logo Sign In

Election Day — Page 4

Author
Time
IT ONLY TOOK ME ABOUT FIVE MINUTES TO VOTE AS WELL. PLUS, I WAS THE 1,000th VOTER IN MY DISTRICT. THEY MADE A HUGE ANNOUNCEMENT OVER THE SPEAKERS ABOUT IT. IT WAS PRETTY COOL. THE LAST FEW TIMES THAT I'VE VOTED TOOK AT LEAST AN HOUR TO DO SO. SO, I WAS REALLY PLEASED THIS TIME.

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide

Author
Time
Were you being sarcastic, or did they really announced the 1000th voter?
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Warbler
I don't believe there is anything in the Constitution about needing to be smart in order to vote.



Well, this isn't exactly a matter of intelligence, but a long time ago, you had to own property to vote. The founding fathers did that intentionally: They wanted the voters to be people who had a stake in the government--that is, people who actually cared.

One problem with modern elections--on both partisans--is that they just get van loads of people who don't give a crap to go out and vote for them. If you don't care enough to get registered yourself, to go to vote yourself, then you shouldn't complain if your guy doesn't get elected.

Aw crap. I'm rambling again.

4

Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab


Well, this isn't exactly a matter of intelligence, but a long time ago, you had to own property to vote. The founding fathers did that intentionally: They wanted the voters to be people who had a stake in the government--that is, people who actually cared.
.


So, people shouldn't be allowed to vote if they rent instead own? That is not the way we do things now.

Quote

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab

One problem with modern elections--on both partisans--is that they just get van loads of people who don't give a crap to go out and vote for them. If you don't care enough to get registered yourself, to go to vote yourself, then you shouldn't complain if your guy doesn't get elected.



Well, since I did register myself way back when I was 18 and have voted in almost every election, including this last one and I drive to the polls myself, I have every right to complain. And unfortunatly giving crap isn't a constitutional requirement either. Though it would be nice if more people did give a crap.




Author
Time
im sorry to say but the USA way of electing people is on drugs and antiquated and out-dated and misinterpreting and misleading and so on and so on...
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
Qui-Gon Jinn (R.I.P.)
Author
Time
Forget it. I give up. I'll wait and decide if the election systems works after I've had a chance to use it.

4

Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: motti_soL
im sorry to say but the USA way of electing people is on drugs and antiquated and out-dated and misinterpreting and misleading and so on and so on...


are you refering to the electorial college? or some other problem?

Author
Time
the electoral college.
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
Qui-Gon Jinn (R.I.P.)
Author
Time
Without the electoral system, a candidate could pander only to the needs of a few large cities.

Look at the 2004 county-by-county map.
Kerry had only, what, 2-3 million less votes than Bush. All his votes were in New York, LA, Chicago, San Fran, and other large population centers. Without an electoral system, he could have focused almost exclusively on these cities, not giving a flying fig about anyone in Nebraska, Iowa, the Dakotas, etc.

Perfect example, Ohio.
Kerry could have made promise after promise to Cleveland, Cincinnati and Columbus. That is really all he'd need (ok, maybe Toledo as well). He could completely ignore the rest of the state.

The electoral college works to balance this out.

If I was a suspicious type, I'd say that you're only angry about the system because Kerry lost. Its the same thing the democrats did in 2000.
Author
Time
but the electoral college undermines democracy which the USA advocates so zealously...
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
Qui-Gon Jinn (R.I.P.)
Author
Time
I don't think so. If we only give those in big cities a voice, then it isn't popular rule. It is Poligarchy.

(is that a word)??

4

Author
Time
I created this monster, I'll kill it

DEAD THREAD.
Author
Time
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm

Quote



Evidence Mounts That The Vote May Have Been Hacked

by Thom Hartmann / Common Dreams

When I spoke with Jeff Fisher this morning (Saturday, November 06, 2004), the Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Florida's 16th District said he was waiting for the FBI to show up. Fisher has evidence, he says, not only that the Florida election was hacked, but of who hacked it and how. And not just this year, he said, but that these same people had previously hacked the Democratic primary race in 2002 so that Jeb Bush would not have to run against Janet Reno, who presented a real threat to Jeb, but instead against Bill McBride, who Jeb beat.

"It was practice for a national effort," Fisher told me.

And evidence is accumulating that the national effort happened on November 2, 2004.

The State of Florida, for example, publishes a county-by-county record of votes cast and people registered to vote by party affiliation. Net denizen Kathy Dopp compiled the official state information into a table, available at http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm, and noticed something startling.

While the heavily scrutinized touch-screen voting machines seemed to produce results in which the registered Democrat/Republican ratios matched the Kerry/Bush vote, and so did the optically-scanned paper ballots in the larger counties, in Florida's smaller counties the results from the optically scanned paper ballots - fed into a central tabulator PC and thus vulnerable to hacking - seem to have been reversed.

In Baker County, for example, with 12,887 registered voters, 69.3% of them Democrats and 24.3% of them Republicans, the vote was only 2,180 for Kerry and 7,738 for Bush, the opposite of what is seen everywhere else in the country where registered Democrats largely voted for Kerry.

In Dixie County, with 4,988 registered voters, 77.5% of them Democrats and a mere 15% registered as Republicans, only 1,959 people voted for Kerry, but 4,433 voted for Bush.

The pattern repeats over and over again - but only in the smaller counties where, it was probably assumed, the small voter numbers wouldn't be much noticed. Franklin County, 77.3% registered Democrats, went 58.5% for Bush. Holmes County, 72.7% registered Democrats, went 77.25% for Bush.

Yet in the larger counties, where such anomalies would be more obvious to the news media, high percentages of registered Democrats equaled high percentages of votes for Kerry.

More visual analysis of the results can be seen at http://ustogether.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm, and www.rubberbug.com/temp/Florida2004chart.htm.

And, although elections officials didn't notice these anomalies, in aggregate they were enough to swing Florida from Kerry to Bush. If you simply go through the analysis of these counties and reverse the "anomalous" numbers in those counties that appear to have been hacked, suddenly the Florida election results resemble the Florida exit poll results: Kerry won, and won big.

Those exit poll results have been a problem for reporters ever since Election Day.

Election night, I'd been doing live election coverage for WDEV, one of the radio stations that carries my syndicated show, and, just after midnight, during the 12:20 a.m. Associated Press Radio News feed, I was startled to hear the reporter detail how Karen Hughes had earlier sat George W. Bush down to inform him that he'd lost the election. The exit polls were clear: Kerry was winning in a landslide. "Bush took the news stoically," noted the AP report.

But then the computers reported something different. In several pivotal states.

Conservatives see a conspiracy here: They think the exit polls were rigged.

Dick Morris, the infamous political consultant to the first Clinton campaign who became a Republican consultant and Fox News regular, wrote an article for The Hill, the publication read by every political junkie in Washington, DC, in which he made a couple of brilliant points.

"Exit Polls are almost never wrong," Morris wrote. "They eliminate the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly separating actual voters from those who pretend they will cast ballots but never do and by substituting actual observation for guesswork in judging the relative turnout of different parts of the state."

He added: "So, according to ABC-TVs exit polls, for example, Kerry was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Iowa, all of which Bush carried. The only swing state the network had going to Bush was West Virginia, which the president won by 10 points."

Yet a few hours after the exit polls were showing a clear Kerry sweep, as the computerized vote numbers began to come in from the various states the election was called for Bush.

How could this happen?

On the CNBC TV show "Topic A With Tina Brown," several months ago, Howard Dean had filled in for Tina Brown as guest host. His guest was Bev Harris, the Seattle grandmother who started www.blackboxvoting.org from her living room. Bev pointed out that regardless of how votes were tabulated (other than hand counts, only done in odd places like small towns in Vermont), the real "counting" is done by computers. Be they Diebold Opti-Scan machines, which read paper ballots filled in by pencil or ink in the voter's hand, or the scanners that read punch cards, or the machines that simply record a touch of the screen, in all cases the final tally is sent to a "central tabulator" machine.

That central tabulator computer is a Windows-based PC.

"In a voting system," Harris explained to Dean on national television, "you have all the different voting machines at all the different polling places, sometimes, as in a county like mine, there's a thousand polling places in a single county. All those machines feed into the one machine so it can add up all the votes. So, of course, if you were going to do something you shouldn't to a voting machine, would it be more convenient to do it to each of the 4000 machines, or just come in here and deal with all of them at once?"

Dean nodded in rhetorical agreement, and Harris continued. "What surprises people is that the central tabulator is just a PC, like what you and I use. It's just a regular computer."

"So," Dean said, "anybody who can hack into a PC can hack into a central tabulator?"

Harris nodded affirmation, and pointed out how Diebold uses a program called GEMS, which fills the screen of the PC and effectively turns it into the central tabulator system. "This is the official program that the County Supervisor sees," she said, pointing to a PC that was sitting between them loaded with Diebold's software.

Bev then had Dean open the GEMS program to see the results of a test election. They went to the screen titled "Election Summary Report" and waited a moment while the PC "adds up all the votes from all the various precincts," and then saw that in this faux election Howard Dean had 1000 votes, Lex Luthor had 500, and Tiger Woods had none. Dean was winning.

"Of course, you can't tamper with this software," Harris noted. Diebold wrote a pretty good program.

But, it's running on a Windows PC.

So Harris had Dean close the Diebold GEMS software, go back to the normal Windows PC desktop, click on the "My Computer" icon, choose "Local Disk C:," open the folder titled GEMS, and open the sub-folder "LocalDB" which, Harris noted, "stands for local database, that's where they keep the votes." Harris then had Dean double-click on a file in that folder titled "Central Tabulator Votes," which caused the PC to open the vote count in a datab
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Oops didn't see the dead thread. OK, this post of mine would've killed it anyway.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering