Christopher Dodd ('Democrat') helped engineer the Bushite corporate takeover of our election system, which now controls all vote tabulation in the country with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code and virtually no audit/recount controls. Diebold, its brethren corporation, ES&S, and a third Republican election theft player, Sequoia, have the capability of putting an undetectable 5% to 10% "thumb on the scales" for Bushites, warmongers and corporatists (and have certainly done so in the last two elections*).
I'm pushing an Absentee Ballot protest. If enough people vote AB, all those shiny new election theft machines will be obsolete. Then we get American Revolution II (the American people demanding TRANSPARENT elections--and everything good that can come from TRANSPARENT elections).
(Note: AB voting is not safe either, but it IS a PROTEST against the rigged machines. Like Rosa Parks, who refused to sit at the back of the bus, WE REFUSE TO VOTE ON THESE RIGGED MACHINES! We can't help what corrupt election officials do with our AB votes (they scan them right into the rigged electronic system--separating the vote from the evidence of the vote (the ballot) which is almost never seen again.). But we CAN refuse TO TOUCH the machines. We CAN refuse to cooperate with all that expensive, crapass, election theft technology. And, if this protest gets big enough, we CAN bring the rigged system down by AB voting.)
I'm not familiar with Connecticut's voting system, but I imagine (with Dodd as Senator) that it's some version of this insecure and extremely insider hackable election theft technology, controlled by the main corporate players. By voting on these machines, you are cooperating with election theft. Sorry to say it that way. But it's true. Even if CT has optiscans (which include a paper ballot record), these machines are part of this corrupt system. The vote is separated from the ballot, and the ballot is almost never seen again. The central tabulators are also run on private, secret, corporate-controlled programming code. The audits (matchup of electronic results and ballots) are 1% AT BEST (often no audit at all), and recounts are extremely hard to get (and even then, only involve 1% to 3%). In this high speed, OPAQUE environment, massive vote switching can occur WITHOUT DETECTION. And can you imagine Bushites RESISTING such a temptation? Har-har. In fact, they set it all up this way ON PURPOSE (and with the collusion of a whole lot of corporate swill 'Democrats'.)
Anyway, will the vote counting in Connecticut be TRANSPARENT and VERIFIABLE? No! (Nor will it be anywhere in the country.) So that must be factored into this critically important, war issue race. The fascists will steal it if they can. And they can.
We passionately work our butts off for change--as we did in '04. And they just steal it--invisibly now. It's disheartening. But it's better to know this, than not know it. If you know the REAL reason you've lost, you can do something about it. If you get falsely led to the wrong reasons, things will never change--because we will never develop the right strategy to defeat it (such as massive AB voting).
------------------
*Note: The "thumb on the scales" for Bush was detectable in 2004 by analysis of the exit polls, which showed a 3% Kerry win. When you combine that with Bushite vote suppression of Dem voters, Kerry likely won by 4% to 5%. All indicators pointed to a Kerry win--except for the "official count" which was derived by TRADE SECRET formulas, owned and controlled by Diebold and ES&S, two related, rightwing Bushite corporations. The war profiteering corporate news monopolies DOCTORED their exit polls to MATCH Diebold/ES&S's "trade secret" result, thus depriving the American people of major evidence of election fraud. The polling firm that did this--Edison-Mitofsky--has promised never to let us see their real exit polls again, and has refused to disclose the raw data, even to a Congressional committee and statistical experts. So it's going to be very difficult in future to detect the fraud. Also, Diebold has been experimenting with massive vote flipovers, as with the election reform initiatives last year in Ohio: predicted to win by 60/40, but, according to Diebold "trade secret" vote tabulation, LOST by 60/40 on election day.
See: Bob Koehler, title: "Poll Shock" 11/24/05)
http://commonwonders.com/archives/col321.htm
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
