If Patrick Fitzgerald says that Rove didn't do anything illegal, I'll believe him.
Actually, since Karl did not have the security clearance to know about Plame's CIA status, he cannot likely be found guilty of treason or some of the more onerous crimes people have been accusing him of. He could still be found guilty of few things, just don't expect him really crash and burn over this. The bigger question for the investigators is likely 'who leaked it to Karl?'
Of course, letter of the law aside, it is still a nasty thing to knowingly reveal classified data (undermining our efforts against WMD proliferation) just for political gain. If that is what Rove did, Bush should fire his ass at a minimum. There is some lines you just don't cross.
Doesn't it seem odd that Wilson got his wife to approve of the trip to Africa? Like any bureaucracy, there are certainly rules against this sort of thing at the CIA. What other taxpayer funded trips did wifey sign for and did she ever go along? Sounds like a nice vacation scam to me.
Yup, I bet he was just chompin at the bit for the chance to vacation in NIGERIA! Get real. The only people suggesting Wilson's wife approved the trip are people in the administration trying to cover their collective asses. The director that approved Wilson already came forward and was most certainly not Plame. Wilson was a former ambassador to Africa working under the elder President Bush with numerous foreign government contacts and as such a logical pick for the job. Wilson's wife admittedly acted as the go-between in bringing the job to his attention... but she most certainly did not 'approve' him because she did not have that authority.
I half agree with you. It may be true that money cannot buy hapiness... but lack of money can sure bring a lot of misery. I'll still pick a lower paying job that I love over a sucky job that pays more, but only if the job I love still brings in enough to pay the bills.
Of course as an independent consultant I sometimes bend my own rule. I'll take a short term sucky job for a high enough rate if it means I can take a really long vacation before accepting the next consulting gig. For me, money is not about buying more toys... it is about affording the free time to play with the toys.:)
If you have any skill with the written word, try picking up a technical writing contract. It is unlikely you will land a full book deal on your first time out, but contributing writer jobs are obtainable with a little persistance. The nice thing about writing is that you set your own work schedule and work from home... it is the ultimate telecommuting job. As long as you don't agree to any overly aggressive deadlines, it works out really well as a 'side job'.
First of all, I'm sure the signs appear much worse than they actually are if you suffer from the sort of paranoia that drives these people to run around digging through peoples trash and make assumptions about exactly what they find there. That aside, why are you guys so insistent that the one oddball poll, the exit poll, which was known to have critical flaws in this election, was the correct one? It is an absolutely silly and laughable premise.
It seems you don't really understand the difference between exit polls and pre-election phone polls and why election specialists use exit polls as the bellweathers for fraud investigations. This 'one odball poll' is exactly the poll that should raise the warning flags when it disagrees with the final tally. This is exactly the standard we apply to other countries when we certify their elections... we use the exit polls to point out where we should investigate for voter fraud.
You call the exit polls flawed, but the reason given is that they disagree with the final tally. That is circular logic. Two different universities have poured over the numbers and found reason to suspect fraud. They recommend we investigate further. Police don't stop a murder investigation just because the smoking gun is not lying in plain site. If a death looks a little suspicious, they dig into it and make sure before closing the book on it.
It is obvious I will never convince you that further investigation is called for. Fortunately the government's General Accounting Office and other organizations do not agree with you. The investigations will go forward. It is unlikely it will overturn the election, but any fraud or unintentional failures they discover will certainly help us improve our democracy.
Whatever your political leanings, I encourage you to support legislation that improves our election system. Insist on a voter verified paper trail. Demand that the vote counting process be open and transparent, subject to third party observation at the time it occurs. Conservatives should feel insulted by the suggestion that they need to steal votes to win. The best way to deflate that argument is for Republican elected officials to champion election reform with even more energy than the Democrats. I suggest you contact your senate and house representatives and tell them just that.
This has been a fun debate. Take care, and have a good Thanksgiving. I'm off to visit relatives.
No, they didn't. Go look at the list of every national poll I linked. In the week prior to the election Bush was up in 11 of 15 polls, tied in 2, and Kerry won 2 of the 15.
The majority of these were well within the margin of error, making it officially a 'dead heat' in the words of the pollsters themselves.
Yes, the exit polls are wrong. The election, which is a much more scientifically sound poll with about 120 million participants, is correct. Any suspicion otherwise is rooted in paranoia and fantasy.
The election is only the more scientific poll if it was actually free of massive fraud. There are warning signs that fraud occured, the questions is how much. What is so wrong with doing an audit to find out? It is the best way to shut up the tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists like me after all.:)
Also, when talking about exit polls, I think you are latching onto those early afternoon ones that weren't even supposed to be public because they were so innaccurate (you know, the ones that showed Kerry up 20 points in PA). Of course, as this dialogue progresses, your tendency to latch onto things is becoming more apparant.
The exit polls always start out rather innacurate and then become more accurate as the day continues. This is only natural as the sample size grows larger. Some people have made a big deal out of the 'exit polls' showing a big swing to Bush toward the end of the election, but this was because they began to replace the exit poll numbers with the actual reported totals as the precincts closed and their numbers came in. This was so the statewide prediction would be as accurate as possible, but it gave some the mistaken impression that the exit polls themselves had made a major shift, when really they showed a lead for Kerry the entire time.
The Berkeley study uses the raw exit poll numbers for the entire period. They are available for download if you are really curious. The exit poll numbers show Kerry winning Florida by five points (well outside the margin of error). Bush won by three points, an alarming eight point swing. A swing that large is considered a warning flag to look for fraud by our own specialists when certifying international elections (in places like the Ukrain for example). The Berkeley study is particularly interesting because it shows the vote total anomalies landing in very specific patterns related to the type of voting hardware used (i.e. paperless electronic vote machines).
I don't know why. That isn't how they historically break within the last 3 days.
The historical trend for quite some time is that the undecideds break for the challenger, at least that is the 'common wisdom' that was being spouted all over the media. In truth, there were not as many undecideds this time, so the newly registered probably played a bigger role. Several studies indicated that new registrations favored the democrats by healthy margins, particularly in Florida.
Hey, I did start this thread saying the election was stolen or that the results should be overturned, only that there was solid proof of fraud (specifically in Volusia county) and it should be investigated. Furthermore, the failure of the exit polls combined with error prone voting machines has undermined many people's confidence in this election. There is only one way to repair that. Audit the results, fix the problems we find, and make sure there is no reason to complain in the next election.
I would hope we could all agree that is a worthy goal.
Do they want you to come in as an independent contractor or work through a larger consulting company? That really makes a difference. If you work through another company in that sort fo 'temp to hire' arrangement, you are unlikely to get the higher pay that usually goes with a contracting job.
Being an idependent can have some great advantages, but only if you are willing to put some extra time in drumming up business, handling the billing, etc. Definetely get yourself a good accountant that can help you set up your own retirement account, health insurance, etc. Consider incorporating, even if you are the only employee in your business. There are some great tax and liability advantages, and it is not as difficult as some make it sound. You do need to file an separate tax return for the business, but your tax accountant can help you with that. There are a bunch of great tax advantages, particularly in matching contributions that the corporation pays into your retirement. Also, there is a broad range of tax deductions available to corporations but not sole proprietorships.
I've been an independent computer consultant for nearly a decade now. I incorporated in the first year and never regretted it. I've been dumping my money back into the company. A couple of years ago I purchased a commercial property through my corporation. I live in the upper apartment (renting it from my own corporation) and rent the out the rest of the building. As a commercial property, I can deduct more of the building expenses than if it I held the property as a personal asset.
Of course if you are only looking to get your foot in the door at a specific company, the above stuff might not apply. Being an independent is not for everyone. You need to be able to really sell yourself, know how to talk to manangement types, network and collect business contacts. You also need to set aside a war chest of funds to ride out those down times between contracts.
I will say that my experience as a independent contractor has been overwelmingly positive. I make a decent six figure income, have greater flexibility in my schedule, and have worked on a variety of interesting projects (right now I'm working on embeded Linux on a flatscreen avionics computer display). Your mileage may vary... so take this advice with the usual Internet grain of salt.
The exit polls were clearly flawed, and they are not sufficient to based your study upon.
A claim like that without facts to back it up can be taken no more seriously than 'the election was clearly stolen.' That is why many are calling for an audit of the election... to find out what the truth really is.
If you look at all of the national polls taken in the month or so prior to the election, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.htm l, you will see that the exit polls are an extreme outlier. To use that data would be absurd. The fact that the exit polling data was so ridiculously far out of line with the rest of the polls is exactly why I, and many, many others, immediately smelled a rat when those completely unbelievable numbers came out early in the afternoon.
Exit polls are historically much more accurate than the phone polls leading up to an election. Phone polls usually have a sample of about 1000 people and include registered and 'likely' voters, which is different from people 'certain' to vote. An exit poll typically has a sample of 10000 people and it consists of people who actually just voted. Exit polls almost always call the election within a two percent margin, and often within a half a percent. The only notable exceptions have been in places with proven voter fraud or, more recently, paperless voting machines.
The final phone polls showed the election a dead heat well within the final margin of error of 4 to 5 percent. The expectation was that undecideds and newly registered voters would break for Kerry. Also interesting is that the pollster John Zogby, who called the popular vote within a half a percent in 2000, called the election for Kerry this time. His number this time matched the exit polls but not the 'official numbers'. Add to that the recent university studies showing the weird changes in voter trends that occured only in paperless electronic voting areas, and you can see why many people are suspicious and saying we at least need to dig into this further.
Either the exit polls are wrong or the election is wrong. So far, I have seen no plausible explaination as to why the exit polls would be as wrong as they were. There is a plausible explaination for the vote count being wrong... fallible electronic voting machines. In isolated cases it has been PROVEN that they miscounted and altered elections. Given their history of problems, isn't it worth while that we do a full post mortem on this election so we can be confidence in future ones?
I don't think so. No totals are official until absentee ballots are counted. I don't think that there would be a poll-only total anywhere to be found... any totals officially available would be the combined polls and absentee.
Poll tapes record only those votes totaled on the voting machines at the polling station on election night... which is why they are called 'poll' tapes.:) Absentee ballots are totalled separately and then added in later for the final counts. Tbe public record request was specifically for the signed and dated election night poll tapes. These would never include any absentee ballots counted after November 2nd. The vote count from individual polling station is all part of the official record, as is the absentee ballot counts that happen later. I've actaully worked as a polling station observer, so I've seen the process in action.
Also, where are you getting the idea that the tapes do not match the offical totals? I'm not accusing you of making anything up, but I didn't see anything about that in the article. What are the discrepancies that they are claiming and where are they documented?
I got it right from the article. It states, "When they compared the discarded, signed, original tapes with the recent printouts submitted to the state and used to tabulate the Florida election winners, Harris says a disturbing pattern emerged." As for hard numbers, I've made a request for the raw data from the tapes, but the crew is evidently busy auditing another county and has not gotten back to me.
I agree that paper ballots are absolutely the best option. I think that if kinks were worked out of the computerized systems they could be a good alternative, but at this point paper is not only the simplest, but the best as well. In my opinion, there is no reason why computer-based systems (touch-screen, etc) cannot be designed so that it simply is not possible to alter anything. There is no need to have the data available on a network, there is no need to allow software to be loaded onto the machine... I just don't understand why they have to have issues.
Agreed. We also use optical scan ballots here in Wisconsin, and I believe the have many advantages over touchscreens. They are easy to use, there is a built-in paper trail, and we need fewer machines per polling station.
Swapping votes? How in the hell did noone notice that "bug" before selling the things?
Actually, BlackBoxVoting demostrated this problem and a many more but most states went ahead and bought the machines anyway. A few listened. California actually decertified the machines and sued Diebold but only after one disaster of a midterm election.
I do, personally, think the notion that machines would be predisposed to cheat for a particular party simply because of the company that makes it is a silly one. I just don't see how a computer would be able to recognize that selection 'A' is the 'right guy' to cheat for... I imagine that these things can be used for other types of voting measures... ballot initiatives, etc... so there should simply be n number of options... party affiliation would (or should) certainly not be a recognizable piece of info from the machines perspective.
The thing is, it is usually Diebold technicians that have loaded the software and pre-configured the ballots before shipping the systems off to the counties. Local election officials have been gradually picking up the role of actually configuring the ballots, but most still lean heavily on the supplier to deliver pre-configured machines. If key people at Diebold are corrupt enough to engage in fraud, they certainly have the opportunity. Of course there is also the old saying, never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence. A little digging into the history of Diebold, and there is some evidence of the former, but plenty of the latter.
As for the vote swapping, you bring up exactly the points that I have been thinki
That could very well explain bags of discarded tapes. I admittedly don't know though. I don't think this group you cite is being taken very seriously though, because there has been ZERO coverage of this around here. And reading the piece you linked to, I did notice that the article is more suggestive than factual. And, frankly, I thought the explanation that they discarded ones were now-unneeded backups makes perfect sense.
The problem with the discarded tapes being backups is that the backups should still match the official reported totals... but those tapes don't. And yes, you are right, the story is not getting much traction with mainstream press. I am a little suprised with that considering the history of BlackBoxVoting in covering the e-vote issue and the past attention they have gotten from the press, but on the other hand, sometimes these stories just take some time to move from the web sphere to traditional media. It only popped up a few days ago after all.
These people are just digging. They have no interest in "investigating" or "getting to the bottom"... their sole purpose is to deligitimze the President and erode the public's confidence in the electoral process. If groups like this hadn't exhibited a pattern of such unproductive behavior for the past 4 years, I might take them seriously. At this point, I believe their credibility is on par with that of Michael Moore. The fact that every kook leftist with a computer is floating ridiculous conspiracy theories doesn't help, either.
I disagree with your assesment. BlackBoxVoting.org has been digging into the e-voting issue for several years now, and they have been very focused on the failings of the technology and its vulnerability to fraud rather than attacking political candidates. They certainly have not been kind to Diebold Inc., but I feel confident they would be ripping into that company even if they had strong Democratic ties instead of Republican (I know I would).
As for eroding the confidence in the electoral process, the nature of the touchscreen voting machines have more to do with that than anything else. Don't blame the people that are simply getting the facts out. As a computer consultant with nearly 20 years experience, including working on embebeded touchscreen systems similar to these voting machines, I know a bit about the potentials and drawbacks of this technology... and I am deeply concerned about this issue. Optical scan and other paper trailed systems are still subject to fraud, but it is harder to pull off and more likely to be uncovered (as the Volusia country events seem to indicate). The parperless machines are a big concern, because failures or fraud can go completely undetected.
A case in point: In both Ohio and Indiana, glitches with touchscreen voting machines caused the party line votes for Democrats and Libertarians to be swapped in some counties. This actually tipped the balance in local elections until it was discovered. The only reason this was detected was because nobody would reasonably believe the Libertarians could receive that number of votes. If this glitch had swapped the Republican and Democrat votes in a close election, nobody would have ever known that it had happed.
It is interesting to note that the 'vote swapping' phenomenon is a vulnerability that BlackBoxVoting pointed out well before this election.
If I had to guess why the reported totals favored Bush over the poll tapes, I would say it is likely due to the fact that Bush had an enormous advantage in absentee ballots, which weren't counted until days later. Once again, it's a silly conspiracy theory and nothing more.
I'm talking specifically about the numbers reported on November 2nd by the poll tapes printed directly from the polling place machines at the close of voting. This is what was requested in the public records request.
Can you please link to whereever it is you are getting this misleading information? People "throwing out" vote totals? Please link. The preloaded voting machines were out of Pennsylvania, a state that John Kerry won handily, which renders it a non-issue. I do agree, though, that if there is legitimate voter fraud, it should be investigated and the offenders should be prosecuted regardless of who it helped or where it happened. I think those "preloaded" votes were satisfactorily explained. Trust me, when I first heard about them it set off big alarm bells with me as well.
OK, it is now obvious that you did not see the link I provided in the original post titled Vote Fraud Smoking Gun. Let me sumnarize it for you. Non-partison auditors made a public records request for the signed Nov 2nd poll tapes from Volusia county, They received unsigned poll tapes that were claimed to be reprints of the original tapes. They demanded the originals, and upon arriving at the records building where they were stored discovered panic filled election officials throwing out the signed and dated poll tapes. Upon comparing these tapes with the 'reprints' they discovered significant differences 'indicative of fraud' favoring Bush in every single precinct examined. Most of this was caught on video tape and police were even present for much of it, so this can hardly be discounted as baseless rumors.
I am not screaming that Bush stole the election, there is just not enough hard information to say that. But there is now solid evidence of major fraud in Florida - real evidence, not just statistical studies - and that means we should investigate further and find out how far the corruption reaches. Even if it did not effect the election this time, it is a serious problem that needs fixing. Let us not forget that localized voter fraud might not tip a Presidential election, but it certainly does (and has) tipped local elections and congressional races. My goal in making noise about this is not to overturn the current election, but to fix the system for the future.
Go back and read that link I included in the last post.
I checked out the link, and it supports the case for the republican voter fraud discovered in Volusia County. Volusia used optical scan voting machines and thus was one of the counties that had an unexpected shift toward Bush. The official poll tapes from those optical scan machines, however, show that Bush votes were added when the totals were reported. At least in Volusia, those added votes would explain the statistically unusual shift toward republican voting as shown in the referenced web site. Is it not reasonable to imagine that something similar happened in all the other optical scan counties? That would certainly explain the strange break with historical trends.
So lets sum up. We have an eight point swing from the exit polls showing Kerry comfortable winning Florida. Two universities publish reports outlining anomolies in the vote totals. An unexplained statistical swing in voting trends that effected only counties using optical scan machines is shown in Florida. Election officials are caught throwing out optical scan poll tapes that indicate votes were added to Bush's total in a manner that would explain the above swing.
But hey, don't worry, there is no need to investigate further for fraud. Its all just a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory.
I'm sorry, but I think this is a solution in search of a problem. The numbers are reported to the Secretary of State by the canvassing boards. Also, since I forgot to mention it... I believe you were citing the Ohio machine "preloaded" with votes as evidence of fraud. Let's not forget that it was the Republican party that filed the complaint about those preloaded votes... so to turn around now and accuse it of being a republican fraud attempt is illogical at best. And the counties using touch screen machines did not trend toward Bush. Go back and read that link I included in the last post.
The problem is not the numbers reported by the canvasing boards... those numbers are the ones that election officials were caught throwing out. Again, the corruption is farther up the chain of command than the canvasing boards, and that is why is potentially much more damaging.
A solution looking for a problem? Please explain to me, then, why the numbers on the official signed and dated poll tapes differed from the reported totals. Please explain why those differences favored only Bush in every single case. Please explain the panic and strange behavior of the election officials that were caught throwing out the poll tapes when they knew auditors were coming to view them. To me, this looks like a big problem that deserves further investigation. I am amazed that you do not feel the same.
As for the preloaded vote machines, I think the news story I am remembering came out of one of the eastern states (New Hampshire perhaps?), so perhaps we are talking about two different stories. Either way, vote fraud is vote fraud and should be investigated regardless of which side is doing it. Maybe you don't believe this, but I would be shouting just as loudly to investigate things even if the suspected fraud favored the Democrats.
I think you are still missing the point that while individual poll workers are unlikely to be corrupt, the election supervisors reporting the totals are appointed by the republican secretary of state. These people have been CAUGHT RED HANDED FAKING THE VOTE TOTALS. Those poll tapes signed by the local poll workers very likely have the correct totals as you say. But those tapes were thrown out by election supervisors farther up the chain of command and new numbers favoring Bush were used instead. Again, people were caught red handed doing this. The faked numbers favored Bush in every single precinct that was examinded.
Say all you want about democrats controlling the polling place. None of that changes the fact that the people reporting the totals were caught altering them.
Hey, I can understand you not wanting to believe corruption could happen at that level, particularly if it is the party you support. But if you care at all about the principal of democracy (which I believe should trump party loyalty) than you must admit this deserves further investigation. A complete audit of all Florida counties is called for.
You must not be very old or just very naive, elections have always contained a margin of fraud. This is nothing new in Chicago, every years hundreds of dead democrats manage to defy the reaper and vote.
Well, just to set the record straight, I am 37 years old, own a computer consulting company and commercial rental properties, and have been knocked around enough by life to know what just how untrustworthy the human animal is.:) Yes, I am very aware that isolated occasions of voter fraud always happen, and that generally they probably even out and don't effect the election.
But we are talking about something different here.
We are talking about potential 'systemic' fraud. Corruption of the machines that count the votes or corruption of the officials that report the totals presents a much larger danger than the individuals that register in multiple precincts or even the occasional corrupt poll worker that stuffs a ballot box.
The alarming thing about the Volusia county story is that, unlike earlier reports of vote problems, it seems to indicates systemic fraud, not an isolated incident.
I think you're missing the point that the counties that were using electronic voting were predominantly Democrat 'controlled' counties and as such would have democrat-leaning elections supervisor (they're elected in FL). Therefore the decision to use electronic voting and control of the machines would have been in the hands of Democrats. If the machines were tampered with, the logical beneficiary would be Kerry.
Actually, the decisions on what voting machines are used, how many are assigned to each precict, where the poll locations are, and the people assigned as election supervisors all falls under the authority of the Florida Secretary of State, a Republican appointed by governer Jeb Bush (the president's Brother). The vote counting was in the hands of Republicans, that is an established fact.
As for any tampering more logically favoring Kerry... I will point out again that the 'smoking gun evidence' found so far shows just the opposite. Every single precinct that was examined in Volusia county revealed that votes had been added for Bush. This was discovered by comparing the signed and dated Nov 2nd poll tapes that the election supervisors were caught red handed trying to throw away. This was caught on video tape with police present.
Good grief, what does it take before people acknowlege that we should at least investigate further!
Does that discount the possibility of fraud in this election, or suggest fraud in the last 6 as well?
Actually, the statistical study done at Berkely takes that whole 'Dixiecrat' phenomenon into account. It uses past voting trends and compares them to the recent election. The big news is not that the votes don't match party registration, but that the big variations from past behavior occur only in the precincts using electronic voting machines.
I, for one, believe in this electronic voting machine conspiracy crap. Sure, a few voting machines probably rigged the votes for Bush, but on the other hand, most likely other voting machines rigged it for Kerry. I think you are missing the point that the manufactures of the voting machines are all strong republican backers, and the two main swing states, Florida and Ohio, both have partisan republicans running the vote counting process. The Democrats would not even have the opportunity to rig the vote in any significant way in those states.
If you have not checked out the article I referenced earlier I really recommend it. It points to potential 'systemic' fraud that could add up to many hundreds of thousands of votes in florida alone. Repeat the tactic in a bunch of non-swing states just to pad the popular vote... and you have a recipe for a stolen election.
It helps when over third of the population is voting on touchscreen voting machines with no paper trail, particularly when they are manufactured by a company with strong republican ties, and a history of fraud and criminal activity.
I am not saying that it definetely happed, just that it is not impossible, and that the early signs of fraud are enough to justify further investigation. We are talking about the fundimental underpinnings of our democracy here. I say that is worth a little extra digging just be sure. The cost of being wrong is just too high.
What's with this post being scored as a 4? It's not even informative. I am very aware that/. readers are overwhelmingly a liberal bunch, but why not stick to discussing the facts instead of espousing "vast right wing conspiracy" theories that are running rampant with the Hollywood crowd?
Please cite exactly where these facts have been debunked. The examples I listed were from mainstream press stories. In most cases, the problems we are talking about have been acknowledged by the election officials. The only question is how much of it is fraud vs unintentional failures and how widespread is it - how much went undetected. Those questions can only be answered with an audit. The American public deserves no less.
If you are so confident the election was honest and correct, what is to be feared by an audit. It can only help restore public confidence in the system.
As for those pre-loaded votes being for Kerry instead of Bush, I could not find a news report that backs up your assertion, so I would welcome a reference if you have one. I will gladly admit I'm wrong on that detail if you do. Voter fraud should be a bi-partisan concern... we need to shine a spotlight on it regardless of which side is doing it.
And my original point is still valid. The reports coming out of Volusia county are the most damning evidence of voter fraud to come to light so far. This event was caught on video tape and witnessed by the police... so it is difficult to discount. It is certainly too early to shout that the election was definitely stolen, but this certainly raises serious concerns and undermines the confidence in the election for many. If the election was not stolen, then there is nothing to fear from an audit; it will simply restore confidence in the election process. How can that be bad thing?
What's to stop them from changing the code on enough of the machines to win? We'd never know what happens after we inspect the code. In the right area they COULD possibly win with only a handful of doctored machines.
It is already certain that vote fraud occured in an alarming number of isolated cases. The only question now is if it occured and went undetected in enough places to actually swing the election. Here are a few of the things we already know for certain:
In several districts, electronic voting machines were preloaded with thousands of votes for Bush before the election started. Where it was discovered, the machines were reset and did not effect the outcome. The question is, in how many districts did this go undetected because voter protection advocates were not there to check the machines.
In at least one case, a location in which only about 600 people voted recorded over 4000 votes for Bush. No explanation has been given for this, though it is likely another example of 'pre-loaded' machines.
In at least one local election, a manual recount of the ballots swung the vote total by a large amount compared to what the electronic vote machines had reported, enough to move the winner from the republican candidate to the democrat.
But the biggest smoking gun is in Florida's Volusia county where election offitials were caught red handed throwing out the official signed poll tapes from Nov 2nd. When these tapes were compared to the reported vote numbers, they showed that votes had been added to Bush's total IN EVERY SINGLE PRECINCT EXAMINED. If this was done in many more Florida precincts, it could explain the eight point swing between the exit polls showing Kerry winning and the official tally showing a Bush win. We must at least acknowledge the possibility, and insist on a full audit of the Florida results... not just a recount done by the same Florida partisans, but full, impartial audit.
Yeah, its amazing to see how many slacker college students appear for a kerry event. I wonder what percentage will actually vote? Your wishful thinking was a disease I had during clinton vs Dole in 96. Sorry to tell you, but the polls are not as favorable for Kerry as you think.
The poll numbers you point to back up point. It is basically a statistical tie well within the margin of error. If turnout is as high as many predict, it will add several points to Kerry's numbers and hand him the win. If turnout is mediocre, the election goes to Bush. Long lines at early voting, a huge influx of volunteers, massive ground game... these all point to high turnout. I'm not ready to declare victory, but there is definetely reason for Kerry supporters to be optimistic.
Of course as a cheesehead I am very happy the Packers won, but I am not counting on that to hand Kerry the election. Fortunately, there is another game that will decide it... it is called the election 'ground game'. In this game, armies of volunteers knock on doors, talk to their neighbors, drop off flyers, and give rides to the polls. It is grass roots politics at its finest.
The republicans seem to be finally getting into the ground game this year. Compared to previous elections, their ground team this year is very impressive. Unfortunately for them, the democratic and Kerry supporting groups are fielding a force that is probably four or five times larger. I've been talking to campaign veterans that have been doing this for over 30 years, and they describe the current groundswell of grasroots activism in support of Kerry with words like 'unprecedented' and 'staggering'.
It is also interesting to see the differences in how to ground game is run by both sides. The republican effort is pretty much all the RNC. It is top down, hierarchical, very organized. There are great many dedicated volunteers, but their actions are very cordinated by the campaign.
On the Kerry side, however, it is much more bottom up. There is a huge swath of liberal leaning non-profits and newly created ad-hoc citizen groups all doing their own part. The DNC itself is very experienced at the ground game and just by itself can put up a good fight against the RNC effort. Add all those third party groups to the mix, like MoveOn.org, ACT, the NAACP, the Seria Club, and newcomers like The League of Pissed of Voters... and you begin to see what the Republicans are up against.
Lets put it all in perspective for a moment. Gore was trailing in the polls by up to five points but ended up winning the popular vote due to unexpectedly high democratic turnout. Kerry is now polling about even with Bush, even ahead in some polls, going into the election. All indications are that the Democratic turnout will break records this year. To me, that looks like a Kerry win.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, since Karl did not have the security clearance to know about Plame's CIA status, he cannot likely be found guilty of treason or some of the more onerous crimes people have been accusing him of. He could still be found guilty of few things, just don't expect him really crash and burn over this. The bigger question for the investigators is likely 'who leaked it to Karl?'
Of course, letter of the law aside, it is still a nasty thing to knowingly reveal classified data (undermining our efforts against WMD proliferation) just for political gain. If that is what Rove did, Bush should fire his ass at a minimum. There is some lines you just don't cross.
Yup, I bet he was just chompin at the bit for the chance to vacation in NIGERIA! Get real. The only people suggesting Wilson's wife approved the trip are people in the administration trying to cover their collective asses. The director that approved Wilson already came forward and was most certainly not Plame. Wilson was a former ambassador to Africa working under the elder President Bush with numerous foreign government contacts and as such a logical pick for the job. Wilson's wife admittedly acted as the go-between in bringing the job to his attention... but she most certainly did not 'approve' him because she did not have that authority.
I half agree with you. It may be true that money
:)
cannot buy hapiness... but lack of money can sure
bring a lot of misery. I'll still pick a lower
paying job that I love over a sucky job that pays
more, but only if the job I love still brings in
enough to pay the bills.
Of course as an independent consultant I sometimes
bend my own rule. I'll take a short term sucky
job for a high enough rate if it means I can take a
really long vacation before accepting the next
consulting gig. For me, money is not about buying
more toys... it is about affording the free time
to play with the toys.
Later,
Thad
The big question is, does it include an Electronic Flight Bag that runs the Linux operating system as described in this Aviation Today article?
If you have any skill with the written word, try picking up a technical writing contract. It is unlikely you will land a full book deal on your first time out, but contributing writer jobs are obtainable with a little persistance. The nice thing about writing is that you set your own work schedule and work from home... it is the ultimate telecommuting job. As long as you don't agree to any overly aggressive deadlines, it works out really well as a 'side job'.
Cheers,
First of all, I'm sure the signs appear much worse than they actually are if you suffer from the sort of paranoia that drives these people to run around digging through peoples trash and make assumptions about exactly what they find there. That aside, why are you guys so insistent that the one oddball poll, the exit poll, which was known to have critical flaws in this election, was the correct one? It is an absolutely silly and laughable premise.
It seems you don't really understand the difference between exit polls and pre-election phone polls and why election specialists use exit polls as the bellweathers for fraud investigations. This 'one odball poll' is exactly the poll that should raise the warning flags when it disagrees with the final tally. This is exactly the standard we apply to other countries when we certify their elections... we use the exit polls to point out where we should investigate for voter fraud.
You call the exit polls flawed, but the reason given is that they disagree with the final tally. That is circular logic. Two different universities have poured over the numbers and found reason to suspect fraud. They recommend we investigate further. Police don't stop a murder investigation just because the smoking gun is not lying in plain site. If a death looks a little suspicious, they dig into it and make sure before closing the book on it.
It is obvious I will never convince you that further investigation is called for. Fortunately the government's General Accounting Office and other organizations do not agree with you. The investigations will go forward. It is unlikely it will overturn the election, but any fraud or unintentional failures they discover will certainly help us improve our democracy.
Whatever your political leanings, I encourage you to support legislation that improves our election system. Insist on a voter verified paper trail. Demand that the vote counting process be open and transparent, subject to third party observation at the time it occurs. Conservatives should feel insulted by the suggestion that they need to steal votes to win. The best way to deflate that argument is for Republican elected officials to champion election reform with even more energy than the Democrats. I suggest you contact your senate and house representatives and tell them just that.
This has been a fun debate. Take care, and have a good Thanksgiving. I'm off to visit relatives.
No, they didn't. Go look at the list of every national poll I linked. In the week prior to the election Bush was up in 11 of 15 polls, tied in 2, and Kerry won 2 of the 15.
:)
The majority of these were well within the margin of error, making it officially a 'dead heat' in the words of the pollsters themselves.
Yes, the exit polls are wrong. The election, which is a much more scientifically sound poll with about 120 million participants, is correct. Any suspicion otherwise is rooted in paranoia and fantasy.
The election is only the more scientific poll if it was actually free of massive fraud. There are warning signs that fraud occured, the questions is how much. What is so wrong with doing an audit to find out? It is the best way to shut up the tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists like me after all.
Also, when talking about exit polls, I think you are latching onto those early afternoon ones that weren't even supposed to be public because they were so innaccurate (you know, the ones that showed Kerry up 20 points in PA). Of course, as this dialogue progresses, your tendency to latch onto things is becoming more apparant.
The exit polls always start out rather innacurate and then become more accurate as the day continues. This is only natural as the sample size grows larger. Some people have made a big deal out of the 'exit polls' showing a big swing to Bush toward the end of the election, but this was because they began to replace the exit poll numbers with the actual reported totals as the precincts closed and their numbers came in. This was so the statewide prediction would be as accurate as possible, but it gave some the mistaken impression that the exit polls themselves had made a major shift, when really they showed a lead for Kerry the entire time.
The Berkeley study uses the raw exit poll numbers for the entire period. They are available for download if you are really curious. The exit poll numbers show Kerry winning Florida by five points (well outside the margin of error). Bush won by three points, an alarming eight point swing. A swing that large is considered a warning flag to look for fraud by our own specialists when certifying international elections (in places like the Ukrain for example). The Berkeley study is particularly interesting because it shows the vote total anomalies landing in very specific patterns related to the type of voting hardware used (i.e. paperless electronic vote machines).
I don't know why. That isn't how they historically break within the last 3 days.
The historical trend for quite some time is that the undecideds break for the challenger, at least that is the 'common wisdom' that was being spouted all over the media. In truth, there were not as many undecideds this time, so the newly registered probably played a bigger role. Several studies indicated that new registrations favored the democrats by healthy margins, particularly in Florida.
Hey, I did start this thread saying the election was stolen or that the results should be overturned, only that there was solid proof of fraud (specifically in Volusia county) and it should be investigated. Furthermore, the failure of the exit polls combined with error prone voting machines has undermined many people's confidence in this election. There is only one way to repair that. Audit the results, fix the problems we find, and make sure there is no reason to complain in the next election.
I would hope we could all agree that is a worthy goal.
Do they want you to come in as an independent contractor or work through a larger consulting company? That really makes a difference. If you work through another company in that sort fo 'temp to hire' arrangement, you are unlikely to get the higher pay that usually goes with a contracting job.
Being an idependent can have some great advantages, but only if you are willing to put some extra time in drumming up business, handling the billing, etc. Definetely get yourself a good accountant that can help you set up your own retirement account, health insurance, etc. Consider incorporating, even if you are the only employee in your business. There are some great tax and liability advantages, and it is not as difficult as some make it sound. You do need to file an separate tax return for the business, but your tax accountant can help you with that. There are a bunch of great tax advantages, particularly in matching contributions that the corporation pays into your retirement. Also, there is a broad range of tax deductions available to corporations but not sole proprietorships.
I've been an independent computer consultant for nearly a decade now. I incorporated in the first year and never regretted it. I've been dumping my money back into the company. A couple of years ago I purchased a commercial property through my corporation. I live in the upper apartment (renting it from my own corporation) and rent the out the rest of the building. As a commercial property, I can deduct more of the building expenses than if it I held the property as a personal asset.
Of course if you are only looking to get your foot in the door at a specific company, the above stuff might not apply. Being an independent is not for everyone. You need to be able to really sell yourself, know how to talk to manangement types, network and collect business contacts. You also need to set aside a war chest of funds to ride out those down times between contracts.
I will say that my experience as a independent contractor has been overwelmingly positive. I make a decent six figure income, have greater flexibility in my schedule, and have worked on a variety of interesting projects (right now I'm working on embeded Linux on a flatscreen avionics computer display). Your mileage may vary... so take this advice with the usual Internet grain of salt.
Cheers,
The exit polls were clearly flawed, and they are not sufficient to based your study upon.
m l, you will see that the exit polls are an extreme outlier. To use that data would be absurd. The fact that the exit polling data was so ridiculously far out of line with the rest of the polls is exactly why I, and many, many others, immediately smelled a rat when those completely unbelievable numbers came out early in the afternoon.
A claim like that without facts to back it up can be taken no more seriously than 'the election was clearly stolen.' That is why many are calling for an audit of the election... to find out what the truth really is.
If you look at all of the national polls taken in the month or so prior to the election, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.ht
Exit polls are historically much more accurate than the phone polls leading up to an election. Phone polls usually have a sample of about 1000 people and include registered and 'likely' voters, which is different from people 'certain' to vote. An exit poll typically has a sample of 10000 people and it consists of people who actually just voted. Exit polls almost always call the election within a two percent margin, and often within a half a percent. The only notable exceptions have been in places with proven voter fraud or, more recently, paperless voting machines.
The final phone polls showed the election a dead heat well within the final margin of error of 4 to 5 percent. The expectation was that undecideds and newly registered voters would break for Kerry. Also interesting is that the pollster John Zogby, who called the popular vote within a half a percent in 2000, called the election for Kerry this time. His number this time matched the exit polls but not the 'official numbers'. Add to that the recent university studies showing the weird changes in voter trends that occured only in paperless electronic voting areas, and you can see why many people are suspicious and saying we at least need to dig into this further.
Either the exit polls are wrong or the election is wrong. So far, I have seen no plausible explaination as to why the exit polls would be as wrong as they were. There is a plausible explaination for the vote count being wrong... fallible electronic voting machines. In isolated cases it has been PROVEN that they miscounted and altered elections. Given their history of problems, isn't it worth while that we do a full post mortem on this election so we can be confidence in future ones?
I don't think so. No totals are official until absentee ballots are counted. I don't think that there would be a poll-only total anywhere to be found... any totals officially available would be the combined polls and absentee.
:) Absentee ballots are totalled separately and then added in later for the final counts. Tbe public record request was specifically for the signed and dated election night poll tapes. These would never include any absentee ballots counted after November 2nd. The vote count from individual polling station is all part of the official record, as is the absentee ballot counts that happen later. I've actaully worked as a polling station observer, so I've seen the process in action.
Poll tapes record only those votes totaled on the voting machines at the polling station on election night... which is why they are called 'poll' tapes.
Also, where are you getting the idea that the tapes do not match the offical totals? I'm not accusing you of making anything up, but I didn't see anything about that in the article. What are the discrepancies that they are claiming and where are they documented?
I got it right from the article. It states, "When they compared the discarded, signed, original tapes with the recent printouts submitted to the state and used to tabulate the Florida election winners, Harris says a disturbing pattern emerged." As for hard numbers, I've made a request for the raw data from the tapes, but the crew is evidently busy auditing another county and has not gotten back to me.
I agree that paper ballots are absolutely the best option. I think that if kinks were worked out of the computerized systems they could be a good alternative, but at this point paper is not only the simplest, but the best as well. In my opinion, there is no reason why computer-based systems (touch-screen, etc) cannot be designed so that it simply is not possible to alter anything. There is no need to have the data available on a network, there is no need to allow software to be loaded onto the machine... I just don't understand why they have to have issues.
Agreed. We also use optical scan ballots here in Wisconsin, and I believe the have many advantages over touchscreens. They are easy to use, there is a built-in paper trail, and we need fewer machines per polling station.
Swapping votes? How in the hell did noone notice that "bug" before selling the things?
Actually, BlackBoxVoting demostrated this problem and a many more but most states went ahead and bought the machines anyway. A few listened. California actually decertified the machines and sued Diebold but only after one disaster of a midterm election.
I do, personally, think the notion that machines would be predisposed to cheat for a particular party simply because of the company that makes it is a silly one. I just don't see how a computer would be able to recognize that selection 'A' is the 'right guy' to cheat for... I imagine that these things can be used for other types of voting measures... ballot initiatives, etc... so there should simply be n number of options... party affiliation would (or should) certainly not be a recognizable piece of info from the machines perspective.
The thing is, it is usually Diebold technicians that have loaded the software and pre-configured the ballots before shipping the systems off to the counties. Local election officials have been gradually picking up the role of actually configuring the ballots, but most still lean heavily on the supplier to deliver pre-configured machines. If key people at Diebold are corrupt enough to engage in fraud, they certainly have the opportunity. Of course there is also the old saying, never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence. A little digging into the history of Diebold, and there is some evidence of the former, but plenty of the latter.
As for the vote swapping, you bring up exactly the points that I have been thinki
That could very well explain bags of discarded tapes. I admittedly don't know though. I don't think this group you cite is being taken very seriously though, because there has been ZERO coverage of this around here. And reading the piece you linked to, I did notice that the article is more suggestive than factual. And, frankly, I thought the explanation that they discarded ones were now-unneeded backups makes perfect sense.
The problem with the discarded tapes being backups is that the backups should still match the official reported totals... but those tapes don't.
And yes, you are right, the story is not getting much traction with mainstream press. I am a little suprised with that considering the history of BlackBoxVoting in covering the e-vote issue and the past attention they have gotten from the press, but on the other hand, sometimes these stories just take some time to move from the web sphere to traditional media. It only popped up a few days ago after all.
These people are just digging. They have no interest in "investigating" or "getting to the bottom"... their sole purpose is to deligitimze the President and erode the public's confidence in the electoral process. If groups like this hadn't exhibited a pattern of such unproductive behavior for the past 4 years, I might take them seriously. At this point, I believe their credibility is on par with that of Michael Moore. The fact that every kook leftist with a computer is floating ridiculous conspiracy theories doesn't help, either.
I disagree with your assesment. BlackBoxVoting.org has been digging into the e-voting issue for several years now, and they have been very focused on the failings of the technology and its vulnerability to fraud rather than attacking political candidates. They certainly have not been kind to Diebold Inc., but I feel confident they would be ripping into that company even if they had strong Democratic ties instead of Republican (I know I would).
As for eroding the confidence in the electoral process, the nature of the touchscreen voting machines have more to do with that than anything else. Don't blame the people that are simply getting the facts out. As a computer consultant with nearly 20 years experience, including working on embebeded touchscreen systems similar to these voting machines, I know a bit about the potentials and drawbacks of this technology... and I am deeply concerned about this issue. Optical scan and other paper trailed systems are still subject to fraud, but it is harder to pull off and more likely to be uncovered (as the Volusia country events seem to indicate). The parperless machines are a big concern, because failures or fraud can go completely undetected.
A case in point: In both Ohio and Indiana, glitches with touchscreen voting machines caused the party line votes for Democrats and Libertarians to be swapped in some counties. This actually tipped the balance in local elections until it was discovered. The only reason this was detected was because nobody would reasonably believe the Libertarians could receive that number of votes. If this glitch had swapped the Republican and Democrat votes in a close election, nobody would have ever known that it had happed.
It is interesting to note that the 'vote swapping' phenomenon is a vulnerability that BlackBoxVoting pointed out well before this election.
If I had to guess why the reported totals favored Bush over the poll tapes, I would say it is likely due to the fact that Bush had an enormous advantage in absentee ballots, which weren't counted until days later. Once again, it's a silly conspiracy theory and nothing more.
I'm talking specifically about the numbers reported on November 2nd by the poll tapes printed directly from the polling place machines at the close of voting. This is what was requested in the public records request.
Can you please link to whereever it is you are getting this misleading information? People "throwing out" vote totals? Please link. The preloaded voting machines were out of Pennsylvania, a state that John Kerry won handily, which renders it a non-issue. I do agree, though, that if there is legitimate voter fraud, it should be investigated and the offenders should be prosecuted regardless of who it helped or where it happened. I think those "preloaded" votes were satisfactorily explained. Trust me, when I first heard about them it set off big alarm bells with me as well.
OK, it is now obvious that you did not see the link I provided in the original post titled Vote Fraud Smoking Gun. Let me sumnarize it for you. Non-partison auditors made a public records request for the signed Nov 2nd poll tapes from Volusia county, They received unsigned poll tapes that were claimed to be reprints of the original tapes. They demanded the originals, and upon arriving at the records building where they were stored discovered panic filled election officials throwing out the signed and dated poll tapes. Upon comparing these tapes with the 'reprints' they discovered significant differences 'indicative of fraud' favoring Bush in every single precinct examined. Most of this was caught on video tape and police were even present for much of it, so this can hardly be discounted as baseless rumors.
I am not screaming that Bush stole the election, there is just not enough hard information to say that. But there is now solid evidence of major fraud in Florida - real evidence, not just statistical studies - and that means we should investigate further and find out how far the corruption reaches. Even if it did not effect the election this time, it is a serious problem that needs fixing. Let us not forget that localized voter fraud might not tip a Presidential election, but it certainly does (and has) tipped local elections and congressional races. My goal in making noise about this is not to overturn the current election, but to fix the system for the future.
Here that link is again
Go back and read that link I included in the last post.
I checked out the link, and it supports the case for the republican voter fraud discovered in Volusia County. Volusia used optical scan voting machines and thus was one of the counties that had an unexpected shift toward Bush. The official poll tapes from those optical scan machines, however, show that Bush votes were added when the totals were reported. At least in Volusia, those added votes would explain the statistically unusual shift toward republican voting as shown in the referenced web site. Is it not reasonable to imagine that something similar happened in all the other optical scan counties? That would certainly explain the strange break with historical trends.
So lets sum up. We have an eight point swing from the exit polls showing Kerry comfortable winning Florida. Two universities publish reports outlining anomolies in the vote totals. An unexplained statistical swing in voting trends that effected only counties using optical scan machines is shown in Florida. Election officials are caught throwing out optical scan poll tapes that indicate votes were added to Bush's total in a manner that would explain the above swing.
But hey, don't worry, there is no need to investigate further for fraud. Its all just a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory.
I'm sorry, but I think this is a solution in search of a problem. The numbers are reported to the Secretary of State by the canvassing boards. Also, since I forgot to mention it... I believe you were citing the Ohio machine "preloaded" with votes as evidence of fraud. Let's not forget that it was the Republican party that filed the complaint about those preloaded votes... so to turn around now and accuse it of being a republican fraud attempt is illogical at best. And the counties using touch screen machines did not trend toward Bush. Go back and read that link I included in the last post.
The problem is not the numbers reported by the canvasing boards... those numbers are the ones that election officials were caught throwing out. Again, the corruption is farther up the chain of command than the canvasing boards, and that is why is potentially much more damaging.
A solution looking for a problem? Please explain to me, then, why the numbers on the official signed and dated poll tapes differed from the reported totals. Please explain why those differences favored only Bush in every single case. Please explain the panic and strange behavior of the election officials that were caught throwing out the poll tapes when they knew auditors were coming to view them. To me, this looks like a big problem that deserves further investigation. I am amazed that you do not feel the same.
As for the preloaded vote machines, I think the news story I am remembering came out of one of the eastern states (New Hampshire perhaps?), so perhaps we are talking about two different stories. Either way, vote fraud is vote fraud and should be investigated regardless of which side is doing it. Maybe you don't believe this, but I would be shouting just as loudly to investigate things even if the suspected fraud favored the Democrats.
I think you are still missing the point that while individual poll workers are unlikely to be corrupt, the election supervisors reporting the totals are appointed by the republican secretary of state. These people have been CAUGHT RED HANDED FAKING THE VOTE TOTALS. Those poll tapes signed by the local poll workers very likely have the correct totals as you say. But those tapes were thrown out by election supervisors farther up the chain of command and new numbers favoring Bush were used instead. Again, people were caught red handed doing this. The faked numbers favored Bush in every single precinct that was examinded.
Say all you want about democrats controlling the polling place. None of that changes the fact that the people reporting the totals were caught altering them.
Hey, I can understand you not wanting to believe corruption could happen at that level, particularly if it is the party you support. But if you care at all about the principal of democracy (which I believe should trump party loyalty) than you must admit this deserves further investigation. A complete audit of all Florida counties is called for.
You must not be very old or just very naive, elections have always contained a margin of fraud. This is nothing new in Chicago, every years hundreds of dead democrats manage to defy the reaper and vote.
:) Yes, I am very aware that isolated occasions of voter fraud always happen, and that generally they probably even out and don't effect the election.
Well, just to set the record straight, I am 37 years old, own a computer consulting company and commercial rental properties, and have been knocked around enough by life to know what just how untrustworthy the human animal is.
But we are talking about something different here.
We are talking about potential 'systemic' fraud. Corruption of the machines that count the votes or corruption of the officials that report the totals presents a much larger danger than the individuals that register in multiple precincts or even the occasional corrupt poll worker that stuffs a ballot box.
The alarming thing about the Volusia county story is that, unlike earlier reports of vote problems, it seems to indicates systemic fraud, not an isolated incident.
I think you're missing the point that the counties that were using electronic voting were predominantly Democrat 'controlled' counties and as such would have democrat-leaning elections supervisor (they're elected in FL). Therefore the decision to use electronic voting and control of the machines would have been in the hands of Democrats. If the machines were tampered with, the logical beneficiary would be Kerry.
Actually, the decisions on what voting machines are used, how many are assigned to each precict, where the poll locations are, and the people assigned as election supervisors all falls under the authority of the Florida Secretary of State, a Republican appointed by governer Jeb Bush (the president's Brother). The vote counting was in the hands of Republicans, that is an established fact.
As for any tampering more logically favoring Kerry... I will point out again that the 'smoking gun evidence' found so far shows just the opposite. Every single precinct that was examined in Volusia county revealed that votes had been added for Bush. This was discovered by comparing the signed and dated Nov 2nd poll tapes that the election supervisors were caught red handed trying to throw away. This was caught on video tape with police present.
Good grief, what does it take before people acknowlege that we should at least investigate further!
Does that discount the possibility of fraud in this election, or suggest fraud in the last 6 as well?
Actually, the statistical study done at Berkely takes that whole 'Dixiecrat' phenomenon into account. It uses past voting trends and compares them to the recent election. The big news is not that the votes don't match party registration, but that the big variations from past behavior occur only in the precincts using electronic voting machines.
I, for one, believe in this electronic voting machine conspiracy crap. Sure, a few voting machines probably rigged the votes for Bush, but on the other hand, most likely other voting machines rigged it for Kerry.
I think you are missing the point that the manufactures of the voting machines are all strong republican backers, and the two main swing states, Florida and Ohio, both have partisan republicans running the vote counting process. The Democrats would not even have the opportunity to rig the vote in any significant way in those states.
If you have not checked out the article I referenced earlier I really recommend it. It points to potential 'systemic' fraud that could add up to many hundreds of thousands of votes in florida alone. Repeat the tactic in a bunch of non-swing states just to pad the popular vote... and you have a recipe for a stolen election.
It helps when over third of the population is voting on touchscreen voting machines with no paper trail, particularly when they are manufactured by a company with strong republican ties, and a history of fraud and criminal activity.
I am not saying that it definetely happed, just that it is not impossible, and that the early signs of fraud are enough to justify further investigation. We are talking about the fundimental underpinnings of our democracy here. I say that is worth a little extra digging just be sure. The cost of being wrong is just too high.
What's with this post being scored as a 4? It's not even informative. I am very aware that /. readers are overwhelmingly a liberal bunch, but why not stick to discussing the facts instead of espousing "vast right wing conspiracy" theories that are running rampant with the Hollywood crowd?
Please cite exactly where these facts have been debunked. The examples I listed were from mainstream press stories. In most cases, the problems we are talking about have been acknowledged by the election officials. The only question is how much of it is fraud vs unintentional failures and how widespread is it - how much went undetected. Those questions can only be answered with an audit. The American public deserves no less.
If you are so confident the election was honest and correct, what is to be feared by an audit. It can only help restore public confidence in the system.
Sorry, Chachi, the preloaded votes were for Kerry. Widely reported in the news. Your other 'facts' are wishful germs of urban legends, as well.
Odd that all these 'wishfull germs' were reported by mainstream media and have not been dispuited by aanyone. For example:
In nine counties, electronic vote machines count Democrat votes as Libertarian.
This relates to my earlier mention of a vote machine glitch tipping a local election.
As for those reports of extra votes, if this site can be believed, it might only be the tip of the iceburg.
As for those pre-loaded votes being for Kerry instead of Bush, I could not find a news report that backs up your assertion, so I would welcome a reference if you have one. I will gladly admit I'm wrong on that detail if you do. Voter fraud should be a bi-partisan concern... we need to shine a spotlight on it regardless of which side is doing it.
And my original point is still valid. The reports coming out of Volusia county are the most damning evidence of voter fraud to come to light so far. This event was caught on video tape and witnessed by the police... so it is difficult to discount. It is certainly too early to shout that the election was definitely stolen, but this certainly raises serious concerns and undermines the confidence in the election for many. If the election was not stolen, then there is nothing to fear from an audit; it will simply restore confidence in the election process. How can that be bad thing?
Cheers,
What's to stop them from changing the code on enough of the machines to win? We'd never know what happens after we inspect the code. In the right area they COULD possibly win with only a handful of doctored machines.
It is already certain that vote fraud occured in an alarming number of isolated cases. The only question now is if it occured and went undetected in enough places to actually swing the election. Here are a few of the things we already know for certain:
In several districts, electronic voting machines were preloaded with thousands of votes for Bush before the election started. Where it was discovered, the machines were reset and did not effect the outcome. The question is, in how many districts did this go undetected because voter protection advocates were not there to check the machines.
In at least one case, a location in which only about 600 people voted recorded over 4000 votes for Bush. No explanation has been given for this, though it is likely another example of 'pre-loaded' machines.
In at least one local election, a manual recount of the ballots swung the vote total by a large amount compared to what the electronic vote machines had reported, enough to move the winner from the republican candidate to the democrat.
But the biggest smoking gun is in Florida's Volusia county where election offitials were caught red handed throwing out the official signed poll tapes from Nov 2nd. When these tapes were compared to the reported vote numbers, they showed that votes had been added to Bush's total IN EVERY SINGLE PRECINCT EXAMINED. If this was done in many more Florida precincts, it could explain the eight point swing between the exit polls showing Kerry winning and the official tally showing a Bush win. We must at least acknowledge the possibility, and insist on a full audit of the Florida results... not just a recount done by the same Florida partisans, but full, impartial audit.
Yeah, its amazing to see how many slacker college students appear for a kerry event. I wonder what percentage will actually vote? Your wishful thinking was a disease I had during clinton vs Dole in 96. Sorry to tell you, but the polls are not as favorable for Kerry as you think.
The poll numbers you point to back up point. It is basically a statistical tie well within the margin of error. If turnout is as high as many predict, it will add several points to Kerry's numbers and hand him the win. If turnout is mediocre, the election goes to Bush. Long lines at early voting, a huge influx of volunteers, massive ground game... these all point to high turnout. I'm not ready to declare victory, but there is definetely reason for Kerry supporters to be optimistic.
Of course as a cheesehead I am very happy the Packers won, but I am not counting on that to hand Kerry the election. Fortunately, there is another game that will decide it... it is called the election 'ground game'. In this game, armies of volunteers knock on doors, talk to their neighbors, drop off flyers, and give rides to the polls. It is grass roots politics at its finest.
The republicans seem to be finally getting into the ground game this year. Compared to previous elections, their ground team this year is very impressive. Unfortunately for them, the democratic and Kerry supporting groups are fielding a force that is probably four or five times larger. I've been talking to campaign veterans that have been doing this for over 30 years, and they describe the current groundswell of grasroots activism in support of Kerry with words like 'unprecedented' and 'staggering'.
It is also interesting to see the differences in how to ground game is run by both sides. The republican effort is pretty much all the RNC. It is top down, hierarchical, very organized. There are great many dedicated volunteers, but their actions are very cordinated by the campaign.
On the Kerry side, however, it is much more bottom up. There is a huge swath of liberal leaning non-profits and newly created ad-hoc citizen groups all doing their own part. The DNC itself is very experienced at the ground game and just by itself can put up a good fight against the RNC effort. Add all those third party groups to the mix, like MoveOn.org, ACT, the NAACP, the Seria Club, and newcomers like The League of Pissed of Voters... and you begin to see what the Republicans are up against.
Lets put it all in perspective for a moment. Gore was trailing in the polls by up to five points but ended up winning the popular vote due to unexpectedly high democratic turnout. Kerry is now polling about even with Bush, even ahead in some polls, going into the election. All indications are that the Democratic turnout will break records this year. To me, that looks like a Kerry win.
It's allready done. Go to http://www.mirrordot.org Have fun!
Very cool! Thanks for the info. Mod that post up.