Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The proof of an honest/stolen election sits in the optical scan ballots...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 10:10 AM
Original message
The proof of an honest/stolen election sits in the optical scan ballots...
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 10:10 AM by Junkdrawer
THIS time there was a paper trail. Next time, there may not be. If they want to quiet all the "conspiracy talk", simply audit a RANDOM, statistically significant number of counties that used the optical scan ballots (and were counted with GEMS).

It's what we asked for with House Bill 2239. Without this or subsequent audits, a voter verified paper trail is meaningless.

We're waiting.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. We certainly are
That the idea has come this late means a probable no go from the "challenger".

Who else can use HR2239 to raise a challenge? It's probably toothless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. Didn't the theft begin late in the afternoon, if yes, any random audit
has to begin then. Why does if have to be random?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. In a large state, there are thousands of precincts. A full recount...
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 10:55 AM by Junkdrawer
would take a loooong time and would be objected to on the basis of cost and making a "safe harbor" date.

But a random, statistically significant, number of precincts could be counted quickly and inexpensively. If that audit turns up problems, then a full recount would be necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 04:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC