I need to ask a dumb question

[lildreamer316]

Okay; let me state the obvious: I believe the election was stolen.
Having said so, my dumb question is this: Exactly how many ppl across the country would have had to have been in collusion with the GOP to accomplish this? I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around what I think are the thousands of ppl that would have known about this but have strangely been silent. Really; please enlighten me. I would like to kinda get a grip on the scope of this thing in people-numbers. Please no flaming; just an honest question. Thanks.:dunce:

[Carolab]

1. Everyone in the "know" says it would only take a few inside people.

The programming and the vote manipulation only required a few people who could set up the machines (since there are so few manufacturers) and a few who could manipulate the tallies.

[Amaryllis]

9. Yes. The fix can be programmed into the software so it takes very few

people. Read Black Box Voting, or watch Invisible Ballots.

[lenidog]

2. It depends on how big of a theft you believe in

If you think it was just Ohio that was stolen then I would say maybe a hundred if they were strategically placed and how they did it. If you think that Kerry won both popular vote and electoral then it would have to be maybe a couple thousand people,

[blogbear]

3. I'm suspicious of fraud here and especially after the 2000 race and

also the one when Janet Reno was running in Florida later on. John Kerry graciously conceded immediately after the 2004 race and I don't believe he would have done so had he thought that he'd won. But I did hear about intimidation of native American voters in SD (I believe) plus the long lines and waiting in Ohio..I don't know that votes were stolen (or weren't) but I wonder about just how much intimidation was experienced across the country during the election process.

[mopinko]

4. intimidation alone

swayed many an election in the south, thanks to the kkk. how sophisticated of a conspiracy were they? even after public lynchings went out of style, (as much as they did) it is the dark side of human nature to jump on the bully bandwagon.
i think the number i read is an average of 20 votes per precinct. not many really. i don't have any trouble at all.

[garybeck]

5. it depends if you're asking about

the intimidation and suppression, that involves more people.

but for the e-voting, that involves a very few.

[Mistwell]

6. Which evidence

It depends on what evidence you think shows that it was fraud.

1) If it is the intimidation, then it's a fairly large number of people, though perhaps it didn't have to necessarily be coordinated and organized.

2) If it is the early exit polls, then it is even more people given the early exit polls from all prior years show the same pattern (even in years where computers were not used to count most votes) - so it would have to be a massive conspiracy of a massive number of people spanning decades.

3) If it is the suspicion and some (one) testimony of possibly fixing computers in select areas to defraud the vote, then it's an unknown but potentially small number of people.

So, it all depends on which theory you believe in. Some theories make it very unlikely given the number of people that would need to participate, while others can work with a small number of people.

[eomer]

7. How many were "unwitting" participants?

Most of the people who were "in collusion" may not have even known that they were.

For example, in Ohio the BOE employees are totally deferential to the vendors when it comes to the tabulator hardware and software. They just do what they are instructed to do and have no idea what the purpose or implications are. They apparently have no security procedures or standards on their own so the vendors can accomplish anything they want to. If a vendor asked a BOE employee to install a "software patch" then they would do so without any way of knowing whether it was really a patch or really a fraudulent counting algorithm.

Do we call these BOE employees "in collusion" or not?

Similarly for the Ohio recount. There was obviously a centrally orchestrated scheme to force the recount to happen a certain way, which happened to be in violation of the rules and whose purpose was to thwart the intent and effectiveness of the recount. Once again, this required the participation of at least a few employees at virtually every BOE. But some of these BOE employees probably did not realize what the real purpose of the rules violations was. They thought it was to avoid being overworked and wasting taxpayer money when in reality it was to rig the recount to come out a certain way.

So when we talk about how many had to be in collusion we need to take into account that many who helped may have been unwitting helpers.


edit: spelling and wording

[adolfo]

8. Counting 2-3 minimum for e-votes

(Assuming there was intentional e-vote manipulation.) For electronic voting it would require a minimum of 2 people; a programmer to work on the vote code and a manager for overseeing the project. Additionally, for each company involved it should take no more than 1 representative.

The more people you add to the mix, the less chances of it remaining a secret. With the exception of some election officials all other methods of suppressing the vote wouldn’t require direct involvement with the main conspirators.

[FogerRox]

10. Adolpho has it right-- Not a thousand peeps

This IIRC has been addressed before--

IMHO---5 to 10 tops, thats it.

Control of the marketplace:

Howard Ahmanson was the initial investor for AIS which became
ES&S,about 1999, they make DRE's or touchscreen voting machines.
Todd and Bob Urosevich were the founders of AIS, until recently Bob
was CEO of diebold Election systems and Todd is currently VP of
aftermarket sales for ES&S.

Howard Ahmanson funds a foundation named after his father Howard
Farmstead Ahmanson -the Farmstead foundation. This also is a
reconstructionist group.

Richard Mellon Scaife and H. Ahmanson are know to contribute to
another group--I'd have to look thru my files to find the NY Times
article --1992- IIRC--this group is also reconstructionist.

In the late 1990's Chuck Hagel was CEO of AIS,when they sold DRE's
to the state of Nebraska--Chuck then resigned as CEO and ran for the
US Senate in Nebrsaska.. and won-------
Sen. Hagel also has ties to this reconstructionist movement.

SOoo the point here is that--- of the 3 major companies that sell
DRE;s in the USA---2 of them have significant ties to the Christian
reconstructionist movement.

Thats about 2/3rds of the DRE marketplace. In 2004 85% of Americans
had their vote counted by a Corporate owned PC.