More Voting Shenanigans in Florida
stewwy writes "It looks like the the shenanigans have started already, the Register is running a story about the difficulty early voters are having with casting votes for Democrats." From the article: "The touch-screen gizmos seem strangely attracted to Republican candidates. One voter needed assistance from an election official, and even then, needed three tries to convince the machine that he wanted to vote for Democrat Jim Davis in the gubernatorial race, not his Republican opponent Charlie Crist."
The article summary is misleading in ways that would give CNN a hardon.
/. hordes into a raging frenzy.
It says nothing about why the terminals were malfunctioning, which had everything to do with touch screen calibration (and the need to recalibrate from time to time) and nothing to do with some right-wing conspiracy. In fact, the article implies that it was one machine in particular, not all of them.
Way to spin it to work the
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
The headline on the Miami Herald piece? Only minor glitches reported in early voting
Read the full article. You have one woman in Florida who had a problem (or made a mistake), realized the problem, and had it corrected. This is HARDLY voting "shenannigans."
Excerpting from the article:
original story via this journal entry
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
From what I read in this article, several users encountered a miscalibrated touchscreen so that a press on the screen registered in the wrong place. Several voters only caught the error when reviewing their votes on the final page.
It sounds like a small, correctable problem, and pretty damn far from "sheannigans."
From the article:
And from TFA: Broward Supervisor of Elections spokeswoman Mary Cooney said it's not uncommon for screens on heavily used machines to slip out of sync, making votes register incorrectly. Poll workers are trained to recalibrate them on the spot -- essentially, to realign the video screen with the electronics inside. The 15-step process is outlined in the poll-workers manual.
SO what we have here is a few incidents with misaligned screens, and a some of the cases, the screen registered the republican instead of the democrat, and of course the press picked up on those in order to feed the conspiracy theories. Actually, the story picked a single incident that that happened in.
So to recap TFA:
There are reports of errors with the voting machines. These appear to be relatively minor and the poll workers are trained to fix them. Some districts keep records of maintenance, some don't, and at least one seals the machines for later review. And in one case, the voter was selecting a Democrat, but it came up Republican, but after three tries they were able to vote for the candidate they wanted. Then they called the press.
Excuse me, but making a big deal about this is just FUD.
Yoda of Borg am I! Assimilated shall you be! Futile resistance is, hmm?
And yet, no word from Slashdot on the dead people casting absentee votes for Democrats as reported recently.
I think it's just honest accounting/mechanical errors on both sides, and political devotees want to make conspiracy theories out of it. Unfortunately, most of the media leans left (according to a UCLA/Stanford study), so only the Republican conspiracies get reported while all the Democratic corruption (if a Republican did what Reid did with his real estate, it'd be all over the news) gets buried. Anyone who followed the election closely in 2004 remembers the shenanigans from both sides (people were even slashing the tires of GOP voting vans!), yet people selectively remember only the Republican shenanigans two years later. Odd how that works.
In other words, STFU with your goddamn conspiracies, you loony wingnuts/moonbats. You fuck up politics and turn it into a big playground with two lines of children throwing spitwads back and forth and tattling to the teachers about various things.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Problem number one.
I think there's evidence of a functional conspiracy, the main smoking gun being the patterns in exit-poll discrepancies in the 2004 election, though the widespread reports of more conventional irregularities in Ohio are good too.Like I said, functional. I don't know if this would count as "brilliant". And I wouldn't "presuppose" this if I didn't think there was evidence for it.
The difficulty with the electronic voting machines in use is that the size of the conspiracy you need to do the job is much smaller. They allow wholesale fraud.Hm, well which do you think, am I claiming that they've never slipped up, or am I claiming that they have slipped up?
The transparency of this particular exploit is indeed pretty peculiar: that's what I'm commenting on. If the bad guys have to work like this, then they're definitely not invincible.
If you want a wild-ass guess: maybe the programmer's were being incompetent on purpose, because they wanted to sabotage the effort?
Well, it could be an IslamoMartian conspiracy to make the Republicans look bad.
Note: your "tinfoil" is past it's expiration date. Please upgrade your rhetoric dispenser.
http://www.cmpa.com/documents/06.10.31.Bad.news.pd f
From the Center for Media and Public Affairs. Right there on the first page, 77% of Democrat coverage (ABC, NBC, CBS) is favorable, and 12% of Republican coverage is favorable to them. Heck, some news I've seen still mentions Tom Delay (Republicans = corrupt), but I never heard what happened to Rep William Jefferson (D-Louisiana) and his $90k in the freezer. Here in Illinois, two big fund raisers for the governor (a democrat) are in trouble for illegalities with their raising. Yet, I don't consider every democrat in the country corrupt because a few are.
What I don't recall from the 1994 takeover of Congress, was this HUGE push for weeks/months beforehand like they have now, saying how it's a done-deal, Democrats have won, Nancy Pilosi is Speaker, Bush will be impeached immediately, etc.