(Tinfoil theory) Something about rigged electonic voting machines I don't get..

[Cleetus]

I do electronics for a living. I eat and breathe software and hardware. So I ask you this.. Why would they rig voting machines so the vote switches from Dem to gop by itself *and the voter can see it?* It would be easier to have the machine display a vote for Obama and record the vote for gramps. Doing it this way, the programmer can fine tune the votes it switches, and the voter sees nothing.

Of course this may be problematic when there's a paper trail, but for machines that don't use a printer, it makes no sense, and is totally unnecessary, for the voter to see his/her vote switched.

It's almost as if they leave a few rigged machines around *waiting* to be discovered. *Those* machines are *repaired*, everyone feels good that they discovered the *broken* machines, meanwhile, a whole shitload of rigged machines do their thing, undisturbed.

[elleng]

1. 'They' address lots of machines

in lots of jurisdictions in lots of states. Because machines differ, so do mechanisms for rigging.

[Cleetus]

5. It's all firmware, and they can pull it off without a trace..

The machines may be different, the code that runs them may be different, but so long as the code that runs the machines is not validated by us, the public, then having the machines do what they will is the easiest thing in the world to pull off. Jesus, we trust these bastards to do the right thing. Shit, they can pull it off without a fucking trace. Firmware drops it's payload in RAM, tainted pages in FLASH get erased. Machine runs off RAM, does it's thing, then erases RAM. Bootloaders load pristine code. Without uncompiled code to look at, this shit can be very, very hard to find, especially when you consider that the machine can be programmed with the means to protect itself.

Scary stuff.

[elleng]

7. It is of course scary,

and as I've said neither dems nor reps really want to deal with it straight-on.

Didn't YOU know that nothing would really change for the good after 2004? I sure did.

[beac]

2. I had the same sickening thought the other day.

Gah! Someone talk us down.

[billyoc]

3. Quite right. You don't display the swapping on the screen, for heaven's sake.

These stories of vote swapping computers are just badly calibrated touch screens.

[Iwasthere]

4. Faulty touch screens

Perhaps this wasn't by design. Maybe this is just the luck of the draw that the machines are doing this to the Dems ( presedential 2nd position on the ballot). And it is posible that it could be happening elsewhere on the ballots as well. The crime imo is the fact that they aren't doing anything about it. These machines must be destroyed !!!!!

[abumbyanyothername]

6. The "vote switching" issues (in West Virginia)

are most likely voter related as suggested by poll workers. The voter touches the screen, does not wait long enough and sees nothing, then touches the screen again. The machine was slow to record the initial touch and reads the second touch as a desire to switch.

Vote stealing on electronic machines would most likely be accomplished at the compilation stage (as it likely was against Kerry in OH in 2004). Compilation theft would be detectable through comparison with exit polling and this is pretty much the sole method used to verify the integrity of elections in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Bosnia, etc.

For some reason the Republicans were able to convince the mainstream media in the United States that exit polling in the United States is not accurate, when it apparently is accurate enough to use in other countries.

I firmly believe that Ohio was stolen through compilation theft in 2004.

I do not believe that discussions of vote theft during voting periods are helpful to democrats, however, as I think that it tends to depress turnout and enthusiasm, both of which favor dems, and especially this year.

[elleng]

8. 2 ways, and 2 times.

Voters did and do the right thing (in WVa and elsewhere.) Machines were intentionally mis-coded.

AND crap happens at the compilation stage; remember bush family sitting around in '04, looking 'concerned,' and 10 minutes later smiling?

And of course, the exit polling was correct: KERRY WON.

'Unfortunately,' during voting periods is the only time enough people actually face the issues; that's why 'they' can continue theft of democracy.

[napi21]

9. I've always been a very suspicious person, but in the WVa case,

I believe the Pub registrar who did the demo. The screen layout was foolishly designed (IMO). The boxes should have had more distance between them so a voter COULDN'T accidentally "roll their finger" accidentally to another candidate! But the way it's currently designed, I believe this case was voter error!

Total vote tabulation is where any hanky-panky would take place, and as far as I know, there's no way to detect that!

[AndyTiedye]

10. The In-Your-Face Flipping May be the Ballot Definition Files

That would not require any programming, just following the manufacturer's directions.
It is likely that the zones on the touch screen don't have to be the same as what is on the display.
The ballot may look like this:


but the touch screen reads like this: