Slashdot Mirror
2004 Election Weirdness Continues
I've read dozens of submissions about election anomalies in the last week and they show no sign of slowing so I've decided to post a few of the main ones here to let you all discuss them. The first is the Common Dreams report
that shows that
optically scanned votes have a strange anomoly in florida: the Touchscreen counties roughly matched up to party registration numbers, but optically scanned paper ballot counties showed strangeness like one county where 69.3% registered democrat, but only 28% of them voted for Kerry.
Palm Beach County, Florida logged 88,000 more votes than there were voters;
that machines in LaPorte, Indiana discounted 50,000 voters;
in Columbus, Ohio voting machines gave Bush an extra 4,000 votes;
in Broward County, Florida voting machines were counting backwards;
Lastly,
precincts in New Mexico gave provisional ballots that will never be counted to as many as 10% of all their voters.
In particular, tmoertel published a pretty good statistical smackdown on the theory of electronic irregularities in Ohio (this isn't my analysis - so I don't take credit for it):
==========
Thanks for sharing the data. Looking at it, I don't see any indications of Republican foul play. My analysis follows.
First, I loaded your data into R from The R Project for Statistical Computing:
When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
Ask and ye shall recieve.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
The best way to flag fraud is to note when the exit polls are substantially out of line with actual returns, and particularly if they are out of line in a systematic (and unpredicted) way.
You mean like these?
Wisconsin
Bush had 4% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 223 elections
Pennnsylvannia
Bush had 5% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 1838 elections
Ohio
Bush had 4% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 223 elections
Florida
Bush had 7% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 500,000 elections
Minnesota
Bush had 7% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 500,000 elections
New Hampshire
Bush had 15% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 10^22 elections
North Carolina
Bush had 9% over the exit polls
Probability: 1 out of 500,000,000 elections
Reference, probabilities calculated with SD=1.53 for 95% certainty level at +-3%.
This is more than cause for alarm, it's a wake-up call that the voice of the people was overwritten by fraud in this election. Contact your local media, contact your congressmen, tell your friends and family, and force people to pay attention to this.
Another data point: Democratic Underground has evidence for a systematic 5% swing from exit polls to the final result, in Bush's favour... only in states using the Diebold tabulators . Pretty horrifying stuff. As Brit I have to offer my sympathy & support for true supporters of democracy in the USA, whoever they voted for.
The electronic systems that are out there now are 100 times more verifiable than most princints in the country.
Don't confuse replicable (will produce the same outcome every time given the same inputs) and verifiable. To be verifiable you need something to verify against. The current breed of voting machines are, by definition, not verifiable. As has been repeated here ad nauseum, it is not even possible for the individual voter to verify that the choice the machine logged is the choice they made. In fact, there is ample proof (not speculation) that the voter's choice is not always accurately represented in eVoting machines.
If these machines offered a signficant advantage (cost, speed, reliability etc) over pencil & paper, I might be tempted to say that there is some justification for the risk but these machines are incredibly expensive, slow and unreliable compared to pencil & paper or scanner-assisted voting.
The e-touch optical scan comparison referenced as 'strange anomaly' may be explained if one considers that counties with small populations used optical machines and those with large populations used the e-touch machines. Bush's campaigners focused on the demographic more likely to be found in rural areas. The red vs blue by county results and the swing from expected to actual vote in rural Florida suggest it was a pretty successful campaign. I know some of the progressive democrats are painting this as an ignorant, rural, right-wing christian uprising. The variation in swing vote as a function of population size, supports at least the 'rural' aspect of their claimed uprising.
/. posters
/ 11/04/news/news02.txt">Laporte Michigan might lead one to believe: poll workers experienced a huge operator error; election systems and software only sold ONE system and it's fscked; one, the other, or both of the aforementioned parties conspired to screw up the count. The traditional trick is extra vote, not tossing a huge number in the $hitcan. My bet is operatorerror. I mean no one ever screws up when using a computer!
The remainder has been pretty well covered by other
In the very article referenced by commandantTaco one reads (if on is able) "...Palm Beach County appears to have accounted for the discrepancy..."
I guess the article from Aa href="http://www.michigancityin.com/articles/2004
Reading the Broward County article we learn, "Bad numbers showed up only in running tallies through the day, not the final one."
The bit from NM doesn't reflect much weirdness. Obviously all those folks that were too ignorant to check their paper MUST have been Bush supporters.
Now I'm the grandest Tiger in the Jungle!
Yes. CNN says Bush had 52% of Florida vs Kerry's 47% (3,911,825 vs 3,534,609, a difference of 377,216 votes). The "strange anomoly" the article points to shows e-touch precints voting favoring Kerry more than expected (expected is total vote * %party) by 4,422 votes (out of 3,863,840 total). And the op-scan precints favored Bush more than expected by 599,721 votes (out of 3,419,852 total).
If the op-scan votes had favored Bush over expectations as much as the e-touch had favored Kerry over expectations, Kerry would have won Florida, and he would have won the national election.
I didn't run the numbers on any of the other anomalies.
ES&S and Diebold (rather Global Election Systems, now part of Diebold) are run by Todd Urosevich and Bob Urosevich respectively. Yes, they're brothers.
There is plenty of evidence for potential conflict of interest in voting machine companies....
Electronic voting, while a neat idea to speed up the vote counting process, seems to have run into a number of glitches (over 1100 nationwide) this November 2nd. In addition to seemingly random problems in Florida [1, 2], Ohio [1], and North Carolina [1], there are allegations of systematic fraud based on statistical comparison of exit polls to final results in precincts with audit trails and those without. It is also interesting that in Florida, the voting patterns do not match the voter registration patterns as they do nationwide. This has attracted the attention of numerous civil rights groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation that has filed at least two lawsuits since election day, and BlackboxVoting.org that has filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain computer logs and documents from 3000 counties and districts across the US. Equally disturbing is the fact that CNN has (since Nov 2) changed its exit polling results to reflect the actual results. This has attracted the attention of Congressmen John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, Jerrold Nadler of New York and Robert Wexler of Florida who have jointly requested that the GAO immediately investigate the efficacy of e-voting machines.
In case you are thinking that this is just sour grapes from Democrats who lost the election, think again. BlackboxVoting.org has been investigating e-voting fraud for years. Likewise, the CEO of Diebold, one of the e-voting machine manufacturers has been quoted as saying "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president." And if that's not conflict of interest enough for you, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel (now resigned) is an owner of the largest e-voting machine company ES&S.
Other numerous problems have been found with the machines from nearly every company in the past [1, 2, 3]. Avi Rubin, a computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University, has been investigating such machines on his own and has found a number of security issues. Swarthmore students stood up to Diebold in November of 2003 after discovering
Here is the source of that story. Here is a followup that debunks a lot of it.
vvnm.org/resources/florida2004/florida_vote_patter ns.htm
Yes the patterns show a strong significance. it screams at you.
The conclusion is not what you are expecting though.
1) First Bush Won Florida On optical scan machines, kerry won on e-voting
2) e-voting agreed with the exit polls, optical scan did not
3) The key finding of the above article is that people vote DIFFERENTLY on optical scan and e-Voting.
THIS LAST FACTOR IS HUGELY IMPORTANT!!!! Assuming No hanky panky is involoved this may be due to the human-machine interface--a factor that has gone unexplored.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
"citizens can vote. Citizens being, of course, only those people who had served in the armed forces"
If you did not serve I presume then that you can't either serve in political office because you are not a citizen. Then almost only democrats can fill the job.
Democrats:
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91. v * Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal. v * Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received #311. v * Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters. v * Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg. v
Republicans -- and these are the guys sending people to war:
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve. v * Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making movies.
* B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem," although continued in NFL for 8 years.
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: d
Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
I come from a poor family, and I can tell you firsthand how absolutely wrong that is. My father supported a family of five on an income well below half the poverty level, and we paid approximately ten percent of that income in property taxes. Through hard work and sacrifice, we managed to maintain a decent standard of living, but the taxes were still crippling, especially since we were not allowed to sell or develop our property because of targeted zoning changes. Bush's income tax cuts can't help everyone.
Trickle down economics NEVER WORKED
Of course not. The idea that giving rich people more money would help our economy is ludicrous and always has been.
Rich people are rich because they make more money than they spend. That's it. Poor people spend all their money. That's why they are poor.
Giving rich people more money is just going to make them richer.
Synergy is your friend
No-one ever said there was a connection between the two despite what Michael Moore would have you believe.
As for 9/11 being the cause of the Iraq war, I won't deny that.
WTF? There's no connection but I'm right anyway? I don't care who claimed what if what I say is the truth. Besides, This is an example of the kind of crap that was coming out of the administration during the run-up to the war. You're right that nobody ever made an explicit connection, but they sure implied it as often as possible. And it worked, too, with almost half the country believing that Saddam Hussein was in some way responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
This article sums it up nicely.
Unfortunately we didn't know the intel was bad until after
You should have. After all, Condi Rice dropped the ball on the Bin laden memo. Seems like a clear indication that something was rotten in Denmark.
Saddam was sending conflicting signals.
The only conflicting signals I was hearing were between Hans Blix and the Administration. I've also never understood the whole WMD rationale. Even if Saddam had what intel said he had, shouldn't Pyonyang be a smoking crater now too? I mean, if you're going to infringe other countries' version of the 2nd amendment, why not start with the big boys and work your way down?
He had violated the terms of the cease-fire of the first Gulf War and numerous U.N. resolutions.
Jesus, not that old chestnut again. Israel's broken more resolutions than everyone else combined and they haven't had so much as a slap on the wrist.
See, shit like this, not being consistent, is what makes this President the world's laughingstock. I find it highly ironic that he's seen as a "steady" leader by his electorate.
I've never read a Tom Clancy novel, though I do admit I enjoyed the Clancy movies with Harrison Ford.
Lucky you. His early stuff was good, but then he disappeared up his own arse. Oh and Harrison Ford is not Jack Ryan. Damn you Alec Baldwin for being so greedy!
Where was I? Oh yes...
But what is so sick about what I said?
Anybody who espouses an honest-to-god "better them than me" attitude will always get my contempt. Like I said, we don't live in caves, we've evolved. Maybe your ideas should too.
It's called hitting them at home while they're on the other side of the world rather than waiting for them to come here. Completely logical and strategically sound.
Those that call things like Iraq "pre-emptive war" are not being entirely honest. It's a proactive response to terrorism. We don't wait for them to attack us, we take the fight to them. And based on the amount of insurgents/terrorists in Iraq it looks like we hit the bullseye.
Thanks, this actually mad me laugh out loud. You do realize that the terrorists are there because we're there, right? If Bush had really wanted to hit the Bullseye, he would have hit Saudi and finsihed the job in Afghanistan before moving on to Iraq. Please tell me you don't honestly believe what you just wrote, you sound like a smart guy.
I'd be interested in what you were in the minority on and were later proved right on?
I dunno...I correctly predicted, a year ago, that Bush would win re-election and by a healthy-but-short-of-a-landslide margin.
Actually, I have to admit being wrong on one thing. I am highly surprised that no WMD's were found in Iraq, if for no other reason that they had been planted there by the US. Gotta say I didn't see that one coming.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!