Slashdot Mirror
Netcraft Shows Smartech Running Ohio Election Servers
goombah99 writes "Netcraft is showing that an event happened in the Ohio 2004 election that is difficult to explain. The Secretary of State's website, which handles election reporting, normally is directed to an Ohio-based IP address hosted by the Ohio Supercomputer Center. On Nov. 3 2004, Netcraft shows the website pointing out of state to a server owned by Smartech Corp. According to the American Registry on Internet Numbers, Smartech's block of IP addresses 64.203.96.0 – 64.203.111.255 encompasses the entire range of addresses owned by the Republican National Committee. Smartech hosted the recently notorious gbw43.com domain used from the White House in apparent violation of the Presidential Records Act, from which thousands of White House emails vanished." Update: 04/25 01:24 GMT by KD : ePluribus Media published a piece called Ken Blackwell Outsources Ohio Election Results to GOP Internet Operatives, Again on election eve 2006, when a similar DNS switch to Smartech occurred. They have been investigating the larger story of IT on Capitol Hill and elsewhere for two years.
Your own submission answers your question.
Nothing "changed" or was "transferred". http://election.sos.state.oh.us/ is a special web site in operation for elections. Otherwise, it points to http://www.sos.state.oh.us/ as it does now. It appears that the State of Ohio contracted with SmartTech for hosting, processing, and dissemination of the election results via the special elections web site, when it is in operation.
That probably won't be a good enough answer for people, though. Regardless, it appears that SmartTech has obvious ties to the Republican Party, and hosts many sites for various Republican political interests. The Secretary of State of Ohio is a partisan political position. This doesn't mean there aren't questions that can be raised or points to be debated.
The sad truth is that partisans are involved in just about every aspect of the voting and elections process, and that's not going to change, ever.
Witness the decades-old joke from Democratic stronghold cities: "Why did the Democrat walk into the cemetery? To thank his voters."
It's April 2007. Anyone who believes the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (or not) isn't going to change what they think now.
The Republican Party is dying.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Ronald said nothing. He flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse, and rode madly off in all directions.
This doesn't even pass the smell test.
As the Democrats' own statistician, Jasjeet Sekhon, who coauthored their 2004 post-election report said:
The "change" is because the elections web site is only in operation for elections. Its operation was contracted to SmartTech by the Ohio Secretary of State. There was no "hack". Partisans and partisan companies are involved in the elections and voting process. The key is having enough oversight to keep everyone honest.
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.
Since the Internet is a series of tubes, either 1) anyone involved has no idea how it works, but got a free iPod for switching hosting facilities, or 2) its a plan by the geeks to throw the election, which, frankly, is better than the politicians throwing it.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Search for wierd:
Did you mean: weird
Even more interesting is that the search for 'weird' and 'smartech' eventually leads to this interesting blog post which lists "Strange Domains Registered by the RNC"
"After you've got your minority support locked away, you can then begin the attack ads:" (from the blog post)
"...and, of course, to anticipate attacks by grabbing(and squatting on) those domains first:" (from the blog post)
- Ken Blackwell Outsources Ohio Election Results to GOP Internet Operatives, Again
- Ohio's election website still sent real-time results to GOP mirror server
Related storiesGrow your own @ePluribUs Media.
Damn it, this is why the republicans are driving this country into the ground!
The Secretary of State's office is NOT a partisan position. The Secretary swears to protect and defend the constitution (or whatever the equivalent is for Ohio state positions), not to protect the elephant. There should be a clear and unambiguous wall between the office holder's official actions and individual partisan actions, and should never, under any circumstances, use official resources for partisan purposes. When it's inevitable (the classic example being the president flying to events during the election season), the office holder is required to provide appropriate compensation for this use. E.g., equivalent first-class airfare for everyone on AF1, IIRC.
With most secretaries of state, I would agree with you that it's probably nothing more than temporary hosting during a period of high use.
But the outgoing Secretary of State, Blackwell (iirc), was extraordinarily partisan in his official acts. He's the reason why Ohio is usually the center of stolen election allegations. Given his amply documented bad behavior in the past, e.g., attempting to have his gubernatoral opponent disqualified on bogus grounds shortly before the election, a rational person would have no choice but to assume the worst and require proof that it truly was an innocent and unbiased decision.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Just because the other side isn't following the rules set by the Geneva Conventions doesn't mean we are freed from the responsibilities of following them. I'm pretty sure we're bound by them regardless of the antics of our enemies. I'll have to do some research to back this up, but I'm willing to bet there is no clause that waives your responsibilities to follow GC under certain circumstances.
I've done stat analysis too. I concur with you that accusations based on statistical about what happened in florida don't seem to be strongly supported. That is to say the statistics are not conclusive. But I've also follwed the ohio reports pretty closely too. Some of the reports are incorrect. But some can't be so easily debunked. The strongest cases indicate that shoddy voting equipment created long lines that detered voters in selected precincts. It's also now certain that the recounts were rigged (they precounted then selected the precincts without problems for the official counts. And there are precints where the votes and voters don't add up. You always expect some of that so one can never really put a finger on if there was too much or too little. All very statistically nebulous. and hence an opportunity to tilt things and hide in the noise.
This is why getting the results early and having the ability to delay posting them enlarges the opportunity for dirty tricks. For example here's a sort of maxwell's deamon way to rig an eleciton completely legally. If you look at the early returns you will see lots of mistakes. Some will go in your favor some will go against you. If you selectively inquire with precinct judges only on the cases where the votes go against you, you can make gains. Indeed both parties routinely do this after the elections so that's not even science fiction. But now suppose your party, and only your party, is magically granted the power to do this on election night itself. Getting totals "fixed" is a lot easier when things are in flux. a simple phone call can say "Hey that can't be right, read those numbers again" will get you an updated total. After the election is done getting changes is much harder. Hence eraly knowledge helps. Running the reporting site would be a windfall.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Losing means we are losing our country's dignity by continuing our unprovoked invasion of another country.
Losing means we are losing our brightest stars, sacrificing for political reasons those who would most readily pick up arms in defense of this country. This includes many of our bravest and brightest. What would do more good for this country, having a soldier in Iraq, toiling in endless war, or having that person back at home, raising their children to become good people like themselves?
Losing primarily means that this is not considered by either side to be a conventional war, with winners and losers. The violence and indignation will go on for as long as we are in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it will continue after we leave. The fighting will continue indefinitely. And as such, given that we are foreign invaders, and our "enemies" are defending their home, we cannot "win."
Do you love freedom??? Do you love freedom!!! DO YOU LOVE FREEDOM!!!!!!!!
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
"The top 10% of earners pay 70% of the taxes. If that isn't "sharing the wealth," then socialism is much nastier than I thought."
Fascinating, that 10% you're talking about also earns 95% of the countries wealth in a year! Meanwhile the 90% that earns 5% of the country's wealth each year is paying 30% of the taxes! Wow, what a burden that must be for the bottom 90%, paying 6 times the rate the top 10% does.
The Generation
I'd say something witty here, but I'm not that bright.
A common misunderstanding Carter was handed a disfunctional military by Nixon, Ford, and Donnie Rumsfeld -- who was as much a disaster in his first tour at Defense as he was in his second. Carter INCREASED real military spending by 3% in each of his four budgets (which were 1978,1979,1980 and 1981 BTW not 1976-1980) That's just about the same rate that Reagan increased spending until Congress eventually stepped in and decided that the US had about as big a military as it could afford. Defense spending as a percentage of GDP was 4.7 percent when Carter took office. It was 5.2 percent when he left.
Don't believe me? Look it up. It's public record.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey