My vote fraud skepticism is based on...

[HamdenRice]

Thank you all so much for keeping this issue alive. But here's my problem with this theory -- and maybe you can help with this -- if the vote fraud occurred, it would have to have included many people in a conspiracy, wouldn't it? Let's say a minimum of 20 people -- programmers, computer operators, Rove himself, state election officials, and so on -- and maybe more. There would have to be layers of people between the White House and the operatives to preserve plausible deniability, but as well, communication links

I just find it hard to believe that on so monumental and important a scam, no one would have leaked.

Can anyone explain this to me to overcome my skepticism?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. Money.

Their one true god. And the odd threat on lives.

[FullCountNotRecount]

2. Central tabulators and modems

and European election observers refused entry into precincts. I saw Nader had 2,200 (later retracted) votes in a 10,000 person county in Iowa election nite. The holding back of blue state announcements until Bush had a sea of red. The refusal of the networks to show populated weighted maps.

[shraby]

3. I would think just a very few computers

could change a lotta county totals in a very short time. It takes about 10 seconds to change a total and get back out of that system.

[linazelle]

14. Central tabulators indeed...it only takes a few hackers which is doable nt

[mountainvue]

4. One person hacking one computer.

n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. Yup. That's all it takes.

Or one programmer programming the software in the central tabulator to steal votes for Bush. ONE PERSON is all it took. ONE person who was no doubt paid a TON of $$$$$ to keep his mouth shut.

[TrustingDog]

7. or had his family threatened with death.

der are vays.

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. Well, the BFEE isn't called the

BFEE for nothin'! :hi:

[tandem5]

6. conspiracy is not exactly the right word

It's a matter of loyalty, spin, and a lack of accountability... other than that they can hide in open sight. It seems to me that the only times these people are brought down is when they just do too much too fast that they can't keep up with damage control.

[AnIndependentTexan]

8. read this to understand more

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2632349#2645360

[Mister K]

9. I am a developer by trade...

I have seen the software demonstration by Bev and have come to the conclusion that the fraud could have been completed in a number of ways.

1) Diebold has never shown their source code to anyone claiming trade secrets. This is total BS. Who knows what is in there or could have been developed. Anything goes. Literally. Everything from random vote swapping to some complex allocation algorithm. I am sure that all of the devs on the project signed a non-disclosure agreement and I am not sure if they even live in this country.

2) Realistically, the machines should have been random sampled to and independently audited by a third party to insure accuracy.

3) In addition, the database that is being used is unprotected and can be modified outside the application.

[morillon]

15. One person could do all the changes, if...

...the back doors were already in place. He or she could be sitting somewhere running some scripts via modem. If I were going to do something like that, I'd automate as much of it as possible so that I wouldn't make any typos and so it'd be done very quickly.

As for knowledge about any back doors or weaknesses, there are a few ways that could go down.

- The programmers who aren't in on the fraud know about the back doors but think they're benign and/or that nobody else knows about them.
- A few programmers do know what could possibly be done with the system and are scared shitless about saying anything.
- The very few people (a couple of people on the inside, an outside contractor, some combination) in on the fraud are applying some kind of patch after the QAs and other programmers have finished testing. That might account for a lot of the instability that was reported in places like Georgia back in 2002. If the patch is buggy, that'd explain why nobody caught the crash bugs in QA -- they weren't testing the same code.

I agree about the impossibility of keeping something like this quiet if more than a few people know about it. There'd be leaks all over the place. The knowledge about the specifics of the fraud would be kept to just a couple of people, IMO. And I think they'd be in real danger of being offed after the election.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. If you have direct access or

modem access to the PC vote tabulating computer, one person could do the whole state of Ohio.

How many people do you think it took to provide fewer voting stations in minority precincts, to challenge minority voters rights to vote, to lose thousands of absentee ballots, to toss out thousands of Demo voter registrations, etc?

[Pithlet]

12. I'm pretty skeptical of a lot of conspiracies for that kind of reason

But, this is not one of them. I think it is entirely possible. I don't think it would take too many people, and you could easily find enough to do the job that are partisan enough to do it.

[bullimiami]

13. You sir. Might as well sit down and let the lying cheating fascists

take over america.

You are blind. It is right in front of your eyes and you deny it.

FIght for your democracy and your life and America or just forget it.

This is IT.