (as well as more powerful computers), and if they want a district in Texas which is 90% democratic and contains the home addresses of two incumbant Democrats (as in the mid-term redistricting), they can do it. If they want to carve out three districts which are 30% Evangelical, 20% non-Evangelical soccer mom, and 10% corporate white collar, they can do so. And they don't even need to hack any machines, or disenfranchise voters to do so. The idea is to create as many districts as possible where you have enough votes to win with a comfortable margin, and stick as many of the other party's voters in as few districts as possible. For example, given four districts with a total of 300K Dems, 300K Reps, and 200K unafilliated, you can create (in a state leg dominated by the Democrats) one district with 140K Reps, 30K unaffiliated, and 30K Dems, and three districts each with 90K Dems, 53 1/3K Reps, and 46 2/3K unaffiliated. To win these districts, you only need to get about 20% of the independents (assuming no-one crosses party lines.)
To some extent, this came around to bite the Republicans in the tuchas this year; they lost districts which they were pretty sure were theres 60%-40% because they lost part of the Evangelicals, and most of the soccer moms and white collar votes.
Because many in the community have focused on the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, our analysis of possible vote tampering has been influenced by that. There are a lot more close states than there are close congressional districts. A state which went close to 50/50 (like Ohio)in the Presidential race may end up having nearly all of its House races settled by over 20%.
There might have been some races which the Democrats lost due to monkeying with the vote, but there were even more where they never had a chance, due to the way districts are drawn. (This is not always a bad thing in principle -- even a bipartisan redistricting will result in some districts which are heavily one party or another due to the population. |
ScottyDog
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Scottydog
Post Number: 3
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 10:53 am: |
|
I want to jump in here and say this is not a partisan Democrat vs Republican issue.
When you go down that road you are falling for the divide and conquer tactics that have divided this country. It may make you feel good to accuse the "evil republicans" or those "wacko liberals" but that is not going to get our Government back with honest elections.
As a previous poster urged people to look at the possibility of a shadow government, I too urge you to look at the fact the elite are running this country and they are not Democrats or Republicans.
They are evil one world government bankers and their pawns that will not be satisfied until we all are slaves to the New World Order.
Please go to this website http://www.augustreview.com/index.php
Learn who these people are and what their motives are in controlling our elections. They are the CFR and Tri Lateral Commission bankers that are attempting to destroy our Constitutional Republic. They have infiltrated our Government whether Democrats or Republicans are elected; they are pulling the strings no matter which party is in power.
Start with this article that traces the origins of the New World order crowd:
Globalization: The Final Demise of National Security
http://www.augustreview.com/index.php?module=pagesetter&func=viewpub&tid=4&pid=1 2
Then read how Clinton started with NAFTA and GWB with CAFTA, is creating the North American Union or SPP. It will result in the destruction of the middle class and our borders into a trilateral union composed of the USA, Canada, and Mexico based on the European Union or EU (Now you know why Bush left our borders wide open)
Toward a North American Union
http://www.augustreview.com/index.php?module=pagesetter&func=viewpub&tid=4&pid=1 4
This is not a conspiracy theory, Lou Dobbs is the only one in the MSM that has had the guts to air this treasonous plan along with computerized vote fraud as they are connected to each other.
"Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad?"
Lou Dobbs on Lou Dobbs Tonight, June 9, 2005
As James and Kenneth Collier learned with their www.votescam.com investigation starting in 1970, the only way to ensure fair and honest elections is with restoration of hand-counted paper ballots, total transparency in the vote count, and the END of the Reign of the Corporate Machine over our elections.
No machine should ever be allowed to count the ballots as they can be easily rigged whether optical scanner, punch cards or the new computerized models.
My 2 cents |
Priscilla Parvenue
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Priscillawho
Post Number: 8
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 12:24 pm: |
|
ScottyDog,
I have heard this for years as well and it does appear to be escalating. I am beyond words when I try to put the magnitude of this "reality" into a future scenario; chills come to mind. Eeeeks! |
ScottyDog
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Scottydog
Post Number: 5
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 12:36 pm: |
|
Priscilla
Spread the word as the MSM has blacked out this issue.
Remember we can get our Government back if we all spread the word-Power in numbers
:-) |
Anthony Medeiros
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Tonyissinc
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 7:04 am: |
|
Too many people are focusing on the who and why. We need to concentrate on the how and correct it. Once corrected the who and the why will not matter anymore. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3423
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 7:14 am: |
|
Hi Anthony,
I see your point.
And--in many cases, it's necessary to understand the who and why in order to correctly perceive what needs to be corrected, and what kinds of solutions are likely to be most effective.
For example, do we need to focus more on insider attacks, or outsider attacks? What are the motivating factors that led to the various problems? (Greed by an individual? A company? An election official who was promised a lobbying job? Incompetence on the part of a programmer? Incompetence on the part of certification bodies? Laziness of election officials? Laziness of citizens in looking after their democracy? Coercian of election office underlings to ignore problems or regulations by pressure from above or from local powerful people?)
It might be difficult to determine the best remedies without a thorough understanding of the nature of the problems and the kinds of people who might be involved.
In other words, if you don't really understand what's broken, including any root causes, how do you know what to fix?
One reason the BBV investigations have been so valuable is that they have uncovered documented specifics that help to unravel the tangled mess of our many election system problems. |
Bev Harris
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Site_admin
Post Number: 173
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 9:43 am: |
|
Scottydog -- you'll need to edit your profile to use real name. We don't permit posting with screen names here. Glad to see you here, though, but please update your profile with real name. |
Marc Heineman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Thjffer
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 8:29 pm: |
|
My understanding about corrupting the votes in a black box system is that if one party enjoys a large margin advantage then any manipulation would be more obvious than in a narrow or close difference. A large margin victory can be proved out by post election polsters at the election site. There is no time to celebrate anything other than our freedom to be vigilent and fight to get our election system back. The country wasted a huge amount of money on machines that are not verifiable. Unless they can be altered which is not necessarily viable, they should really be destroyed. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3449
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 17, 2006 - 2:41 am: |
|
Hello Marc,
I think it would be a mistake to assume what corruption would look like in any particular situation.
For example, one cannot assume that a party that has a strong advantage in a particular area would be the party that is doing the corruption in any particular election. Either party can corrupt. One could shave off points of an opponent without notice by doing so where in areas where that opponent has a strong advantage. For example, in a Senatorial race, if one county is predominantly Republican, crooked Dems might choose to rig machines to deduct a few percentage points from the Republican count in that county because it probably wouldn't be noticed.
And/or crooked Dems might shave small amounts (e.g. within polling margin of error) off of several or many Republican precincts.
Rigging using machines by redistributing votes could be done quite subtly. Especially if one has ways to monitor how the vote is going, such as if one knows in advance how absentee/early voting ballots are trending, one can know in advance what kind of margin needs to be changed and where that can be done most surreptitiously. For example, it could be done by only tampering with the machine that counts absentee ballots in some places where Diebold is used.
There have been a number of instances where a last precinct or county has been mysteriously late in reporting its votes for one reason or another, and then that very area reported a surprising result that was decisive in the overall election result.
Alternatively, shaving votes by knocking off a few votes in many polling places (such as by undervotes--e.g., every 10th vote for XXX candidate isn't recorded correctly on the review screen, and since not every voter will notice or correct the error or complain to a poll worker, it leads to undervotes or changed votes for every 30th vote for XXX).
All these methods can be mixed and matched, depending on various local opportunities. Therefore it is unwise to assume that vote rigging by one side would show a certain telltale hallmarks. (In fact, this is one of the weaknesses of some of the analyses of the exit poll discrepancies in 2004. Liddle and others have made assumptions that vote manipulation using machines would look a certain way, and/or that rigging would be employed in the same way on certain kinds of equipment.) |
Jeffery Godwin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jag1957
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 29, 2006 - 9:48 am: |
|
I just feel a little better that New Mexico went to paper ballots. I think this state still has a ways to go and hope we all get there. |
|
|
