Unlike, say, Bill Gates, who gives out all of the Windows code, line by line, for free inspection I suppose?

You still have neglected to tell us how you can hack an election. How are you gaining access to all of the machines, in all of the precincts, in all of the counties, in all of the states?

yes I have shown how a programmer for ANY voting machine company can steal an election. And as I have stated before, the programmer if smart would not have the code execute in every machine. IE it would execute in only 30 percent of the machines and it would very the amounts it shaves. Again these are very easy things to do as a programmer. It is amazing how easy it is to do malicious things when one is a programmer for the system.

Gee who was the last programmer to add code or supposedly verify the code? did this programmer add or modify?

Gee these voting machine companies have sent "software patches" what the day before the election? so much for that testing by the so called "testing houses" labs for verification done 4 years before.

And again they certify without going through the source code. and by the way who says the source code is identical on every machine? who tests every machine this the day of the election when some states even have machine sleepovers. do we have 2 engineers (one dem and one republican) at every precinct to test that every machine has the same code. And yes it would take a sharp tech person to find discrepancies.. No I have never heard of such a thing.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm


And will you show me how the Chinese "as noted above" have ever infiltrated a computer. Geee so why worry?

BTW where are these machines/computers manufactured that ESS Diebold and so on are using?


Here is an intersting requirement by a voting machine manufacturer, here is what can not be disclosed.
http://www.democracyforutah.com/node/1442?...34d3f369416d448

No you didn't. You showed how people have said they could rig a machine. That's not even on the same planet - let alone territory - of rigging an election.

And we're still waiting for you to explain that part. This has been my contention from the beginning. How do you tap your machines into felonious bliss across many precincts and states without the conspiracy you say isn't required?

Can you please answer this question?

That is you opinion and I have no reason to believe your opinion as well as you do not want to believe or possibly understand my dyslexia writing of what is posted and that is fine. Well I have to say we will have to agree to disagree.

also I think my links are numerous and have been very credible.


Onto another area.............. just founf these links. seems I have some others in kind about this issue.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/14/researc...citizens-shoc/2


http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/06/diebold...r-minutes-flat/

http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/bo...1954/36510.html
there are some easy to unplug chips in there I wonder what they are?


http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

gee here we go again. please look up the definitition of rate. here to be clear we are looking at dv/dt where did I say number of votes.

So you have a dv/dt that is unique to a “real” election and cannot be tested for by just entering the number of votes typical for the election and in the manner they would be inputted? As you know this could be done as a software run – IMO there is no way you could make a system that would “know” it was or was not “election day” for test purposes. What is the dv/dt of voting??? You have this data?

And this is the point. The machines are out there and can be tested by any and all means before AND after an election. And why do you assume the system even has a “date” field?

The companies are as good or badly run as any in a competitive business. All we can do without the source code is test the machines thoroughly. And if you are telling me you can fix it so any test done will not pick up a “fix” you have not convinced me yet.

I do agree there should be a paper copy if they are used and the paper copy should be printed for the voter (to examin) and hand in to be keep as an audit.

Ted, you have noted several times in this thread you agree with the print out, thanks for confirmation of understanding again.

Ok, here is the rate dv/dt part of the program that will stop the detection. Yes the date in testing could be set for the election date for testing and I am assuming it is. and yes we could enter a bunch of votes as the normal election. But are you going to test it in a realtime simulation, IE a vote every say 10 minutes for 14 hours. If any votes happen faster than x (say 7 minute) minutes intervals the vote change will not take place. also as I said I am going to only do this in 30 percent of the machines. so how many machines actually get tested? I have no idea but the manpower to test just a machine like this is huge. I wonder who picks the machine for testing. From what I have heard the manufacturer sends the machines directly in some cases. In Ohio in the last presidential election for the recount the manufacturer told the county which machines were to be used for the recount. geeee

Now lets look if there is an inaccurate vote, we assume the machine did not work. just machine malfunction. IE like reported machine that flipped 4000 votes if I remember that one accurately. As we can see the vote machine companies have it such that in most areas the state can not even disclose any security or machine "malfunctions" there can be nothing more despicable/threatening to democracy than the silence of forced silence of these issues.

inventor, I know it's about the 10th time we are asking you, but how are YOU going to do this, without a massive conspiracy involving the voting machine company. Even you seem in indicate a grand conspiracy:



I mean, how is one lone programmer going to do all of this without being detected? It's just not realistic.

Again for the 20th time,,, very easy answer.

First I will not rule out any way or method of these companies or individuals committing fraud.

First way is one single programmer putting in the code as I stated. Simple as that. no one else needed..... Said and done.... very simple. One single programmer putting in the code I mentioned. Simple as that. do you understand? If not we are going to have to agree that you can not understand my writing. But I find it interesting that in all the boards I have ever posted debate/information ONLY some of those on the right seem not only do not want to fix this but also deny it could ever happen. I really did not know the security of voting was a partisan issue, as it turns out to be.

Next we are speaking of ALL fraud POSSIBILITIES........ our goal is to stop all electronic vote fraud possibilities here. so yes it is also possible that there are multiple persons involved in voting fraud. I would be negligent to keep an open mind to that possibility. The reason this is a obviously possible is we have 3 republican high level people convicted of vote fraud in a recent election and they had over 20-30 calls to the Bush white house leading up to the election. So we know that there is collusion with the white house (the white house will not release whos phone number that was) to commit vote fraud even at a level of stopping several thousand voters. So if they could have done more damage with lower risk of being caught do you think no-one would do it?

inventor, almost everything you claim is either implausible and/or factually incorrect.

First, Diebold does allow their source code to be reviewed for certification by states that request it. Half their machines used in the last election did print out receipts. The one I used did as well. You can't take it with you (and you shouldn't be able to) and they are used for auditing and recounts.

For the record, I voted a straight democratic ticket the last 2 elections. I challenge you to find evidence anywhere here that disputes my inclinations to that. I'm a small government, fiscally responsible, pro-life republican that has nothing in common with today's republican party. So save your partisanship ideals for someone else.

Anyhow, your super-secret trojan would have to switch votes in every precinct in every state, pass the audit votes correctly, give the correct reciepts, and swing votes in a double entry encrypted database. Any idea how much memory that would take, where it would run in memory that remains protected and undetectable?

Let me help you - not.gonna.happen. Not on a Windows system anyhow.

Secondly, no one person works on source code. That simply doesn't happen and it never will. Your hacks/trojans/special loops/whatever-else-you-could-dream-up would have to pass the scrutiny of your coworkers, the testers, the election comission when they certify the machine, the people who certify the source code, black box voting companies that make their living hoping to find what you are trying to do (which to date, has never been found), all while passing every audit correctly.

Do you know how nutty your "I know when election day is" claim is? So does everybody else with a clue. Do you think nobody is smart enough to set the date the machine for actual election day and run an election to verify it's results?

Now, your spiffy little hardware/hack that somehow shared resources with Windows without the blue screen of death (you'd be the first) would need to open a database up, unencrypt the election results, and switch votes in a double-entry system using the same encryption. Your monkey example ran a VBA script that altered tables. The VBA script was already loaded (your first roadblock) and they used no encryption and no double-entry methods. You couldn't get the script on there without taking the machine apart.

Of course, nobody would notice you taking apart the machine with a toolpouch while you voted so you can install your nefarious hardware and software. These systems are only protected by blinders. Election workers can see everything you do except for which buttons you push.

Do you really think you are that smart and people are this dumb?

Most of your post is so far fetched. for instance you say.
I guess you did not see one of the recent links so you absolutely do not know what you are talking about. Next I do not care if a state is provided with source code, they are not qualified and do not have the needed manpower or expertise to go through line by line. But from what I have heard they are not provided the source code. Please provide the link for this information you claim to be true...................



You then state...
I am tired of saying this but one person on the thread got it and seems you just can not figure it out. I can not believe how nutty you are to not understand this simple statement. I assume you have never taken advanced math or engineering courses for this simple concept or you just do not understand the term rate........ I disclosed a rate[color=#FF0000] of voting. And to that matter I stated of cource they would move the clock to the election date for testing ... at least I assume they would do this. so do you know how nutty your post really is...

But needless to say there are NO good standards for testing that I have seen. Since you are claiming you know the testing standards please provide your source for this.... So if you have a copy please post them.... In fact as I said a person who has never worked on a computer a hack without an engineering degree could be the verifier company from what I have read.

So lets assume a person does actually run a simulation and puts it to election day as I previously posted.. GOT IT, Election DATE... Is he going to run this simulation to have a vote every 7 minutes for the entire day, with no breaks. No he isn't. and even if he does this and I put in in lets say 10% of the machines. if he gets a machine that fails what is he going to do. Oh that one machine is not certified. next one. there are what 100k machines out there. and there is no way they test every machine. Now if you had the ability to understand what rate means you would know the only way one would look for rate is to get past the setting the machine for election date. Remember I only need to change a few percent...

Please post your source that diebold now prints 50% of their ballots in the last election.. and as I mentioned at least three times in Nevada we have all machines that print and I can steal the election. As long as the voter can not deposit his vote in a lock box the machine can change that vote. The machine can spoil a ballot and print another one. The machines print out in Nevada are not touchable by the voter. Ours were not Diebold.

And next as we know and I think you also agree the electronic reporting system is also hackable. We must have the votes counted by all parties at the polling place and they verify that it is correct.

As long as you list yourself as party affiliation republican on the page I will assume you know what you are.

Just an off-the-wall question. Given the ease which you could perpetrate your 'hacks' (which I don't believe, but just for argument's sake)...Shouldn't we just use paper ballots?

Oh yeah, every single thing you say (and worse) could and has been done to paper ballot voting since the beginning of time. Democracy hangs by a thread.

As for party affiliation, I do wonder why Democrats are the ones against ID verification and for paper ballots. Wasn't it Stalin who said "It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes?"

all three good issues are worthy of another thread. As you may know canada does use a paper ballot.

Your second yes vote fraud has been present from the beginning of human nature. the reason I pick a triple verification is to eliminate as much fraud as humanly possible. what is interesting and timely the NYT today put a vote fraud 5 year study front page. you can guess the republican run Justice Department found so few cases it was less than just the problems in one precinct with vote machine problems.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washingt...3IBWxpXiOAs9Nqw



Third, as I posted our CIA has manipulated elections in many countries. I am for a system used in most of the world inking ones thumb on election day. I am for having the election day a national holiday. I am for a national ID but not mandatory, if you vote without one your vote goes to a to be challenged if recounted like an absentee.

and sorry no replies allowed on these, a new thread must be started.

Paper ballots? What's to stop someone that doesn't need any technical skills to create fake ballots and stuff the ballot boxes? If a bunch of 8 year olds were solicited to perpetrate this nefarious plan, they wouldn't even go to jail.

What is easier? Getting kids that can't be prosecuted to do something that requires no skill, or find a plethora of highly skilled computer experts willing to commit felonies of the highest order?

Let me play by the same rules as the ones inventor's genius plan requires, and I could swing an election much, much easier by stuffing ballot boxes. And nobody goes to jail if/when caught.

Actually I have disclosed a way to stop that 3-5 times on this thread as it applies to the electronic voting print outs too.

Quite simply, the dems, republicans, the greens, any purples bring to the election a special stamp provided by their respective parties. with that each party provides their judge with a batch of colored inks and an envelope that stays in the dems hands with a phone number they are to call with a code. When they call that number they enter the code. Then it tells them what color to use to stamp the back of the ballots after the person votes. Then the votes are counted before they leave the polling place. the respective parties call in their count to the respective parties and they each make a call to the state and report the total. the state will post it and the parties independently verify their counts and if it matches they call the poll worker to go home or if problem then all parties stay with the ballots till rectified.

I know, I was just playing devil's advocate. I'd much rather have competent electronic systems vs. paper ballots, especially given the voter registration fraud perpetrated on a massive scale by groups like ACORN last time, and the general history of vote fraud in the US, especially the big cities.


The problem is that all parties couldn't possible have adequate representation at the polling places. I believe there are more than 2,000 polling places in Cook County, IL, where I live. You need 3 or 4 judges from each party since it's a 14-15 hour day with no breaks. And who judges "independent" candidates or referendum items?

That means that you need ideally 6,000 - 8,000 "volunteers" from each party to staff the polling places to ensure that the Democrats don't steal their vote. As it stands, in the city of Chicago, my polling place has 3 or 4 "Republican judges" that are really life-long Democrats who are paid by the county to sit as polling judges. They do the job every election just to get the day's pay, and in most Chicago wards there are literally no Republicans. The only exception is when Mrs. Carlito volunteered for the 2004 election (and witnessed wholesale fraud, but that's another story).

If the Libertarians and Reforms get back on the ballot in IL, then you would possibly need more volunteers than there are voters for those parties.

Let's say that four parties qualified. You would have to pay them ($100 / day times 4 volunteers times 4 parties times 2,000 polling places = $3,200,000) You would have to train them ($50 1/2 day pay = $1,600,000) plus facility plus transport plus facility plus materials, plus figuring out how to find 6,000 or 8,000 Libertarians in Cook County that have a whole day free to spend 14 hours stamping ballots...

And let's be honest, if you made voting day a state holiday, everyone would vote early and go out of town that day. The only ones that would "volunteer" would be the ones that need the money, which is just like it is now. Which would defeat the purpose. And then you'd need your ink-laden volunteers to staff the absentee desk for 6 or 8 weeks of early voting.

Plus, one really big problem that I think you missed.

Currently, I can vote for a Republican president, Democratic Senator, Independent Water Reclamation District President, Democratic County Judge, Republican State Justice, Libertarian School Board member, you name it. Plus a myriad of referenda and other issues.

In order to ink stamp each "party choice," you would have to have one ballot for every single candidate. So, for a Presidential election year, you would need ballots to handle each of the national, state and local elections. You just multiplied the complexity of the election by 60 or 100 times. We wouldn't get vote counts for weeks, and there would be endless challenges and litigation with such a system.

this is simple I have never been to a polling place in my life that did not have at least 4 people there working. so you are inferring polling places have less than 2 people?

I have no problem with taking the day as a vacation day... have a great day...

Here is an example we already have judges from two parties. but also note a vulnerability.....

http://avirubin.com/judge2.html



more troubling is below......... gee 9 judges and the president of Diebold showing up multiple times to precincts...
.....


Here just so you know a little more about your cook county where you live... I will do the math for you, that is 5 per precinct. that is todays number. And I would require a minimum of two from opposing parties, by percentage of county any party that has over 20% total in another party they must be represented.

http://www.voterinfonet.com/sub/election_judges.asp

But is this the case or not? No I believe not. By the way we know JFK was elected by stuffed Ballot boxes in Chicago – so this is still IMO the worst threat. And your dv/dt argument is still nebulous. First of all it will vary and second the exact dv/dt is known by the people making the machines and the people who buy them. Easy test – just program votes entered at that rate up to the number of average voters in an election and them audit. Test 50 machines and if 10% are fixed you will have caught 3-5 at least. Find just one “fixed” machine anywhere and its all over for the company and its ececs. And as we know with all the machines out there and smart suspicious people like you not one “fixed” machine has been uncovered to my knowledge.

Tells you something.

please post the links to this absolute proof you have about the election .

Ok seems you understand the dv/dt issue. It is simple if you are involved in designing you also know specifically how they are tested. Once you know the testing you design your dv/dt or hook or whatever by that knowledge.

Can you provide me with links to how these are tested. From what I have been told testing labs test just basic things. IE are the names coming up properly, if they vote x times does it record x votes and so on, nothing detailed. That they are not there to find the fraud methods specially when there is a code change the day before the election.. So please list all 50 states requirements. You show me the specific testing proceedure an I will show you how to get around it.



here is what I have found
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?si...06&from=rss


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/04/washingt...nyt&emc=rss
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: January 4, 2007



being from nevada here is what happens on slots.. more than voting machines...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/05/ev...ell_understood/
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2004/11/[code]65535

adding another good link... note the bolded, as I guessed the testing is set up via the manufacturer... not good as this person notes...
http://nyvv.org/blog/2007/01/secrets-of-vo...ne-testing.html

[quote]“CIBER has not shown the resources to provide a reliable product. The current quality management plan requires more time to spend on managing the process than they appear to have available and it was clear during the assessment visit that they had not accepted that they have a responsibility to provide quality reviewed reports that show what was done in testing.”<!--[endif]-->
“CIBER’s reports provide limited or no descriptions of the testing performed so a reader or reviewer can not tell if all the testing was completed. Cross checking between CIBER and Wyle reports has revealed at times that neither [voting machine test lab] has performed certain tests, expecting that the test was done by the other.”<!--[endif]-->
“In addition, during the review, [CIBER] indicated that the testing for a product tends to either use vendor developed tests or new tests developed specifically for the product—they have no standard test methods defined. This makes their testing dependent on vendor input and vulnerable to unique vendor interpretations rather than a core validated set of internal references for training and testing.”[/quote]

OK, there are 12,500 judges in the suburban precints. Add to that the 2,600 precincts in the city and there are probably 25,000 judges. They are largely uneducated, they fall asleep in their training classes, they are almost all Democrats, and half of them are called "Republican judges" on election day. I would estimate that maybe half do it out of civic duty, and the rest (especially in the city) do this for the couple of hundred bucks involved. If you believe the election website you linked that our elections are carried out "fairly, honestly and accurately," then you are being a little naive in my opinion.

So, if the Republicans don't have 20% of Cook County, they don't need any election judges? Third parties don't need any? What are you saying?

You can "require" all the judges you like, what I'm saying is that there aren't enough Republicans in Cook County willing to spend 15 hours stamping ballots for $100.

inventor, did you miss my point about ink-stamping each candidate requiring 60 or 100 ballots? What is your solution there? Who judges and stamps ballots that have no party, like independent candidates or referenda?

Again I am in favor of testing and maintain that good tests should be done and if they are the result will be that no machine could be fixed.

If CA passes tough laws others will as well. STILL all the machines ever sold are still out there and neither you or anyone else has ever found a “fixed” machine and I have to assume people have tried.

And since states vary and tests can be changed at will there in no way IMO you could design a fix around a specific test. Any “hook” put in a machine is always still there.

Well, I voted in an aldermanic run-off election this morning. More judges than voters in my Chicago city precinct. There were two fresh, new faces who were there recording each voter for later verification. They were "volunteers" of the labor groups who are backing the challenger candidate in my ward. That plus two democratic judges, and a few other poll volunteers. No other parties needed, since none were in the race.

Voted on an optically scanned ballot by connecting an arrow, and the vote was counted by the evil machine. As I looked at the simple counting machine, it pained me to know that it was just lying in wait until 2008 in order to skim democratic votes and give Mitt Romney Cook County's presidential vote....

This might be a stupid question, since this thread has been running for about six months now, but why is it remotely necessary to use voting machines at all? Can't the mighty power of the United States cope with simple ballot papers where the voter puts a pencil cross in a box next to their favoured candidate's name?

I know ballots for the various tiers of government and elected offices tend to be balled up to stop being having to spend all their free time voting, but surely one ballot paper for each election, with some sort of colour code for the different types of election on offer that day, with a real human being counting up the votes at a network of more central locations and reports the results would solve all the guff about whether this type of machine dimples the chads correctly or that type of machine counts the electronic pulses appropriately?

Why complicate things?

Could we do without – sure but the costs would be much higher and errors would be greater. Computers are very, very good at doing this type of chore quickly and cheaply.

Could we do without the “spreadsheet” and the Word Processor – sure but who wants to??

hmm pencil or pen cross, well was it in the box exactly, was it an x and so on I can see the arguments. The goal is to eliminate the subjective standards that can be used.

Second to this is the ability of ease of ballot box fraud. yes they can do the multiple stamps with different colored ink on the back of the ballots but I like the machine count redundancy that can be very low cost as I have suggested, it would cut the costs by about half if done my way or the highway...

See also in the manual recounts only the candidate you vote for is listed on your ballot so no confusion and very simple to count. No confusion of x is in the box.

Here is a recent find that points out the other major vulnerability is when the central counters have issues.

read this link as it is very detailed with many issues raised that need to be checked out in full via a independent council. Loved the one where Bush recieved 4,258 votes with only 638 people voting.. ooops. and several counties with only 120-131 percent turn outs. or maybe the 350 of the fianal punch cards cast election day were all bush supporters. or another one with210 votes the last ones cast.

http://www.alternet.org/story/50941/


and they close with a statement I can support, they obviously get it...

Would you post corroboration on this from the Ohio election web site or the courts or someone. Looks like the margin was 118,000 votes. Are you saying anything in your article even comes close?? Are you claiming error or voting machine fraud?

I like this comment:


Top of Form
New York City, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago, Philadephia, Pittsburgh, Boston - all urban areas with heavy MINORITY populations, all in states that went BLUE - no problem with voting
BUT - Cleveland and Cincinnati - they are in a state that went red. It's funny that the only problems in 2004 were in Ohio.
In 2000, the only problems were in Florida. Apparently Florida fixed the problems they had in 2000 for the 2004 election. And apparently there were no problems in Wisconsin, because the Democrats won that state by 11,000 VOTES. Only Ohio is to blame because George W. Bush won that state by 118,000 VOTES.
Recap:
NY, Mass, Michigan, Illinois, California - cities without voter problems
Wisconsin - a state decided by 11,000 votes goes blue - no problem
Ohio - a state decided by 118,000 votes goes red - voter fraud, evil republicans fixing elections yet again!!!!!!!!!! Does Bush have a step-brother that we don't know about running Ohio. I mean, we all know that Jeb stole the will of the people for his brother, he must have a relative in Ohio.

http://newsbusters.org/node/8417#comment-210952

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselect...4/countymap.htm

Ted thank you for posting some bloggers opinion without any facts to back up their trash talk. Can you tell me how they determined how there were no vote fraud issues in those states? again from what I understand all the machines are made by republicans.

So you did not answer to the other issues of the article I cited. As we know the one county locked up all votes and did not let anyone in because they claimed officially that they were notified by the homeland security that there was a terrorist threat????? . As we know as a fact homeland security has said there was no such threat. Can you please find the blogger that has that answer. and the rest.

Now did the attorney general ever begin looking into the vote fraud issues like these. Answer no, he can not remember... so many major discrepancies and so far no grand juries /investigations... geee how does that happen. It was requested by the dems...

.


Come on – how can you know this??? Please. And what the article said is the Dems had no claims of voter fraud in the big cities that went their way but only in places they wanted to win and lost – sour grapes? Certainly the massive right wing conspiracy would have fixed more than a few voted in OH – where by the way the number you are discussing hadno impact on the result.



I need more info. This was a blogger report as well. If it mattered why didn’t the Dems take it to court. Could it be because it could make no difference in the election???

TED, well I guess you did not read the credits at the bottom of the page, hardly bloggers as you infer.



So the answer to your question is yes there is a lawsuit. And yes the head of voting of Ohio was to be deposed and he did not show up, he cited some kind of privilege that is working its way through he court, so that he will be able to testify a gazillion times I can not remember when it finally gets resolved.... that is why we need a grand jury the federal government to do it.

To add to that the congress did hold hearings back then and because the dems do not have a majority they could not use subpoena power to force people to appear. Blackwell, and more did not show up though they were asked to, yes Blackwell and Feeney for two were asked to appear voluntarily... . again if there was any massive fraud by the dems the republicans hold ALL federal prosecutors and would have gone after them. But the Bush appointed partisan federal prosecutors did not go after any democratic mass fraud cases. NOT a ONE.

I did not hear of one grand jury put together for any massive fraud by the republican federal prosecutors. And we now know Rove/Gonzalez et al fired and put pressure federal prosecutors if they did not go after several individuals that voted though they were not eligible. With all the money spent they were mad that these prosecutors would not go after a handful or two of convicted felons that voted because they thought they were now eligible. And I heard they were charging one person who voted absentee and later asked if her vote should be by machine instead and they told her to re-vote. That was the best they could do is not one that was a dem conspiracy of mass vote fraud. NOT ONE CASE...

Yet democrats have had all these questions of counties or precincts flipping that the dems had hearing on and not one federal prosecuter picked up those. gee how does that happen. Hey what happened to all of Roves emails, seems like they have disappeared like votes do, gee they were the same servers??????? what a co-incidence....

Huh. Wish you could document that as the Dems would love to have it as they try vainly to pin something on the legal “firings” - show mw one investigation compromised.


And please respond. Could any voter fraud in OH you allege make a difference in the 118,000 Bush votes. Certainly not IMO.

Ted,
Here are a few references of prosecutors who were fired for not going after small cases of vote fraud. this is under investigation as you can see by the democrats. Again note not one federal prosecutor found and significant fraud by dems to convene a grand jury. you will even see the most aggressive on this issue was fired because he found none... he even set up a toll free phone number with the FBI to go after it. He was the trainer of the other prosecutors. He found none by dems. note these are mainly recent articles last couple of weeks. Dems are starting to get somewhere.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...31201818_2.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/washingt...nyt&emc=rss


http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/25900

here is why one fed prosecutor was in hot water. It was his decision not to prosecute for an error.




http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...6I&refer=us


as far as your second question, absolutely there are methods of vote fraud that can account for more than that. A BBC reporter just released a book highlighting the facts he was able to dig up on vote fraud in the USA. Finally a real journalist reports in, shame the corporatist US media will not allow an american journalist to do a in depth look at vote fraud. But hey considering the US media is rated about 20something in the world go figure.

Interesting twist inventor – certainly you would want your “politically appointed” person to look into this – as any Democrat would do – right? IMO Dems are looking for mush bigger fish in the voter fraud area in the years to come – that is illegal aliens. Thus that often favor giving illegal aliens drivers licenses – next step to the POLLS. Watch for this.

Bottom line “voter fraud” should be a clear priority for USAs. Certainly you agree.
Since the 2000 presidential election ended in dispute in Florida, Republicans have repeatedly raised concerns about possible voter fraud, alleging that convicted felons and other ineligible voters have been permitted to cast ballots to the benefit of Democrats.



Can you post. And who is bigger in the fraud area? IMO the Dems are tops in this area.

"It is becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic Party perpetrated massive voter fraud in state after state in the 2004 election, just as it did in the 2000 election. The latest news comes from Wisconsin, where a task force has been formed to probe fraud apparently perpetrated by the Democrats in Milwaukee:
Local and federal law enforcement authorities are finalizing a task force that is to look into potential fraud in Milwaukee in the Nov. 2 election, sources confirmed today.

The details are being worked out between Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann, U.S. Attorney Steve Biskupic, Milwaukee Police Chief Nannette Hegerty and the local office of the FBI."

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/009328.php

"Voter fraud fiascos in Wisconsin and East St. Louis are now on top bloggers' radar screen.
Now, it's time to turn the spotlight on the stink in Sacramento. California-based watchdogs have been hot on the littered trail of embattled Democratic Secretary of State Kevin Shelley. In a nutshell:

Besides allegations that he used millions of dollars in federal Help America Vote Act funds to boost his political profile and reward Democratic allies, [Shelley] also faces two state investigations and a federal probe into accusations he accepted campaign contributions from a political ally that had been laundered through a state grant. He's also been accused of accepting political donations in his state office.
A bombshell investigative report from the California State Personnel Board released today blasted Shelley's hiring practices:"

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001346.htm

Ted, you will have to excuse me but the republicans have been crying wold over this for 10 to 20 years. And again every federal prosecuter has to be a partisan taking a right wing oath to do damage to democrats or be replaces apparently. So with this wolf crying where is the beef the criers have held every political position for several election cycles and control the prosecutors.

so to date how many illegal aliens have been caught voting? I would like exact numbers...

this seems to be a relatively easy to spot, you do have to have a real address so you are easily tracked down. From what I am aware of illegals they avoid high risk places because they do not want to be deported. they are here to make money not be sent back. So please with all the federal prosecutors in the right wing pocket, exactly how many illegal aliens did they convict. Lets assume not many because the right wing web sites would be gloating vs all we have is their area 51 conspiracy's they seem to have with aliens..

and with all the kings men able to investigate the dems again you have nothing major exacept propaganda that is still being used. As far as the fellons, that one is easy too. show us where this happened massively and prosecute them. this is easy they have to list an address so the federal prosecutors can easily nail them. But what has happened is the way the republicans have scrubbed voter lists. If your name matches a convicted fellon and you live in a democratic area you are removed. So lets say your name is john smith or any common name and you live in a democratic area you automatically lose your right to vote. for purposely taking away one eligible persons right to vote is no democracy....

I say if this is done by a computer company those who cause one person to lose their vote that company President should go to jail for a year vote fraud and never be able to vote again. And for the second one he causes to lose their vote he should spend 20 years in jail and if he is responsible for 3 people who should have been able to vote he should get a life sentence. So yes liberals can be tough on crime... And that goes with everyone in that company. To deny an american of their vote is to hate america and its freedom.

yes, Greg Palast; here is the book on sale in paperback April 24th... from his interviews I have heard he claims about 1.5 million voters names were scrubbed/disenfranchised in one way or another by the republicans which were eligible voters. He said that on one of the talk shows yesterday.
http://www.gregpalast.com/

I think phone calls or pamphlets or announcements to dems that because of the large numbers voting dems should vote on wednesday. Or in dem areas where there were increased registrations decreasing the machines in those precincts cause lines of hours to vote. these tactics should not be allowed in a free country. and as we see not one prosecution by the right partisan federal prosecutors. and again we are beginning to get investigations that those on the right are beginning to complain about. Gee why... lets get an independent council that is a partisan dem pulling grand jurys and lets see how many people get convicted for vote fraud. The right has their hand picked federal prosecutors the rest of america needs to be helped.

Well that would be impossible wouldn’t it??? But we do have some evidence – here

Non-Citizen Voting in Federal Elections


“In 1996, Congress enacted the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, making it a federal crime for non-citizens to vote in any federal election (or state election, unless authorized by state law). As a penalty, ineligible non-citizens who knowingly vote may be deported. Additionally, a non-citizen who falsely claims to be a United States citizen is in violation of this law.

However, there are many documented reports of non-citizen voting,[1] [2] and there is no evidence of prosecution of the aliens for their action. With nearly 19 million foreign-born residents who are not U.S. citizens in the country in the 2000 Census and an estimated 9-11 million illegal residents (many of them not also counted in the Census), the potential is enormous for non-citizens to affect the outcome of elections.
Charges were made in at least three federal elections in California [3] [4] and twice in Florida[5] that voting by ineligible aliens may have determined the outcome of the election. For instance:

• In Florida, election observers say a “sizable number” of Florida votes in the 2000 election may have been cast by ineligible felons, illegal immigrants, and non-citizens. [6]
• In California, former Republican Rep. Robert K. Dornan was defeated by Democrat Loretta Sanchez by 984 votes in the 1996 election. State officials found that at least 300 votes were cast illegally by non-citizens.[7]

Investigation of the allegations established that aliens had illegally voted in those elections, but not in sufficient numbers to have changed the result. Authorities appear not to have prosecuted any of the aliens who voted illegally.”
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?page...ntersb9dc#_edn1

Maybe not so easy to spot inventor….

Ted, come on be real give me some real sources. An organization called Federation for American Immigration Reform that can not give us hard facts on cases prosecuted and absolutely found in the hundreds of thousands much less a 100 cases. Or even 50 prosecuted. Show me the convictions............. Come on, that is their life goal to hate and dig up the goods. And to not have one single conclusively listed prosecution of an illegal voter is pathetic.

here is one quote I have found from your hate source...

And you will not get much sympathy for your cause when as I have stated the right has controlled every single branch of government for 7 years now including all the federal prosecutors, and if your party is not going after them to convict more than 20 that is not worthy of the USA being in a delusion that there is some sort of massive fraud going on. the right area 51 aliens case is just not a fact. it is science fiction.

I say your party wants your masses to be delusional so they can do other unethical and illegal things to disenfranchise americans (liberals and moderates) from their votes. and to energise the people of hate to hate more. the poor right victims...

again show me the massive convictions........... not hearsay, rumor, or innuendo.....

.


As stated some will go to court but how do you prosecute illegal aliens who can move at will? And I love it when my sources are not real but yours are??? Come on please. And YES some did it “unknowingly” but IMO the Dems who pushed this law through are hoping there will be a lot more of this type of “mistake”.



Except state law and enforcement of course – which illegal aliens obviously walk all over and where many cities like SF tell illegals to come on in.

No my friend the illegal immigrant issue is part of the election debate.

This is only an approximate quote, but it catches the original insight:

If you let me call this the "back end' of the voting system, I don't think it's yet been properly addressed in the spirit of Inviter's post! And I believe it's necessary to debate it in the spirit of "the validity of the whole voting system!"

Well it looks like the Republican party certainly is benefiting from "blips in technology". Missing emails and now this...


If you want you can continue to ignore the back doors and ease of tampering with these machines. But what do you do when the database that holds the voting records gets corrupted?




The idea that Diebold would not use an enterprise database (SQL or Oracle) for the voting system is simply mind boggling. As one commented on the linked article, "they might as well have been using Excel". A person wouldn't even need to tamper with the machines to change the votes, the system is inherently flawed in that the databases in use aren't designed for this level of activity. The software architects and programmers of Diebold should be fired and never allowed to work again and the government should cut any contracts with Diebold for gross negligence.

I agree and this points up what IMO is a real problem. The “customers” for the machines and so ignorant of the computer issues - esp. software that they never questioned this! So IMO this is also “mind boggling”.

IMO voter fraud at the precinct level is possible for hand count and machines. If the machines printed a copy of every vote and the voter could look at it and pass it in at the exit as with paper systems then a check would be available for “corrupted” databases. This should be done and for heavens sake lets either get states to hire consultants or full time computer experts before they buy machines. Too often the purchase is made by non experts and based on price alone. Even the Federal government doesn’t do this. They developed a “specification” and companies bid to this. Certainly any “specification” would call out a database more robust than Microsoft Jet. IMO this is not vote tampering just stupidity.

It's not the job of the government or the customer to tell a company "how" to design their software. The golden rule for good business requirements/specifications is that you tell them the "what", the programmers come up with the "how".

The customer would write something like, "Should be able to handle a load of 200,000 users". It's up to the software development company to decide "how" to handle that load. In this case, Diebold implmented it incorrectly. While I think the government should've done their due diligence, Diebold had all the "expert" architects, programmers, development managers, and quality assurance people who all dropped the ball on this.
I find it hard that you can pass the blame on to the customer. Did you ask Microsoft what the buffer size was in their RPC manager for the DNS in Windows Server 2003?

But let’s remember that the “customer” is ultimately responsible to insure the product meets the “specification”. It’s not enough for the seller to say we meet the spec and here is a price. The buyer needs to have not just a specification but a way to verify that any product that claims to meet said spec does in fact do that.

This is common in the military where most purchased products from bullets to aircraft must be tested to the initial specification and must “pass” testing before purchase or acceptance.

So my question is what was the spec and how did the unit from Diebold “pass” a test, that should have included real loading as in usage, and then fail later???

here is some more good news. Florida is in essence removing all touch screen machines. So seems some are getting it... now we will have a paper trail. Optical scan is better but still can be minipulated at the tabulators. http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20070503/tc_pcworld/131544



Here is another intersting one, gee if Venezuella owns part of the voting it is then not safe, but if a political partisan on the right does it is OK?
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/03/31...n-us-elections/

for those naysayers, here is just another study just released. As shown another study was just released. I know we will have some that know more than these programmers who we assume had the most open view of the Diebold system. and this is without them understanding the chip level vulnerability, this was a software evaluation.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135461-c...ty/article.html



and as I have also said, do not trust the trojan horse bearing paper trails... are we getting it yet.... bet this will not make the major media.... yep keep them sheep in ignorance..... why should americans be knowledgeable about voting the building block of democracy???

This last study was bogus as hell. The hacked machines with no controls in place. Given the environment, you could have stuffed ballot boxes to your hearts content, defeated optical scanners, and virtually every type of voting system available. I'm not sure what the purpose of this study was because in real life, it simply can't happen.

Again, republicans aren't that smart and democrats aren't that dumb. Nobody is going to be able to take a tool kit into a voting booth and be able to take a system apart to hack it (voting systems have no keyboards, no mice, or any other type of input device other than the touch screen). And although some precinct might be moronic enough to violate all the rules and circumvent all the election controls and allow one person into the tabulator computer (where the results of all voting machines are stored and transmitted via a dial up connection), there could not be any systematic abuse unless you thought every voting official in the country was crooked.

The latest study only proved people are willing to do anything to get rid of electronic voting and go back to their comfort zone - pregnant dimpled hanging chads on a system not friendly to the disabled or stupid.