Did Anonymous really Save-the-Vote in Ohio? .... REALLY???

[bvar22]

I don't care.
In the grand scheme of things, whether or not Anonymous stepped in at the last minute and prevented Rove and his minions from Hacking-the-Vote doesn't really matter.

Despite the internecine battles currently revolving around this issue on DU,
we will NEVER really know whether or not Anonymous Saved-the-Vote in Ohio,
and THAT is of the utmost importance.

We do NOT have the means to determine whether the vote was hacked or unhacked!
THAT should scare the pants off of everybody, not just on DU, but across the nation.
Let me repeat:
We do NOT have the means to determine whether the vote was hacked or unhacked!

The important fact is that elections in the United States have been removed from the hands of The People and given to private For Profit corporations. These corporations use secret, proprietary software to log, count, tally, and report how YOU voted. If you, as a private citizen, ask to examine the computers or software that counted the votes,
you will be told, "Sorry. That is a secret."

The most important of our Civil Responsibilities is no longer accountable to The People, but to a board of directors.
There is NO avenue by which The People can verify the vote.
We are told that we must take-the-Word of Private For Profit Corporations that our vote was counted fairly.

Elections in Venezuela, Iraq, and most 3rd World Countries are MORE Transparent and Verifiable than what passes for elections in the USA,
and THAT is what is important.

Whether Anonymous actually Saved-the-Vote in Ohio or not doesn't matter to me.
What matters is that because of his claim, people ARE talking about how insecure our elections really are.

Over 92% of the American People support Transparent, Verifiable elections.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446445

WHY must we continue to have Secret Vote Counting and Unverifiable "Privatized" Elections?

Thank You, Anonymous, for helping to make public how ridiculously opaque and unverifiable our privatized elections really are!

[center][/center]

[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Coyotl]

1. We DO have the means to determine whether the vote is hacked

We don't have the means to verify every unfounded claim any yahoo wants to post on the WWW

Jesus Fucking Christ = Restoring Reason to Election Integrity Madness
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021851707

[xfundy]

2. We do? Care to explain it?

I agree completely with the OP.

[JohnnyRingo]

69. In Ohio we do.

There is a paper trail on every Diebold machine in the state, and the paper count can be verified at any time over the next few years.

See my explaination of the voter machine procedure in our state here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1857009

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. We do?

First question. How many elections, yes you read right, happened on November 6th for President of the United States? Clue, that is part of the problem, and as far as oh is concerned the OP is correct.

[bvar22]

4. Do you have a proprietary interest in ESS?

You behave as if you do.

What possible objection could you have against an open discussion about the vulnerabilities of our privatized elections?

[FreeBC]

58. The difference between Vegas slots and Electronic Voting Machines (pic)

[Pbs1914]

63. Great Comparison!

And to top it off, Mitt Romney's SON just happened to own some of the machines in one of the most important Ohio districts. Both had nothing to do with the other I'm sure. Just one of those quirky happenstance occurances in the mold of "damn it's a small world, picture us runnning into each other a continent away."

[bvar22]

68. Thank You.

Great Graphic.
...stealing it as I type for further distribution!


[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]

[reusrename]

107. Outstanding graphic.

I'll watch this spot to see if any of our reality deniers have enough guts to comment on it.

[ElboRuum]

29. How would we do this?

Serious question.

I have heard of no way thus far how this would be determined. Please, enlighten us.

[EOTE]

34. You want facts?

Hysterical emotion is so much more entertaining. I don't think you'll get much other than that from this particular poster.

[ElboRuum]

42. Yeah, I kinda do want some facts.

And I believe your assessment correct that facts from this poster are not forthcoming.

[JohnnyRingo]

72. Here are some first hand facts on electronic voting in Ohio

Most people professing a conspiracy of "back door" programs and incredible movie style hacks are repeating 2004 conspiracy theories.

See my detailed explaination of Ohio's 2012 electronic voting accountability procedure here and decide for yourself if there is any validity that "Big Brother" has taken over our elections and preventing accountability:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1857009

[ElboRuum]

99. Interesting explanation.

Thanks for that.

In response to that, though, I would simply offer up that while Ohio may do this now, others don't. In the absence of the ability to verify an election in its entirety, the system still offers up opportunity for tampering.

What is being done in OH should be the standard for e-voting across the country.

[randome]

100. Unfortunately, that's normally seen as a state's rights issue.

So it's more difficult to get everyone on board with something consistent and trustworthy.

[reusrename]

108. Unfortunately, he's also wrong.

This subthread in a monster thread gives an explanation.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1857208

[ElboRuum]

122. Actually...

...your points in that subthread are being refuted according to the methodology presented.

[reusrename]

125. I haven't seen any legitimate criticism.

I'd be very interested if someone were proposing some alternate view of the universe, some new overarching property of math or physics that would refute the evidence.

I would very interested in that.

[ElboRuum]

126. Funny...

I am proposing an alternate universe altogether. One in which one can say nothing happened when it did and be considered factually correct.

[reusrename]

133. This is a progression that the prophet Orwell spoke of.

We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. - George Orwell

[heaven05]

38. your reasoning?

okay.

[Coyotl]

45. Odd many respond to this post without realizing that ANON claims to determine Rove is doing it

Anon claims to have the means to determine Rove is hacking, but these posters don't believe the capability exists

What are you going to believe? Noone except Anon can do that? Why don't people see the giant abysses of logic in stories like this one?

[sabrina 1]

59. Never mind Anon. You have made a stunning statement, ie, that we CAN verify the vote.

Care to explain then why, regardless of all the efforts to do so have failed due to the fact that, incredible as it is, the software in those machines is proprietary, putting the interests of Corps ahead of the interests of Democracy?

I am very interested in this new information you have just revealed.

[Coyotl]

77. Never mind me, if Whoever/Anon made a stunning statement, ie, that they CAN ...

Let them prove their claim. Why don't you ask for that, and how they do it?

[bvar22]

62. That is a Strawman.

You stated:

[font color=red]"Anon claims to have the means to determine Rove is hacking, but these posters don't believe the capability exists

What are you going to believe? Noone except Anon can do that? Why don't people see the giant abysses of logic in stories like this one?"[/font]
--post #45 by Coyotl

[/font]
#1)[font color=red]"these posters don't believe the capability exists"[/font]
Who has said THAT.
Please provide a link.

#2)[font color=red]" Noone except Anon can do that"[/font]
Again, WHO has said that?
Please provide a link.

[font color=red]" the giant abysses of logic"[/font]
Ironic that you would use this phrase in a post constructed entirely of Logical Fallacies.

Do you regularly just make stuff up,
or is that something you are doing just for this thread?

[Coyotl]

81. If the Fake Anon video producers have given this more thought

they might have something more convincing. But, apparently a Strawman is all you need if people want to believe something. People are readily believing that this particular poor-quality video claimant to being Anon can determine if someone is hacking the vote, but if i say we can determine such, I am not believed.

Go figure which is the Strawman, the guy with the straw pile or the guy with the matches.

[bvar22]

94. #1 You REALLY should Google: "Strawman Logical Fallacy"...

...before embarrassing yourself further.

#2) I clearly stated in the OP, and numerous times in this thread that
I do NOT care whether Anon really DID save the election.

The Relevant Fact is that it can NOT be proved that Anon did or didn't.

Poor quality videos have NOTHING to do with my OP.
I CAN prove that by making this claim, Anon HAS pointed to the vulnerability of our Privatized,
Corporate Owned, Secret, Proprietary, No Public Accountability, Unverifiable Elections,
[font size =4]and for THAT, I applaud Anon!
THAT was BRILLIANT![/font]

If you want to argue whether Anon actually Unhacked-the-Vote you should go to another thread where THAT is being discussed, because THAT is NOT the topic here.
Good LUck with your "case",
because due to the Privatized, Unverifiable nature of our elections,
you can NOT Prove It one way or the other,
and THAT is The Problem!

[reusrename]

110. When is feeding time over for these folks?

I think it should end now!

[sabrina 1]

54. So we could have verified the votes in 2000 and 2004 after all? I know this was

something many Democrats wanted to do, so can you explain why it was not done? Or are you claiming that the 2000 and 2004 elections were legitimate and Bush was fairly elected after all?

[Coyotl]

89. The same way your so-called Anon verified that Rove was going to hack, of course

Unless, of course, you are arguing Anon/Whoever can't do it?

[sabrina 1]

93. I see you are trying to avoid answering my question. So I will ask it again.

You have made a stunning statement that we CAN verify the results of elections on those machines. My question, which for some reason you are avoiding was 'so we COULD have verified the 2000 and 2004 elections after all?

Please share this new information with us. We have been asking for verifiable voting machines for over a decade now, and if we finally got them, that is news to me.

[sabrina 1]

143. Anon are irrelevant. You said we could have verified the votes in 2000

and 2004. That was news to me considering we know that those machines have, insane though it is, proprietary software. So are you retracting that claim and agreeing that we have no way to verify votes anywhere those machines are in use?

You seem to have avoided the question.

[Coyotl]

144. I wrote:

"We DO have the means to determine whether the vote is hacked"

[Pbs1914]

55. and yet

here is potentially another of the unamed (don't want to get my post hidden trimvariate of posters on another similar topic thread stating how much they dont care about said topic, and by extention, the potential existence of oppossition efforts towards election fraud. Hmm on an unrelated note. I wonder if I went to FR and had 1,000 posts in little over 30 days and then started with a gradual leftward lean, would the post count matter to them, seeing as though I had only been there 30 days? Just thoughts I sometimes ponder.

[reusrename]

111. Yeah, but now we've got him talking to himself in public!

[Exultant Democracy]

131. Yes they are called exit polls and they indicate vote tampering in 2004

Exit polls are the gold standard and when they are as far off as they were in Ohio in 2004 it indicates massive vote tampering.

[liberalmuse]

5. Yes.

In the alternate universe in my head, Anonymous dispersed a nanovirus into the computer system which was able to attach itself to the "experimental patches". This nanovirus was able to instantly recognize and flip back Obama votes that Rove and his minions had flipped for Romney.

[FSogol]

16. Anonymous is also keeping all the wild tigers off of my street in suburban Virginia.

My evidence? No Tigers!

Thanks Anonymous!

[ProSense]

21. Pic Of The Moment: QUESTION: How Old Is The Earth?

Pic Of The Moment: QUESTION: How Old Is The Earth?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101780897

He could be right (wing).

[MADem]

151. Some guy is taking them away in a lifeboat--he must be a member of the Anon Club!

[randome]

17. Did you ever watch Independence Day? IT CAN HAPPEN!!

[bvar22]

67. Actually, I don't believe that Flying Saucers and Aliens represent a credible threat.

You may continue to believe that they are,
but I am more concerned with the very REAL threat to our democracy presented by Privatized, Corporate Controlled, Unverifiable Elections.

When Venezuela and Iraq have more transparent, verifiable election systems,
then we have a problem.

Please PM me when the Flying Saucers attack.
I will be busy with more immediate threats until then,
but I am glad you are watching the skies.
...very reassuring that you have that one covered.

--bvar22

[randome]

73. Here you go!

[liberal N proud]

6. We had better care if either of these things happened

We deserve to know and must start demanding the facts on election integrity.

Not caring is like saying saying you don't care who won the election!

No one should be allowed to buy or tamper with the election results.

[bvar22]

7. No. You missed the point.

The POINT is that it COULD have happened,
and that is NOT acceptable.

If it CAN happen, it WILL happen,
and THAT is the problem that we NEED to be addressing.

Our elections should have NEVER been given over to private corporations with secret computers.

[RomneyLies]

8. .

[RepublicansRZombies]

10. perfect response from you*

Last edited Tue Nov 20, 2012, 02:54 PM - Edit history (1)

thank you for illustrating who you are

* this coming from the person all over every thread about anonymous/Rove telling us to move on, nothing to see...now they are here rolling their eyes on the very idea of election integrity. 'What a bore, who cares if they can steal elections'

Why doesn't this person go to another thread about another topic then if they care so little about this topic?

[bvar22]

18. a response completely void of substance,

that offers no cogent rebuttal is a perfect response according to you?

No....Thank You for perfectly representing the Voice of the Opposition to Transparent, Verifiable, Publicly Owned Elections.

[ElboRuum]

31. The needle on my sarcasm detector twitched...

...very faint reading but it might have been.

[RepublicansRZombies]

32. perfect response for illustrating who they are

sorry, I thought that was clear.

This person is all over the other threads telling people how stupid this topic is, nothing to see in the Anonymous/Rove deal....and now the topic of election integrity in general gets a 'roll eyes'

This person seriously doesn't care about election integrity and wants everyone to know it, on every thread.

It's weird how much they care about not caring.

[bvar22]

98. Oops.

[font size=1 color=gray]My bad.
Just ignore me.[/font]

[sabrina 1]

92. So you're okay with easily hackable voting machines? Or are you saying you totally trust

Corporate Republican owned, voting machines that no one can check if there are problems, because the software for some insane reason, is proprietary?

Do you believe that Bush was legitmately elected in 2000, in 2004?

[RepublicansRZombies]

9. and now is the perfect time to unite with Republicans on this

They were accusing us of stealing the election electronically before voting even started.

If they can point the finger, it they have any understanding whatsoever...now is the time to fix this bullshit.

Hand counted paper ballots.

It's not that hard.

Most precincts have less than 1000 voters.

This would take an hour to count, and another hour to recount.

C'mon what bullshit is it that we need electronic machines!?

[randome]

11. Paper ballots are easily 'lost'.

IMO, we need electronic machines that print out the vote, a voter examines it then drops it into a locked box. If the machines and manual recount match, the election is good.

That was RobertEarl's suggestion, not mine, but I think it's a good one.

[bvar22]

13. Paper Ballots are NOT "easily lost"...

..when they are placed in transparent ballot boxes in full public view with live video surveillance feed to the Internet during Single Day Voting until they are counted and the election certified.

Vote-by-Mail ballots are easily lost.

[byeya]

19. Paper ballots are NOT easily lost and should be subjected to the chain of custody requirements

that evidence in criminal trails is subject to.
It's not hard; we've been doing it for decades; we evidence cutodians and training regimens for them.

[randome]

39. They've been 'lost', 'misplaced' and, in some cases, deliberately modified.

It happens. Do we need a better system. Of course. Unfortunately that's a state's rights issue and not easily enforceable.

[randome]

40. Fine. Get Congress to mandate this across the country and I'm good with it.

[bvar22]

71. Thank You!

THAT, sir, IS The Problem.
Our Congress, Republicans & Democrats, seems unconcerned that our elections have been given to Private, For Profit, Accountable to the Board of Directors ONLY, Corporations.
You have to go waaaaayyy out on the Fringe Left Wing to find a Democrat willing to talk about it in public,
and HE got "redistricted".
(Hmmm. Lesson for others?)

It is Up-to-US to raise Holy Hell,
STAND Together in Solidarity with Common Cause,
and demand the Congress address our grievance....

...unless you are OK with Privately Owned, Unverifiable Elections.

[Spryguy]

123. *Vomit*

Unite with Repigs? Are you out of your mind? They are the ones stealing elections, they always have been, they always will be. That's like uniting with Nazi's to see who is murdering all the Jews!!!!


Besides, Repigs are fast becoming obsolete; we're finally cresting the point where we don't have to give a damn about what they say or think anyway.

[WillyT]

12. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[ProSense]

14. Silliness

Did Anonymous really Save-the-Vote in Ohio? .... REALLY???

I don't care.
In the grand scheme of things, whether or not Anonymous stepped in at the last minute and prevented Rove and his minions from Hacking-the-Vote doesn't really matter.

Despite the internecine battles currently revolving around this issue on DU,
we will NEVER really know whether or not Anonymous Saved-the-Vote in Ohio,
and THAT is of the utmost importance.

We do NOT have the means to determine whether the vote was hacked or unhacked!

It doesn't matter. There is no such thing as evidence and science. What really matters is creating the impression that we're just as loony as the RW when it comes to believing unsubstantiated claims.

Score!

On edit:

So might this have really been the reason for Karl Rove’s shock on election night? Under the guise of sophisticated get out the vote operation, had Rove and the Republican Party actually built up a massive system to steal the Ohio election, just like in 2004, only to have it thwarted at the last minute by a group of computer hackers?

If this is true, then the implications are enormous and could take down the entire Republican Party and finally wake Americans up to the fact that our privatized vote system is shockingly flawed and insecure.

In their press release, Anonymous concludes, “We have a warning for Karl – sail again at your own peril. We may just put all the evidence into a tidy little package and give it to a painfully bored nemesis hanging out in a certain embassy in London.”

In an era of internet lulz and digital false flags, we must demand proof for these sort of claims made by Anonymous. But given Karl Rove’s history with elections in Ohio and the known vulnerabilities with our corporate owned electronic voting machines, there may be both smoke and fire with these election night allegations.

That’s why it’s vitally important for Anonymous to release any information or evidence it has about this plot to not just Julian Assange, but to law enforcement authorities as well. Otherwise, the alleged democracy-saving actions of the hacktivist group will instead be regarded as useless internet antics, relegated to the dustbins of history.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1853363

[bvar22]

23. Silliness?

Do you ever read the stuff you Cut & Paste?

From your own post"

"But given Karl Rove’s history with elections in Ohio and the known vulnerabilities with our corporate owned electronic voting machines, there may be both smoke and fire with these election night allegations. "

Which is EXACTLY the point of my OP.
THIS is the reason I give kudos to Anonymous,
for making MORE public the fact that there IS a BIG problem with these machine and Privatized elections.
Thank You for joining with me in pointing out this problem.

You still have time to add your Recommend,
and edit your post to remove your embarrassing comments.

[ProSense]

25. Oh please,

"THIS is the reason I give kudos to Anonymous,
for making MORE public the fact that there IS a BIG problem with these machine and Privatized elections."

...unsubstantiated claims are not going to spur change. The claim is already being written off as ridiculous, not because of the lack of evidence, but because it was gibberish.

Hartmann's point is: "Otherwise, the alleged democracy-saving actions of the hacktivist group will instead be regarded as useless internet antics, relegated to the dustbins of history. "

[bvar22]

76. Ducking he issue agin.

Was it YOU who posted:
[font size=3]"But given Karl Rove’s history with elections in Ohio and the known vulnerabilities with our corporate owned electronic voting machines, there may be both smoke and fire with these election night allegations. "[/font]?

Why YES. It was you,
once again posting something that actually discredits your own post!
You really should be more careful about what you cut & paste,
...at least read it before posting it.

As for your "opinion", it has no merit.
The MORE that this issue is talked about,
the more the Powers of the Establishment (you) try to marginalize Anonymous,
the MORE attention is drawn to the vulnerability of our Private, Corporate Owned, Unaccountable, Unverifiable elections.


[font size=3]"But given Karl Rove’s history with elections in Ohio and the known vulnerabilities with our corporate owned electronic voting machines, there may be both smoke and fire with these election night allegations. "[/font]---posted by Prosense in earlier post.

...and THAT was the point of the OP.

Thank You for your help!

[Coyotl]

48. How can you ever know if it was Anonymous or not?

So why not call it what it is, an internet post by an unidentified person. Gee, ever wonder what they have to hide?

[starroute]

56. "It wasn't Anonymous ... It was an unidentified person"

Just what do you think Anonymous is?

Anonymous is nothing but unidentified persons -- any of whom has the right to speak in the name of Anonymous. If other Anons agree, they were doing it right. If other Anons say, "No, this person is saying things in our name that are false or pernicious," they were wrong.

So far, I haven't seen any Anons disavowing this letter. That suggests to me it's as "official" as such things get.

[bvar22]

86. The point of the OP is..

...that it is unimportant if it was Anon or not.
You might have picked up that clue when I stated "I don't care".
What IS important is that we DON"T KNOW, and CAN"T Prove It one way or the other.

...did that part go over your head?

Do you want me to explain it again?

[forestpath]

52. K&R

[zappaman]

15. No

No, they didn't.
But let's start yet another thread on DU just so we can look even more foolish for embracing bullshit.

[Coyotl]

50. And let's keep starting new threads until there is one without a

disagreement

[sabrina 1]

103. No, let's just kick this one because some of us progressives actually like

to keep important discussions as centered as possible.

[99Forever]

20. K&R

[byeya]

22. This thread was started to point out that our voting results are not verifiable and transparent

and that they should be. We have the means to do so cheaply and easily and now is the time to begin the process to guarantee each persons' vote is counted for the person he or she voted for.

[bvar22]

24. Thank You.

It is amazing how quickly threads can be hi-Jacked, distorted with minutia, and hi-jacked with Personal Agendas.

[byeya]

26. Yes I am afraid that you are right about the highjacking. I think we all remember Waukasha(sp?)

County, Wisconsin, and the bags of ballots that were not secured and yet were still allowed to be counted. And, I believe, some ballots were even in an election official's garage.
Whatever, the USA has the means to do a whole lot better in the area of ballot security and election transparency and the means are at hand; the means have been tested and are simple to use and understand.

[RepublicansRZombies]

41. and the bags came back overstuffed, ripped, and with the wrong numbers

The very first bag the election judges pulled out had the wrong identification number, different than the election judges had recorded on election night.

They bags were so stuffed they were ripped open...I'm sure someone has the pictures here. It was what you would expect to see if someone was stuffing the ballot bags.

It was insulting how obvious they were and they still got away with it, because the same types of people were here telling us to shut up about it because we had no proof.

[byeya]

47. Thanks for the reminder of how truly blatant and horrible the performance of "our" officials

were in that county. That alone should have been enough to have the two Party's say, halt, time-out, we can't let this crapola continue.

[RepublicansRZombies]

65. Imagine if Kathy Nickolaus was a Dem doing that to the Republican party...

That would be completely unacceptable. They would be irate, screaming at the top of their lungs 'How obvious could we be!'

It would be all over the liberal news...

They were accusing us of fraud this election, maybe we need to do it back to them so we can get some action on the situation.

[Vincardog]

27. Exactly. Ban BBV and the point is mute.

[polichick]

28. And the U.S. goes around the world telling others how to run elections...

What a joke!

k&r

[Coyotl]

51. And we sell them votibng machines that they don't know how to program without our right-wing corps

Nothing wrong with that picture, move on now, not invented to overthrow foreign governments, keep moving, move on, ... LOOK, look over there, terrorists

[snooper2]

30. Anonymous hacked Kroger

So my Kroger Plus Shoppers Card would give me double the savings!

[Egalitarian Thug]

33. Been hoping someone would point this out. Thank you. K&R

[OldDem2012]

35. Excellent points, but why do some DU posters want to shut off all discussion on this topic? nt.

[RC]

60. Too many here are self defined as Democrats, when they are actually DINO's.

The are not actually Liberal or Progressive.
But you knew that.

[stonecutter357]

87. K&R

concern troll?

[laundry_queen]

146. It's baffling isn't it? nt

[heaven05]

36. +10000

thanks for logic.

[ElboRuum]

37. I cannot detect any lack of truth in what you posted.

I don't get the hostility around this issue. We've been saying, quite rightly and correctly since HAVA was enacted and the e-vote showed up that this lack of transparency around election represents a distinct, palpable threat to our democracy.

You are precisely correct in saying that it doesn't fundamentally matter whether the vote was hacked and then unhacked or whatever the situation may be. Lacking direct evidence, we must avail ourselves again of the reality that the opaque manner in which we hold our elections these days precisely and exactly PREVENTS validation of any election with any reasonable assurance.

I'm not averse to Anonymous providing proof that some action was taken on their part to prevent Rove and Co. from doing whatever it is they were going to do, that would, of course lead many currently unconvinced that our elections are susceptible to tampering from outside agencies. However, what I do not require is this evidence to know that the lack of transparency coupled with the lack of a paper trail in many states is incipiently dangerous to the legitimacy of the vote.

[DonCoquixote]

43. Here is what gets lost in the shuffle

The idea that, for a national election, 50 different processes are used to count and safeguard the vote is a problem in and of itself. You simply have too many chefs spoiling the broth, 50 in fact, each and every one trying to use the process for it's own desires. Even if there were no corporations involved, the idea that 50 different methods of voting ensures confusion at best.

I have no problem with States using their own methods for state elections; you want to elect a Governor or Senator, by all means, use your methods, and keep your state election officials, but when you affect me, now I have a right to have some say in how you do things.Yes, make a national election system for national elections, use a paper ballot, though there is no reason it cannot be a scantron like we have been using since junior high school. Break out the No.2 pencils.

I say this from Florida, the state that went from kingmaker to "Thank God it was decided before we had to worry about Florida." We voted Blue, but to a large part, it was because the ham-handed tactics to exclude voters backfired. Of course, if Ohio was counted for Romney, there would have been massive MSM pressure on Obama to concede before Florida was counted, especially as the GOP was already hearing that Democratic turnout was much bigger than expected. Of course, that fact had NOTHING to do with the slow way our votes were counted (sarcasm.)

[laundry_queen]

147. +1

Federal elections should have federal guidelines.

[bleever]

44. It's amazing that stating that our elections are unverifiable is open to debate.

Looking at some of the responses here, it's pretty clear that a lot of people let their knee-jerk reactions to hot-button topics derail their ability to simply pay attention.

The whole point you're making is that it should be a very simple matter to prove what did or didn't happen. This includes all the scenarios involving any hacking by anyone, no matter how far-fetched.

But it's not. Hell, I could posit that the Flying Spaghetti Monster flipped an equal number of votes for each side, and as ridiculous as that may be, no one can disprove it.

And that is what's really nuts here.

[Norrin Radd]

75. I agree.

[backscatter712]

46. As a member of Anonymous, I am keeping America safe from velociraptors!

No incidents in 71 million years!

[randome]

49. We thank you for your service!

[UCmeNdc]

53. The Machines in Ohio can be hacked without a trace

&feature=colike

[bahrbearian]

64. Good Video , " and that is realty"

[JohnnyRingo]

157. That machine is a Diebold Accutron TS from 2004.

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2012, 04:03 PM - Edit history (1)

Ohio now uses the Accutron TSx with a paper printout that is generated while the voter watches. The printer is located to the right of the touch screen. That paper roll is stored at each of Ohio's 88 counties for two years in case of a dispute or recount.

According to the video, the transmitter they installed has a range of a half mile, so a would be hacker would have to be outside every precinct to affect the state's election. Now you're talking about at least a hundred plumbers with sworn loyalty to Karl Rove. There aren't even that many people who like KarlRove, let alone be willing to go to prison for him.

The machine they worked with is the old model because those guys are not going to walk into a county board of elections and take a machine we currently vote on. I can hear that conversation:

"We concerned citizens want to take one of your voting machines for testing".
"OK, take that one over there, but don't open it up and install any hacking hardware".

Hahaha

To see how every voting machine in Ohio works, and how each one of them provides the county it's in with a hard paper ballot, see this link:

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/Upload/elections/votingsystems.aspx?page=25056#

If paper ballots aren't secure enough, I'd like to know what would satisfy you that the 2012 election was above board and unhackable.

[NightOwwl]

57. Anonymous would sell their mothers to the devil

if it would bring them notoriety.

I'll be looking for the "Anonymous is dead to me" threads when they claim credit for something that goes against the values of those now fawning all over them.

Personally, I credit the real voters and the real people who worked months to see this re-election effort succeed.

[RC]

70. So, you are saying that voting machines, own and programed by admitted Republicans, on the record

as working to electing as many Republicans to office as they can, using proprietary (read secret) firmware and software is OK with you?

Florida even has a law that only the results from their electronic voting machines and tabulators count as valid votes. The paper ballots cannot be used as votes in any recount. Is that OK with you also?
Without any real transparency, how can we really know?

[NightOwwl]

85. I didn't say any of that.

I said Anonymous loves notoriety above all.

And what better way to accomplish this than to claim they foiled the plans of the nefarious Karl Rove, et al so they can take credit for the election win. Especially when they don't have to back it up with proof.

I think it is disrespectful to everyone who stood in line for hours to vote and to the people who worked tirelessly to get that vote out.

But if you want to credit a nameless, faceless organization who doesn't show a shred of proof, that is your right.

[bvar22]

91. Go back and read the OP.

I gave Anon credit for helping make the issue public,
and don't care whether they actually did it or not.

I am GLAD Anonymous used their "notoriety" to assist in a good cause,
drawing attention to the vulnerability of our Privatized, Unverifiable Elections.

I've been screaming about it since HAVA, and have been unable to gain the traction that Anon did.

Kudos to Anon!

[Rockyj]

127. Reposting here:Thom compares 2004 & 2012 elections:

[link:

|

[sabrina 1]

90. Well, I will never declare anyone who is telling the truth, no matter how inconvenient, dead to me.

I credit those who were prepared for more election fraud for their efforts this time to prevent it.

I credit those who deny election fraud for the theft of the 2000 and 2004 elections.

[librechik]

61. yeah, we don't know--which SHOULD scare everyone into LOUDLY demanding action

and stop trying to shut up the messengers.

[ProSense]

74. We should demand that

Democrats learn how to prevent Rove from hacking voting machines...pull an "Anonymous" so to speak.

Problem solved!

Who save us in 2008? Was the 2010 election stolen?

[bvar22]

105. "Who save us in 2008? Was the 2010 election stolen?"

The point is, you don't know."

Maybe Obama earned an even greater Electoral or Popular Mandate in 2008.
Maybe we earned even larger majorities in the House and Senate, but had the close ones stolen.

Maybe Obama was an acceptable candidate to Wall Street, The Global Corporations, The Military, and The Republicans.
Even the dumbest Carny Con or Crooked Casino Dealer knows that you have to let the Rubes win one every now and then.


You don't KNOW,
and THAT is the point.

This MOST IMPORTANT function of our democracy should be transparent and verifiable,
and it CAN be....easily.
We can borrow the system used in Canada (or Iraq or Venezuela) at a very LOW cost
and have verifiable, transparent elections.

The NEXT POINT is:
Why haven't we already done this?

[JohnnyRingo]

66. Ohio can indeed now certify the vote through an audit.

I live in a part of Ohio that uses the infamous Diebold touch screen machines. Trumbull and nearby Mahoning Counties (Youngstown) are 2:1 democrat so we would absolutely be prime targets for vote switching in an alleged Rove conspiracy.

We received these machines in 2004 when we and almost all of Ohio replaced the old punch card ballots with Diebold touch screens that had no paper trail to determine after the election how those units actually voted, other than a computer memory chip. When Ohio went suspiciously for Bush in the '04 election, a public cry went out to add a paper print-out for accountability. Vote switching was specifically cited as the reason.

At first, as many recall, Diebold said that the technology was impossible, but we elected a Democratic governor that year, and they quickly found a way to print the ballots on a paper roll (like a register receipt) when governor Ted Strickland threatened to end their contract immediately (money talks).

I"m a precinct worker here in Trumbull County, and as such, I and three others (2 dems 2 Repub) are largely responsible for security of these archived paper rolls at our precinct. Here's how that works: The rolls are loaded into the machine and the door is locked (There's only one key) A tamper proof sticker is placed over the door with the machine serial # and the sticker # recorded in our log and signed by all four precinct workers.

The moment a voter casts their vote, the machine begins printing the vote in real time, line by line, while the voter watches. The voter can't leave the machine until this is completed. When the roll fills up, one republican and one democrat replace the roll, and all four workers (two from each party) sign the roll and place it in a steel box that will be locked at the end of the day with a recorded tamper proof sticker placed across the lid. Accounting, such as machine serial # that printed the roll, and sequential paper roll #, are recorded in the precinct log book and signed off by all four of us. The vote total for the machine is printed on the last roll as a final report. At the end of the day, those rolls are returned in the locked box by car to the BOE by one Representative of each party with a tamper proof sticker that has a recorded serial # placed over the lid. The rolls are then stored for (I think) two years in case there's a problem that requires accounting. To say that these paper accounts cannot easily be verified is innaccurate.

"Back door" programs can still be installed to change votes I suppose, but it's much easier to get caught doing so now. Unfortunately, in spite of my advice, many people do not watch the print out, though I've never seen a discrepancy myself, nor has anyone ever complained of one. If they did, the paper roll is to be removed at once by a member of each party and examined for accuracy. That paper roll would then be sequestered, the machine serial # recorded along with the paper roll, and the entire action would be signed by all four precinct workers.

Unlike in 2004, I now have a great deal of confidence in this system, and if someone stopped Rove from using some backdoor computer matrix wizardry to undermine this highly documented and verified procedure, I'd like to hear the theory behind that conspiracy.

[RobertEarl]

78. Here ya go JR

Try to refute this. You can't, and it just makes your whole post insolvent.

Possible Path To E-Vote Theft
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021847774

[JohnnyRingo]

96. Ohio's Diebold machines are absolutely not on a computer network.

We plug them into the wall and everything is done independent of the elections board within the machine itself. There is no 4G internet transmitter in the machines linking them electronically to Karl Rove's secret underground computer lab, and because of the paper backup it wouldn't matter if they did.

At the end of the day, the machine and the certified paper rolls are returned to the BOE for uploading. The machine count must match the tally on the paper rolls that specific machine produced. The 1st check is done at the precinct by us before we return the machines, and signed by all four precinct workers verifying accuracy to the last vote. If the numbers don't match up, we have to go through the votes one by one if necessary, until we find the discrepancy. If we can't, the event is logged in our precinct book and the county board takes up the problem (I've never seen that happen).

Once again, you must keep in mind that the machine and the paper trail both keep track of how many Romney votes were cast and how many for Obama. They have to match exactly before we'll sign off on it (two dems and two repubs).

If anyone has reason to believe the vote was electronically hacked, they can request an audit against the extremely well documented paper that each machine produced. (Remember now, this report was printed right in front of the voter in real time.) The final documentation process, as I stressed, is done by equal numbers from each party and kept under lock & key for years in storage at the county BOE. (I guess the Libertarian and Communist parties are on their own. LOL)

If my post is "insolvent", please point out where this mysterious hole in the Diebold system exists. You're using stale conspiracy theories from 2004 when Bob Taft and Ken Blackwell were in charge of counting our votes. They left in 2005 when democratic governor Ted Strickland overhauled the entire electronic voting procedure. (Remember how the election went for Ohio in 2008?)

Since 2011 we now have Kasich and Husted in charge of elections, but they concentrated primarily on suppression instead of changing the actual procedure at great expense.

[RobertEarl]

97. You really have no clue?

If you go demand and audit they will tell you to go fuck yourself. Try it. I dare you.

Obviously there was no hack this time. But in 2004 there was.

[JohnnyRingo]

102. Yes, I agree that in '04 there was a problem.

That's why our newly installed democratic governor overhauled the system with a paper trail in 2005. Remember how the Ohio vote came out in '08 when we helped elect barack Obama?

It's true that if you walk into the Board of Elections and demand to see the paper accounting, they'll tell you to go fuck yourself, but if you go through the proper channels in court, with probable cause and win a hand recount, that can fortunately be done (albeit, at great public expense).

There are- as I explained- laborious procedures to make sure the machines and paper printout match to the last vote, but if we weren't committed to a fair count, we wouldn't volunteer. Trust me when I tell you, I would not have allowed a democrat to cheat at my precinct either, and I'm certain my co-workers felt the same.

There was no hole in the Diebold machines that would allow Karl Rove to change the votes tallied on our machines, and hasn't been since the dark days of governor Bob Taft.

I'm confidently not anywhere near clueless on the procedure for electronic voting in Ohio.

[RobertEarl]

135. Thanks, JR

We appreciate good people like you working the polls. We would not have one iota of fair elections if not for good people like you.

However.... there is more than meets the eye. Following is a reply made last night to someone else about Ohio. In response to this post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021858496#post10

"Remote access software can be surreptitiously installed on a computer." Says your link.

That means the laws concerning internet hookup could easily be hacked.

Memory chips can be set to flip votes. DRE's can flip votes, so the count out of those machines could be miscounted from the beginning. The only way to check the count is via audit. Audits take days, sometimes weeks. DRE's can not be audited.

What did the trick in Ohio 2004 was, along with the above, and other types of miscounts, was in the network with the state computers where all the data is uploaded electronically and therefore vulnerable to hacking.

What we saw in 2004 was false uploaded data. Thousands of votes had been electronically altered. But before an audit or recount could be done, the die was cast and Bush declared the winner. Subsequently, recounts were kept from being done and the only audits I remember were months later by private individuals.

Roughly written but historically true. In the heat of the moment, using electronically altered numbers, Bush was made into a winner.

[JohnnyRingo]

141. As far as I can tell, the Diebold machines have no network access.

We certainly don't log them on when we set them up, and the only plug we use is a power outlet. Each unit appears independent

What if the machine flips every 3rd or 4th vote to a republican in hope that a voter isn't watching the live printout of his vote? That seems like a long shot of a gamble, but there still would have been hundreds of voters claiming the printout displayed didn't match their vote. That didn't happen in 2012, and would have ended Diebold's contract, leading to probable bankruptcy.

What if Diebold programmed the machines to print the right vote, but record a different vote on the log? That could easily get caught in a recount or an audit and means serious time in a federal pen for whoever was responsible. On top of that, Diebold would lose a contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars nationwide. Would they risk that to get Williard Mitt Romney or Joe the Plumber in office? Again, if Diebold 's machines can be so easily rigged, their reputation for security would be dead on arrival.

What if the machines were hacked by a third party to flip votes in a similar fashion? Now we're talking about less than a handful of people who have access to every machine in every county of the state. I doubt those state employees would sleep well for the next couple years while those paper records are sitting in county election boards across the state like a ticking time bomb.

Once again, if someone wants to challenge the election and wins the right to do so in court, the election winner can be determined by counting each vote on the paper rolls and comparing the numbers to our log books. The books don't tell how people voted, but they do tell how many voted, so padding the count is a bad idea. Besides, we knew before we returned the machines that the vote count matched what was in our books.

Even if Ohio went to all paper ballots, who can we trust to hand count them, John Kasich's Secretary of State? If someone is cynical enough, there's no such thing as a fair election when millions of ballots are concerned. If we each voter put a marble in the box of the candidate we choose, we'd end up with twice as many marbles as when we started. I believe the electronic voting machines we have with a paper trail is the best technology we have.

[RobertEarl]

150. Did you see this, JR?

From DU thread: Hmmm… Why Was Karl Rove So Adamant

Here's the link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1835756

Snipped piece::::



So what happened then? Stephen Spoonamore, a computer expert and close associate of Michael Connell, who was widely known as “Karl Rove’s IT guru”, provided a likely answer to that question in a sworn affidavit on October 26, 2008.

During the evening and early morning on the 2004 General Election in Ohio, on my own computer I was watching the results of incoming counties and precincts. I believed there was a more than likely chance County Tabulators had been programmed to manipulate votes…. As early results showed Kerry ahead, I noticed a trend in a very few counties (I believe I noted 8 counties on election night) that at about 11 p.m. suddenly began reporting radically different ratios of Kerry to Bush votes. All in favor of Mr. Bush. This sudden rate of change… resembled a fraud technique called an Intelligent Man In the Middle, or KingPin Attack. This type of attack requires a computer to be inserted into the communications flow of an IT system…

Other experts found additional data indicating Bush's increase in votes from these counties, and Kerry's decrease in votes… When information about the SmartTech IT routing switch became public… I again stated that we now have confirmation of a KingPin, or Intelligent Man in the Middle position had been created… The SmartTech system was set up precisely as a KingPin computer used in criminal acts against banking or credit card processes and had the needed level of access to both county tabulators and Secretary of States computers to allow whoever was running SmartTech's computers to decide the output of the county tabulators under its control… The SmartTech computer would as the results of the evening proceeded be able to know how many votes Bush needed to steal from Kerry, and flip enough votes on the desired county tabulators to reverse the outcome of the election…

[JohnnyRingo]

153. In 2004 there was no paper trail. We had to trust the machine's tally

Many theorists are using such outdated information to prove their conspiracy.

The fact is, when newly elected governor Ted Strickland took office in January of 2005, one of the first things he did was to demand that all of Ohio's electronic voting machines supply a paper ballot that is verified by the voter himself at the poll. Ohio now has every vote cast under lock and key in case of a dispute or a recount. They're stored separately under lock and key in each of Ohio's 88 counties to prevent mass fraud. Contrary to popular lore, there is no network connection on the machines to hack. The machine's main purpose is basically to count a paper ballot that is archived.

To imagine someone would travel to each county, walk into the BOE and tell the staff they want to take all those machines apart in incredible. Trumbull County alone has several hundred, and very few people have such access. The "man in the middle" theory holds little water as well, even if someone could possibly alter enough machines to cheat an election. The range of the transmitter that would be installed in each machine is about a half mile according to the conspiracy "experts". That would mean Rove would need hundreds of loyal plumbers to stake out each precinct on election day, and none of them better talk. Not one of them. Even the mafia's "blood oath" doesn't assure that much airtight security from their members.

[truckin]

79. But are they ever verified? Does anyone ever count the votes on the rolls and

compare them to the machine count? If that doesn't happen the paper is almost worthless. How do you know that the machine counts the vote in the same way it is being printed on the roll?

[JohnnyRingo]

106. Because the machine keeps track of how many votes were cast for each candidate

When we unseal and pull the paper roll we have to have the machine print it's final report on the roll. On the paper is a tabulation that has to match the votes cast in the machine's memory exactly before we can sign off on it and lock it in a steel box with a tamper proof seal.

Remember, that vote was printed out right in front of the voter, and they can't pull out the card until it's finished doing so. Therefore, in the case of an audit or recount, the paper print out will reveal how people actually voted, regardless of what was stored in the machine's memory. Only those paper rolls are stored under lock and key for years in case the election is challenged. The log books we keep during the election (where we record the votes cast) are also stored and must confirm what the paper rolls show.

If the machine and paper print out tallies don't match at the close of election day, we have to stay and go through our sign in book, the paper rolls, and the digital machine count, to find the discrepancy. If we can't figure it out, the roll is sequestered and the event is logged in our book for the county board to investigate. Personally, though many trusting voters ignore the paper print out, I've never heard of a complaint from a voter that his vote was incorrectly logged on a Diebold machine, and it's certainly never happened to me.

On edit:
I have to mention that someone could indeed hack a machine to show an innacurate count, but because of that verified paper roll that was printed in front of each voter, evidence exists to prove fraud and an accurate count can be confirmed.

[truckin]

124. But no one counts the individual votes on the roll of paper to compare them

to the results on the machine.

It could happen but it doesn't. And to my knowledge, correct if I am wrong, a manual count of the paper rolls has never happened in Ohio. It is meaningless to compare a total at the end of the roll to the machine count. You need to count each individual vote on the paper rolls, that have been should have been verified by the individual voter, to have any assurance the machine count matches the paper rolls.

[JohnnyRingo]

128. I guess that's true that no one hand counts each vote on election day

...but those rolls are stored at the county board of elections right now, and if there's a challenge in court, they can be manually counted vote by vote. Understand, there are hundreds of millions of dollars in this contract for Diebold, and you have to ask yourself if they'd compromise that contract (and their reputation in future elections) to get Mitt Romney and Joe The Plumber elected. I believe their lucrative contract with multiple states (and their reputation in all their security products) is worth much more than a proposed 20% tax cut. How could the CEO of Diebold sleep at night knowing that paper trail is sitting there like a ticking time bomb waiting to throw the company into bankruptcy?

If someone outside Diebold put their own software override in, it also likely could be determined who went through thousands of machines and changed the code. Less than a handful of people in Ohio have access to every one of our Diebold machines in every county. Remember, there's no internet connection on the Diebold machines as far as I know. We don't hook them up to a network at the polls, and there's no log on when we set them up.

Getting ahead of you a little, I have to mention that if the machine manufacturer (or someone else) wanted to, they could have the machine flip every fourth Obama vote and hope that particular voter isn't watching the machine as it prints out their vote, but all it would take would be a couple hundred astute voters reporting an incorrect vote for the election to be thrown into chaos, resulting in a a call to Diebold to pick up their machines while Ohio finds another supplier.

In the end, if someone is too cynical to trust the paper trail that is produced by these machines ,and laboriosly verified by the poll workers and BOE, how can they trust anyone to hand count the ballots? There could always be cause for suspicion that one party is cheating the manual count.

[truckin]

134. No one hand counts the paper after the election either. The paper is never counted.

If you never hand count the paper to check the accuracy of the machines it is almost worthless, imo.

[JohnnyRingo]

136. That's not true.

The paper trail is an important part of accountability. As I pointed out, no one is going to prison so Mitt Romney can be president, and Diebold isn't going to bankrupt the company because they got caught cheating an election. Did you read my post?

If you want a week long hand count of each paper roll the macine produces, who do you trust to do the counting? John Kasich and his election stealing AG Husted? How many people would Ohio have to hire to sit at a table and accurately register each vote? Not just for the president, but every congressman, senator, and every issue on the ballot.

It's obvious to me that suppressing the vote is the path chosen by Republican governors across the country, now and in the future. As a participant, I have every confidence this election was completely above board, at least in Ohio.

[truckin]

142. You count a randomly selected sample

Of the machine's paper to make sure that the machines count correctly. That is what is done in my state of CT. If you don't count the paper the paper is almost worthless.

[bvar22]

82. ?

...and I don't even trust The Machines in Vegas,
but millions of suckers still play them every day.

[JohnnyRingo]

148. Your unfounded fear of technology is clouding your view.

While there was some question about the 2004 election (the 1st year for the electronic voting here in Ohio) the newly elected democrat governor Ted Strickland demanded all machines use a paper trail to confirm the count. This has been the standard since 2006 (remember '08 when Ohio went for Obama?). Today, there is a paper ballot produced for every voter. Many of those who claim Rove had a "man in the middle" hack or some RF vote flipping are using news reports or conspiracy theories from 2004.

Some, like the Diebold Accuvote TSx print the vote right before the voter's eyes as it is cast. The voter cannot leave the machine before the printing is completed.

Others, like several models of the optiscan by ES&S use a hand marked ballot that is scanned into the machine to be tabulated. The ballot is put in a locked steel box for return to the county BOE

The Hart machine is also an optical scanner type machine that requires the voter return his hand marked ballot to the poll worker.

In each case, the paper ballot is stored at the county BOE for (I think) two years in case of a dispute or recount. In all cases, the machine is reset for the next election and becomes irrelevant. If someone hacks the machines and alters the digital count, the verified paper trail is accountability that cannot possibly be altered.

If there's any credibility to the theory that Rove or someone else changed the digital count, one only needs do a hand count audit at one suspect county and get probable cause that the election has been subjected to fraud. That sounds like a very high likelihood that the perpetrators of such a foolish plan will be caught, and even Rove isn't that arrogant. I won't even go into the logistics and large number of plumbers needed to visit and alter every voting machine in each of Ohio's 88 counties. The number of people with the clearance to drop in at a county BOE and work on their machines is so few that someone would really have to put their ass on the line for Karl Rove.

Here is a link to the three types of voting machines in Ohio and how they work. You'll notice that in every case the paper ballot is returned to the poll worker or rolled up into the machine to be removed at the end of the day, The paper ballot is then locked in a steel box for return to the county BOE when the polls close:
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/Upload/elections/votingsystems.aspx?page=25056#

None of the machines are connected to a network for internet hacking. There's no login and a wall outlet is the only connection in every case. If you don't like a paper ballot that is either marked by hand or printed by a machine (right before your very eyes) and stored under lock and key in 88 different locations, what form of voting do you like?

Karl Rove is smart and somewhat evil, but he's not a James Bond villain. That's why he focused on misleading commercials and suppression.

[bvar22]

149. Your false accusation is as disingenuous and diversionary as every other post you have made here.

I have NO FEAR of TECHNOLOGY.

I DO fear privatized elections where Private Corporations have control over the voting, counting, compiling, and reporting of The Vote.
These Corporations are accountable ONLY to their Board of Directors, and NOT to The Public,
THEY, and ONLY they have access to the hardware and software that determines the outcome of our elections.

THAT is something EVERYONE should FEAR.

There ARE elections in the World that are transparent, verifiable, and the counting is accessible and visible TO THE PUBLIC.
THAT is the method we SHOULD be using.

When the elections in Venezuela and Iraq are MORE transparent and verifiable than those in the US,
WE have a problem,
and YOU have NO valid argument.

[JohnnyRingo]

158. The ballots are accessible to counting.

All anyone would have to do is take probable cause to an attorney general and get a recount of just one suspected county's paper ballots to determine fraud. That hasn't happened nor will it. The ballots that were personally verified by each voter is sitting at each of our 88 counties just waiting to be counted if there's a reasonable suspicion. I doubt you could use a masked man who made a post on an internet web site as proof however, nor will any reasonable person try.

If paper ballots aren't good enough for you, I'd like to know what method of accounting you'd prefer. If not the machines, then you could accuse the hand count workers as being paid Rove lackeys.

[bvar22]

159. More smoke and bullshit from you.

Are you NOT familiar with the methods used in Venezuela or Canada?
We CAN do that here.
Yes. We. Can!

*Single day elections, National Holiday, Polls open 24 hours

*Vote IN PERSON, paper ballots deposited in transparent Ballot Boxes
I like the "Purple Finger" method used in Iraq!

*Multiple Independent Exit Polls

*Ballot Boxes remain in Public View and continuous Video Surveillance (a la Casino) uploaded to the Internet
(Now THERE is "technology" I embrace)

*Ballots hand counted in public & video view

*Results posted at the Voting Station

*Minimum 35% random recount in each state

*Ballot Boxes remain in full Public & Video View until the election is certified or all recounts completed
(Absolutely NO moving ballot baxes to another location for re-counting!)

You can NOT find a single International Agency that approves of the system used in the USA.



You stated above that these contracts are worth "Hundreds of Millions of Dollars to "Diebold".

In this era of austerity and budget cuts, I know a GREAT place we can save "Hundreds of Millions of Dollars"
and give the American People better oversight and deeper confidence of our elections.

[JohnnyRingo]

160. Haven't you ever seen the movie "Oceans Eleven"?

With simple close circuit video feeds and mirrors in the boxes that makes them appear full when they're actually falling through a hole in the table into Karl Rove's lap is how that gets cheated.

Of course I'm being facetious, but my conspiracy theory makes just as much sense as the ever evolving crap you've been spouting. In a country with one tenth the population as the US that may be a doable way to run an election, but here we like to know who won the same day as the election. Besides, when the ballots are driven to county BOE, it's done by one member from each party. Every step we take to ensure ballot integrity is signed off on by at least two members of each party and a recorded tamper proof seal is applied over all containers that contain votes. Those ballots are still at the county BOE with the seals intact.

Besides, how can you of all people ever trust those who sit at a table and count votes? They could all be under the employ of the evil super villain Karl Rove, and Anonymous would have to arrive by an Aston Martin DB5 at each county board instead of using the internet to thwart him just in the nick of time.

I've tired of arguing with a devout and deluded conspiracy theorist who offers absolutely nothing concrete except some guy on the internet wearing a mask. I've explained how the election here is secure with a verified paper trail but you persist in discarding the facts to fit within your parameters of a grand conspiracy.

How about preaching conspiracy from your reality proof bunker next election and leave the voting to the less gullible.

[bvar22]

162. It does NOT take a Conspiracy Theorist...

..to point out that our elections have been given to private For Profit Corporations that are NOT accountable to The Public
but to the handful of rich old white men on the Board of Directors.
PERIOD.
You have NO Case what-so-ever,
just bluster and bullshit,
and string of logical fallacies, mostly Red Herrings and Strawmen.
You stated YOURSELF above that our elections are worth Millions of Dollars to the private corporations.

Some things in a democracy should NEVER be controlled by private corporations.
One of them is our elections!
PERIOD.

[JohnnyRingo]

163. It's not just one company that provides our machines.

That would be ignorant and create a security breach if the single company wanted to somehow engineer a bias.

Instead we have three separate companies that provide voting hardware in Ohio, and if one company's machines uniformly provided uneven results, a red flag would go up and Ohio could simply count the hand marked ballots in a suspected county to verify the integrity of that company's machines. Currently, machines are provided by Diebold, ES&S, and Hart.

A practical guide to the voting machines used in Ohio and how a verified paper trail is produced:
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/Upload/elections/votingsystems.aspx?page=25056#

I have a suggestion. Why not go to your county's elections board and ask if you can be a precinct worker next election. Do it now to get your name on the list for spring. I don't know what state you live in, but perhaps if you witness first hand how devoted fellow election workers are and how many redundant steps are taken to assure ballot integrity, you'll be less prone to think a mere mortal like Karl Rove can flip an election with a keystroke. Plus, they pay you.

If you're still convinced by then that someone is stealing votes from beneath your nose, you'll be in a better position to debate the problem and suggest a fix. Participating certainly opened my eyes to the process, and I learned what most people don't know about election security.

[bvar22]

164. "With simple close circuit video feeds and mirrors in the boxes ...

..With simple close circuit video feeds and mirrors in the boxes that makes them appear full when they're actually falling through a hole in the table into Karl Rove's lap is how that gets cheated. "

#1) Oceans 11 was FICTION and that heist would have had ZERO chance of working IRL.


#2)All of the elaborate set up would be a little difficult to accomplish in full public view on election day, and during the immediate vote count, don't cha think?

#3) Is this going to be done at every single voting station?

Using the Oceans Eleven fiction actually helps MY case, and hurts yours.
It is an excellent demonstration of just how secure Paper Ballots/Hand Counting really is.

Thank You!

[Coyotl]

145. Almost all of Ohio voted on punch cards in 2004.

http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio_spreadsheets.html

And punch cards were easy to rig. You just moved the cards to the next precinct and the Kerry votes became Bush votes. Tooo easy! This is why there were such incongruities in down-ticked races not attached to party.

The false meme about Ohio electronic voting in 2004 persists even though there was a blue shift in the e-voting counties. People just ignore facts when you provide them with what they want to believe.

[truckin]

80. Great post! Couldn't agree more.

[LiberalLovinLug]

83. Some of you missed the point of the OP

Its not saying that this undeniably happened, only that Anonymous and also you could include Brad's Blog, did well for making Americans more aware of the POSSIBILITY and the need for public verification of the voting process in a modern democratic country. When you have much greater levels of security and government access in Las Vegas machines than you do with machines that tally the national vote - something needs to change.

BTW its so easy to spot the Authoritarians and other shallow thinkers on this topic. Just go through the thread and find the

It seems to be their favorite response. Just like a wingnut guest on network news shows, if they can't compete with genuine concerns the only recourse is to laugh over and at the other guests and that somehow is supposed to prove how "absurd" the other arguments are.

[bvar22]

101. After over 11 years at DU, I have reached the conclusion that...

...the first appearance of in a discussion is a tacit admission by the poster who deploys it that he/she is no longer able to cogently support his/her position.
It is a desperate attempt to save face while facing personal failure,
as if anyone reading the thread believes that that poster is actually laughing at their own inadequacy,
or is unable to see through this pathetic ploy.


As a general rule, the more they deploy,
the greater the personal Butt Hurt they are suffering.

Of course, this generalization does not apply to posts in the Humor Group.

[reusrename]

116. Hey, I used one upthread!

One of those folks was talking to himself in public and I was amused contemplating the amount of butthurt that must be behind it.

[Kingofalldems]

84. Kick and Rec

[Octafish]

88. Outstanding post, bvar22, in every way.

Last edited Tue Nov 20, 2012, 05:18 PM - Edit history (5)

Thank you for putting it down in words. The side-show artistes, who most loudly and automatically proclaim "nothin' to it conspiracy nonsense" whenever the subject of electronic vote fraud comes up, succeed merely by derailing discussion from what truly matters: verified voting with a citizen-counted paper trail. Those who have lost their lives working on the process and related matters include Athan Gibbs and Michael Connell.

[woo me with science]

95. K&R

[Bluenorthwest]

104. I would suggest taking a moment away from the specifics and consider

if you would the general notion of unnamed people making unproven and unsupported allegations of great crimes done by specifically named others. Sure we hate Rove. But forget Rove. Forget Anon. Think about faceless folks leveling accusations of high crimes without proof. Now think about the ramifications of that becoming an accepted modality.
It is in essence McCarthy tactics. I'd not do that to my worst enemy, that 'I have a file with his crimes listed, you can not see it, but you must act against him' routine. Not to my worst enemy.
The licesnse to indict and convict without evidence is not something I wish to give to anyone. The right to face one's accusers is nearly sacred in our system for a fucking good reason. Folks who desire to indict, to judge and to do so without evidence nor without confronting the accused are usually called things like 'fascists' and 'authoritarians'. The fact that this is 'Anon vs Karl' does not change the basic facts. No proof, no face on the accuser, yet an accusation of great crime is not really cool.

[bvar22]

109. "the general notion of unnamed people making unproven and unsupported allegations of great crimes"

That happens every single day.
Where have you been?

The beauty of Anon's claim here is that it exposes the Unverifiable Nature of our Privatized, Proprietary, Secret elections.
In a democracy, it should be (and can be) a simple task to verify.

"It is in essence McCarthy tactics. I'd not do that to my worst enemy, that 'I have a file with his crimes listed, you can not see it, but you must act against him' routine. Not to my worst enemy.
The licesnse to indict and convict without evidence is not something I wish to give to anyone. The right to face one's accusers is nearly sacred in our system for a fucking good reason. Folks who desire to indict, to judge and to do so without evidence nor without confronting the accused are usually called things like 'fascists' and 'authoritarians'. The fact that this is 'Anon vs Karl' does not change the basic facts. No proof, no face on the accuser, yet an accusation of great crime is not really cool.

As far as this hyperbolic attempt to climb up on a moral high horse,
I'm just not feeling ya, dog.
Who Indicted or Convicted ANYBODY beyond our flawed, opaque, "Trust Me" voting system

I just can't see what Anon did here as equivalent to McCarthy or "fascism".
I see it as a counter to fascism.

You CAN Take it or Leave it.

[byeya]

112. The good that the Anon letter did was to stimulate discussion about why the USA has a more

arcane and opaque voting system than many other coutries in the world - developed, developing or undeveloped - and why isn't there a push from at least one of our two parties to fix the problem.

[socialist_n_TN]

115. You know, if it would help get verifiable elections........

I wouldn't have a problem with accusing Obama, Rove and even YOU of butt fucking the Pope against his will. That's how important elections SHOULD be in this country. They're obviously not that important to most of the folks that are already in power though.

[rhett o rick]

113. Excellent post. It doesnt matter if Anon helped or not. Our election process is broken and needs

to be fixed. This is probably the most important issue before us. If our election system is vulnerable all advances we make may easily be undone in the near future.

We dont need Anon to produce evidence. We should investigate, prosecute and fix the system.

I find the deniers fascinating. Not only do they deny, they spend a lot of energy trying to "convince" the rest of us that we should take their word that everything is cozy in River City.

I totally understand doubters. We dont know what happened so we shouldnt be buying into any ole conspiracy theory. But we should keep our minds open because things are rarely as they seem, esp when Republicans, Rove and lots of money are involved.

[Z_I_Peevey]

114. K&R

[socialist_n_TN]

117. Yep, I've been thinking the same thing myself.........

after reading all of these posts on various pages for a few days now, I'm really confused as to how so many people could get sidetracked off the real issue. Well maybe not really confused per se. That sidetracking thing is a staple in the on-line arsenal of some.

If you want to stop the conspiracy theories about elections, take them out of the hands of the corps and put them into the hands of the people. ALL of the steps.

[chknltl]

118. Great OP topic, need more like this.

I have learned much here. It is sad that we can't seem to rally around the the urgent need for absolute transparency and consistency in our elections system. In a democracy such as the one are supposed to have, We The People must be the final arbiter when it comes to deciding on all matters regarding our own governance.... If not us, then who and how would that still be a democracy? This is not a partisan agenda, it is a citizens agenda and we citizens need to be discussing this among ourselves and with our representatives.

Imo a full on congressional investigation into the whole elections fraud issue needs to happen right now! 2014 should be an election that we citizens are confident reflect the combined will of the citizenry. The status quo suggests (with good reason), that we lack that confidence. Threads such as this are good for getting more tongues wagging.

Nothing more to add. Thank you for this Bvarr22.

[FogerRox]

119. Since no Ohio voting machines are connected to the internet

and IIRC my Ohio election law correctly, no county tabulators are connected to the internet.

Just how did Anon get access?

Thats not a real Anon claim, not with such a basic mistake. Nope.

[graham4anything]

152. +a million

and why people here want to emmulate a movie where the lead blew up a national monument (i.e. a terrorist act) I don't know.

Anarchy was never a way out.

[eridani]

120. This point cannot be emphasized enough

As David Dill once said "It is not enough that elections BE accurate; we have to KNOW that they are accurate, and we don't."

[GitRDun]

121. I like your take on this issue...

I tend to be skeptical on some of the stories, but agree whole-heartedly with your larger point.

If we cannot verify election results, WE NEED TO FIX THAT! 'nuf said...great post!

[OnyxCollie]

129. No E-Voting In Germany

http://www.edri.org/edri-gram/number7.5/no-evoting-germany

The German Federal Constitutional Court decided on 3 March 2009 that electronic voting used for the last 10 years, including for the 2005 general elections, was unconstitutional and therefore not to be used for the next elections in September 2009.

The court ruled that the use of the electronic machines contradicts the public nature of elections and the equipment used in 2005 had some shortcomings. However, as there has been no evidence of errors in the past, the results of the previous elections remain valid.

A petition signed by over 45 000 people in 2005, trying to ban e-voting, had been rejected by the German Government. Now, the court ruled that the Federal Voting Machines Ordinance having introduced e-voting was unconstitutional because it did not "ensure that only such voting machines are permitted and used which meet the constitutional requirements of the principle of the public nature of elections."

Also the court considered that, differently from the traditional voting system where manipulations and frauds are much more difficult involving a high degree of effort and a high risk of detection, "programming errors in the software or deliberate electoral fraud committed by manipulating the software of electronic voting machines can be recognised only with difficulty." Also, in the court's opinion, the electors should be able to verify how their vote is recorded without having to possess detailed computer knowledge. "If the election result is determined through computer-controlled processing of the votes stored in an electronic memory, it is not sufficient if merely the result of the calculation process carried out in the voting machine can be taken note of by means of a summarising printout or an electronic display."

Conspiracy Theories
Cass R. Sunstein
Adrian Vermeule
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585

A broader point is that conspiracy theories overestimate the competence and
discretion of officials and bureaucracies, who are assumed to be able to make and carry
out sophisticated secret plans, despite abundant evidence that in open societies
government action does not usually remain secret for very long.20 Recall that a distinctive
feature of conspiracy theories is that they attribute immense power to the agents of the
conspiracy; the attribution is usually implausible but also makes the theories especially
vulnerable to challenge. Consider all the work that must be done to hide and to cover up
the government’s role in producing a terrorist attack on its own territory, or in arranging
to kill political opponents. In a closed society, secrets are not difficult to keep, and
distrust of official accounts makes a great deal of sense. In such societies, conspiracy
theories are both more likely to be true and harder to show to be false in light of available
information.21 But when the press is free, and when checks and balances are in force,
government cannot easily keep its conspiracies hidden for long. These points do not mean
that it is logically impossible, even in free societies, that conspiracy theories are true. But
it does mean that institutional checks make it unlikely, in such societies, that powerful
groups can keep dark secrets for extended periods, at least if those secrets involve
important events with major social salience.

~snip~

Whenever a bad event has occurred, rumors and speculation are inevitable. Most
people are not able to know, on the basis of personal or direct knowledge, why an
airplane crashed, or why a leader was assassinated, or why a terrorist attack succeeded. In
the aftermath of such an event, numerous speculations will be offered, and some of them
will likely point to some kind of conspiracy. To some people, those speculations will
seem plausible, perhaps because they provide a suitable outlet for outrage and blame,
perhaps because the speculation fits well with other deeply rooted beliefs that they hold.
Terrible events produce outrage, and when people are outraged, they are all the more
likely to attribute those events to intentional action. In addition, antecedent beliefs are a
key to the success or failure of conspiracy theories. Some people would find it impossibly
jarring to think that the CIA was responsible for the assassination of a civil rights leader;
that thought would unsettle too many of their other judgments. Others would find those
other judgments strongly supported, even confirmed, by the suggestion that the CIA was
responsible for such an assassination. Compare the case of terrorist attacks. For most
Americans, a claim that the United States government attacked its own citizens, for some
ancillary purpose, would make it impossible to hold onto a wide range of other
judgments. Clearly this point does not hold for many people in Islamic nations, for whom
it is far from jarring to believe that responsibility lies with the United States (or Israel).

Here, as elsewhere, people attempt to find some kind of equilibrium among their
assortment of beliefs,34 and acceptance or rejection of a conspiracy theory will often
depend on which of the two leads to equilibrium. Some beliefs are also motivated, in the
sense that people are pleased to hold them or displeased to reject them.35 Acceptance (or
for that matter rejection) of a conspiracy theory is frequently motivated in that sense.
Reactions to a claim of conspiracy to assassinate a political leader, or to commit or to
allow some atrocity either domestically or abroad, are often determined by the
motivations of those who hear the claim.


For those keeping score, the authors of HAVA have:

Been convicted of bribery and corruption for deals with Jack Abramoff and sentenced to 30 months in prison- Rep. Bob Ney

Been convicted of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering to get repub candidates elected, and have received a sentence of three years in prison (and has yet to serve a day)- Rep. Tom DeLay (See also DeLay's ties to Abramoff.)

Run for President (poorly)- Sen. Chris Dodd. Dodd was also a "Friend of Angelo" Mozillo of Countrywide.

Business and financial ties through the McCarthy Group with ES&S, the company that had a monopoly on vote counting in the US- Sen. Chuck Hagel

"When it can be established that when a number of political acts work in concert to produce a certain result, the presumption is strong that the actors were aiming at the result in question. When it can be shown that the actors have an interest in producing these results, the presumptions become a fair certainty- no conspiracy theory is needed." -Walter Karp, Indispensable Enemies

[RobertEarl]

137. Big Post. E-voting, HAVA and Germany

Thanks Onyx, that is a wonderful addition to the discussion.

[OnyxCollie]

138. You are most welcome. nt

[bvar22]

140. I believe that Ireland did the same thing.

IIRC, they had changed over to BBV in the early 2000s,
but scrapped the Black Boxes in 2009 because of their hackability and lack of transparency.

The story I heard was that they collected all the Black Box Voting Machines, and threw them into the North Sea,
but they may have been speaking figuratively.
I would have just sold them back to the USA where, apparently, most don't care about security, transparency, or verification of the elections.

[Bradical79]

130. I doubt Anonymous had anything to do with the vote

but I agree about transparency. There were a number of times that our Ohio government invited possible accusations of fraud if things didn't work out in Democrats favor, like the last minute mystery software patch. I don't feel like they were sophisticated enough to think of any kind of effective software fraud considering their pretty brazen attempts at direct voter suppression, but I don't like the possibility being out there of a private company with definite ties to one party being in charge of such an important part of our elections.

[krispos42]

132. I have to confess...

I was the one that stopped Rove from stealing the election in Ohio.


Not only that, but in revenge for them stealing Ohio in 2004, I reversed the Rove hack.


He had his people set it up so that, in certain precincts, the votes for Obama and Romney would switch in the computer's memory. Behind the scenes, of course. Deep in the bowels of the RAM.

I simply had the machines switch them back, then add 5% to Obama and subtract 5% from Romney.




Disprove it.

[bvar22]

139. Welcome, brother!

We are ALL Anonymous,
and the MORE attention we can focus on our opaque, unverifiable, privatized, unsecured, secret elections,
the better off we will all be.

Thanks for your good work,
and welcome to The Underground!






[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[arely staircase]

154. it does matter, it matters very much

and if anyone "anonymous" or otherwise has evidence that karl rove or anyone else engaged in felonious tampering of our presidential election they need to come forward or they are accessories after the fact.

[Dems50State]

155. Don't you just love Conspiracy Theories

The people are the ones who stopped Rove from stealing Ohio. The people stood up and said we aren't going to take this anymore stayed in lines for over 8 hours. Those are the heroes of this election.

[Zorra]

156. Gosh, bvar, could this mean that all this angst was caused by a simple psyops

attack on the status quo and their gatekeepers, set in motion to help rid our nation of electronic voting machines forever?

We will never know for sure what really happened, but it appears that the result of this entire situation has been overwhelmingly positive for the people and for democracy, and a very frustrating event for the MIC in every respect.

Hopefullly, we will see a transparent, as foolproof as humanly possible national standardized voting process instituted in the US before 2016.

Still, it would be comforting to see certain RW parties prosecuted for perpetrating and/or attempting to perpetrate election fraud.

[Marrah_G]

161. I agree that We on Du have no way of knowing

Our President and all of the experts under him do have the means to find out if the election was tampered with.