IMO, getting anything out there is better than getting nothing out there.
But people, when you write them, please sound RATIONAL! Don't sound so convinced, like a tinfoil-hatter. Just point out that some of these things have not yet been explained, and they need to be explained.
Here's more or less what I wrote to them.
The Salon.com story is OK -- it refutes some of the voting irregularities, but it doesn't do a complete job.
- It touches on the "Dixiecrats in Florida" issue, but Olbermann pointed out that only five of the counties they looked at were in the panhandle. The other 24 were scattered across the state, and had nothing in common other than the optical scan balloting.
- It did absolutely NOTHING to address the facts that are coming out on blackboxvoting.org about the ease-of-hackability of the systems. Their FOIA request showed that the Diebold central tabulators were never even evaluated from a security standpoint by the company that was supposed to do the evaluation. I showed their article to a coworker who is a certified ethical hacker -- he is a white hat security expert. He said that he had written more security into our last product (which does nothing business-critical, and does not protect anything very important) than they had for an election.
- It still doesn't answer the question of why the exit polls were so off? Several people have weighed in on this, including Sheldon Drobny, a former CPA and founder of Air America Radio. Interesting article here:
http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10385Anyway, I'm not sitting here like chicken little saying "the election was stolen, the election was stolen." I'm just saying that the more I look into this -- with my programmer co-workers, who are actually mostly Republicans, not lefty conspiracy theorists -- the more I realize that there have been egregious security lapses.