Guide to Stealing an election

[AutumnRayne]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
IMO, the best method if a computer voting system that prints out a ballot for the voter to view, and then that ballot is inserted and counted in another machine.

Computer to vote on makes sure that the vote is 100% correct, no double vote etc etc

Paper allows recounts, and creates a trail.

Two tiered system (one to vote, one to count) makes it harder for hackers.

I like that! I think something more like that would calm many worries of the current electronic systems. You should put in a call to the president and get this started. 🙂

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
This one- right here!

Talk about seeing what you want to see...

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
Honestly I think its hilarious all the hype over stealing elections with electronic voting machines.

Sorry, its a diversion from the fact that one party is not advancing the ideas needed to win so they are willing to come up with any excuse to explain the loss.

Look, elections can be rigged with paper ballots and confirmations, been so for many years and still are today. The only reason its a concern now is that FUD works great on the ignorant masses especially when you toss in some buzzwords, technology, racism, etc.

Yeah the current electronic forms of voting have some areas of lacking. What is most striking however are the same groups lamenting over electronic voting, its security, its authenticity, are the same ones who go out of their way to prevent verifying that the voter is who they say they are.

Simply put, if you won't verify the voter with a picture ID how in the hell can you claim fraud later in the process

Did you read the article? If not, then you're one of the "ignorant masses." You're not qualified to to dismiss the points raised. There is all the difference in the world between penny-ante retail vote fraud and the kind of wholesale vote fraud available through these electronic systems.

 

[shadow9d9]

 

[spacejamz]

It has been nearly 2 years since the 'election' got stolen...

For a bumbling, incompotent president, that is quite an accomplishment to keep such a coverup of this magnitude underwraps...

Surely, by now, enough 'evidence' should have been gathered so that a mainstream media outlet can properly 'break' this story, right???

How much longer will we have to wait???

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: spacejamz
It has been nearly 2 years since the 'election' got stolen...

For a bumbling, incompotent president, that is quite an accomplishment to keep such a coverup of this magnitude underwraps...

Surely, by now, enough 'evidence' should have been gathered so that a mainstream media outlet can properly 'break' this story, right???

How much longer will we have to wait???

1. I don't think you read the op.
2. It is as easy as flipping a switch to screw results and there is no way to track it. That is the problem.

Do you think non traceable/recountable voting is something that the "greatest nation in the world" should be using to determine the outcomes of its elections?

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: spacejamz
It has been nearly 2 years since the 'election' got stolen...

For a bumbling, incompotent president, that is quite an accomplishment to keep such a coverup of this magnitude underwraps...

Surely, by now, enough 'evidence' should have been gathered so that a mainstream media outlet can properly 'break' this story, right???

How much longer will we have to wait???

1. I don't think you read the op.
2. It is as easy as flipping a switch to screw results and there is no way to track it. That is the problem.

Do you think non traceable/recountable voting is something that the "greatest nation in the world" should be using to determine the outcomes of its elections?

I am not going to debate how easy it is to rig a voting machine. Just because it can be rigged doesn't mean that it was actually rigged, now does it??

The point of my post is that if the machine was 'rigged' by the president or his staff, why hasn't this been proven? Is two years not enough time??? How could someone that is a 'complete moron' cover up something of this magnitude? Well???

 

[Banzai042]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
Honestly I think its hilarious all the hype over stealing elections with electronic voting machines.

Sorry, its a diversion from the fact that one party is not advancing the ideas needed to win so they are willing to come up with any excuse to explain the loss.

Look, elections can be rigged with paper ballots and confirmations, been so for many years and still are today. The only reason its a concern now is that FUD works great on the ignorant masses especially when you toss in some buzzwords, technology, racism, etc.

Yeah the current electronic forms of voting have some areas of lacking. What is most striking however are the same groups lamenting over electronic voting, its security, its authenticity, are the same ones who go out of their way to prevent verifying that the voter is who they say they are.

Simply put, if you won't verify the voter with a picture ID how in the hell can you claim fraud later in the process

How can you seriously say that this is FUD? I'll grant that there may be other issues with the security of the election process, but saying that one issue is imaginary because another issues exists makes no sense. It's an established fact that electronic voting machines can be easily hacked in less than 60 seconds with minimal tools. If a machine is hacked then you can do all sorts of things, like programming it to ignore votes for one candidate or inputting votes for another candidate. Combine that with companies actually actively refusing to include a paper trail and it starts to sound like these things are actually designed to be insecure.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: spacejamz

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: spacejamz
It has been nearly 2 years since the 'election' got stolen...

For a bumbling, incompotent president, that is quite an accomplishment to keep such a coverup of this magnitude underwraps...

Surely, by now, enough 'evidence' should have been gathered so that a mainstream media outlet can properly 'break' this story, right???

How much longer will we have to wait???

1. I don't think you read the op.
2. It is as easy as flipping a switch to screw results and there is no way to track it. That is the problem.

Do you think non traceable/recountable voting is something that the "greatest nation in the world" should be using to determine the outcomes of its elections?

I am not going to debate how easy it is to rig a voting machine. Just because it can be rigged doesn't mean that it was actually rigged, now does it??

The point of my post is that if the machine was 'rigged' by the president or his staff, why hasn't this been proven? Is two years not enough time??? How could someone that is a 'complete moron' cover up something of this magnitude? Well???

No one made that claim, so what on earth do you think you are responding to?

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
IMO, the best method if a computer voting system that prints out a ballot for the voter to view, and then that ballot is inserted and counted in another machine.

Computer to vote on makes sure that the vote is 100% correct, no double vote etc etc

Paper allows recounts, and creates a trail.

Two tiered system (one to vote, one to count) makes it harder for hackers.

See, it's not just liberals that want accountability in an electronic voting system. It seems like alot of conservatives didn't care about possible fraud on the voting machines because the man that controlled them was a staunch conservative. But here's proof that one of the more vocal conservatives on this forum believes in accountability and fair play. Now, while I rarely agree with ProfJohn, I'm with him on this idea.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:

The survival of this Country at stake is not funny.

I fear for the the U.S. not being to make it to 2009 if the Dems don't win back at least the House.

It?s getting harder to discern the party of fear mongering.

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:

The survival of this Country at stake is not funny.

I fear for the the U.S. not being to make it to 2009 if the Dems don't win back at least the House.

It?s getting harder to discern the party of fear mongering.

Until the Democratic leaders say voting for Republicans is a vote for terrorists, not really.

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:

The survival of this Country at stake is not funny.

I fear for the the U.S. not being to make it to 2009 if the Dems don't win back at least the House.

It?s getting harder to discern the party of fear mongering.

Until the Democratic leaders say voting for Republicans is a vote for terrorists, not really.

Don't forget that not voting for a Christian is legislating sin!

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: thraashman

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:

The survival of this Country at stake is not funny.

I fear for the the U.S. not being to make it to 2009 if the Dems don't win back at least the House.

It?s getting harder to discern the party of fear mongering.

Until the Democratic leaders say voting for Republicans is a vote for terrorists, not really.

Don't forget that not voting for a Christian is legislating sin!

Katherine Harris. What a POS she is.

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
IMO, the best method if a computer voting system that prints out a ballot for the voter to view, and then that ballot is inserted and counted in another machine.

Computer to vote on makes sure that the vote is 100% correct, no double vote etc etc

Paper allows recounts, and creates a trail.

Two tiered system (one to vote, one to count) makes it harder for hackers.

I'm down with that.

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
IMO, the best method if a computer voting system that prints out a ballot for the voter to view, and then that ballot is inserted and counted in another machine.

Computer to vote on makes sure that the vote is 100% correct, no double vote etc etc

Paper allows recounts, and creates a trail.

Two tiered system (one to vote, one to count) makes it harder for hackers.

I'm down with that.

I can live with that also.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
IMO, the best method if a computer voting system that prints out a ballot for the voter to view, and then that ballot is inserted and counted in another machine.

Computer to vote on makes sure that the vote is 100% correct, no double vote etc etc

Paper allows recounts, and creates a trail.

Two tiered system (one to vote, one to count) makes it harder for hackers.

Yes, that's generally considered best practice, and it's the norm in many other countries. It's incomprehensible that our elected officials have been willing to settle for something far inferior.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Yes, that's generally considered best practice, and it's the norm in many other countries. It's incomprehensible that our elected officials have been willing to settle for something far inferior.

I don't know the answer to this (and I doubt there are many international viewers here) but I wonder how many other countries rely on senior volunteers to run the polls on Election Day the way we do? And doesn't the inevitable influx of technology in to the voting process create these issues when the people responsible for administering them are overwhelmingly clueless and apathetic towards said technology?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Yes, that's generally considered best practice, and it's the norm in many other countries. It's incomprehensible that our elected officials have been willing to settle for something far inferior.

I don't know the answer to this (and I doubt there are many international viewers here) but I wonder how many other countries rely on senior volunteers to run the polls on Election Day the way we do? And doesn't the inevitable influx of technology in to the voting process create these issues when the people responsible for administering them are overwhelmingly clueless and apathetic towards said technology?

It's a good question, and a good example of why it's even more important that electronic election systems be intrinsically secure. We cannot depend upon poorly-trained volunteers to maintain the security of complex computerized systems.

 

[Bowfinger]

Bump for the most important article on P&N.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I'd like to take this time to suggest, that all the Fockers, that have in the past, quipped about tinfoil hats, when the election fraud issues are discussed, now shove that tinfoil where the :sun: doesn't shine.

It is plainly evident that it could have occurred already, and there wouldn't be any proof at all. And it needn't involve anyone in higher places, just some fanatical party zealots "doing it for their team".

 

[chcarnage]

The Dutch organisation We Don't Trust Election Computers recently demonstrated live on TV how it's possible to manipulate the results in less than five minutes by opening the machine and exchanging two EPROMs. They also installed a chess game because the director of the election computer company said this was not possible. The computers will be used in this years' elections in the Netherlands.

I'm glad we use only paper here (there were some WWW-Voting and text-message experiments though)... Four dates per year and the counting is done mostly by volunteers (but you can be drafted for a 4 year period = 4-6 sundays). The compensation is fair in my electorial district, too ($24/hr for normal volunteers and $32 for supervisors).

// And of course you can get into serious trouble if you try to manipulate the outcome during the counting process, and every vote is double-checked.

 

[KK]

I'm not so worried about electronic voting as I am that non legitimate people are allowed to vote.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:

The survival of this Country at stake is not funny.

I fear for the the U.S. not being to make it to 2009 if the Dems don't win back at least the House.

Dave, give us a break. Your response you every discussion about Iraq is to post the line/joke "It's Clinton's fault"

Amazing double standard.

BTW: I thought the "hacker" line about the tire slashing was pretty obvious, I can't believe the number of people who missed it.

 

[ProfJohn]

I don?t think the fear so much should be an organized attempt to ?steal? the election by one side or another.

The greatest fear would be some hacker getting his jollies out of inserting a virus that takes the whole system down about mid way through the election day. Especially a foreign hacker who wouldn?t have to worry about the US government putting his ass in jail for a LONG time.

For an American political party or hacker the stakes are just too high to risk it. Trying to change the outcome of an election via hacking could be called treason in my mind. If not that then I am sure there are enough other laws they could hit this person with, I doubt they would see light of day for 20+ years.


What is amazing is that for all the claims of Bush ?stealing? the election no one can find any proof of wrong doing.
What is it with the left and its conspiracy theories lately anyway? Stolen elections, Afghanistan was about an oil pipeline, Bush has a plan to invade Iraq before he was elected, Republicans want to run he debt so high that we HAVE to cut spending etc etc.