Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hardware:
I'd prefer paper and pencils deposited in a locked ballot box. Keep it simple and stupid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:



But then we couldn't have instant results!! What would the networks do on election night? Just kidding.

IMHO, the method of voting isn't the issue, as any system can be gamed. People were stuffing ballot boxes and voting the dead long before computers were invented. It's the people who control the process you have to look out for. If you can get an election commission/board/agency that most people think is above corruption, it won't matter how folks vote; paper, potsherds, pebbles or pixels.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bojesphob:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
^^^ ? It's not some old ladies responsibility to make sure American voter laws aren't corrupted. Really. Sheesh, you are ignorant. Shut up!

---

So I'm ignorant because I expect her to be responsible and make sure that her vote counts?? How is that ignorant? It's called taking responsibility for the things that one can control. If you cannot place your vote, then it IS your responsibility to bring it up when you are voting, NOT AFTERWARDS. Plain and simple. Basically, because she (and others) did not make a scene when it happened, it allowed other people to vote on that faulty (tampered with) machine, and essentially allowed it to misinterpret their votes. If it was a paper ballot and that ballot was "lost", then of course it would not be her fault that she couldn't do anything about it. This is like if it only said "Bush" on a paper ballot and you couldn't even vote for Kerry on it. If you know you cannot vote for a person that you know you should be able to vote for, there is an expectation that you bring it up immediately to the officials, then if they don't do anything, you call the voting hotline, or your local representative. Voting is a right AND a responsibility, not JUST a right. We were not given the right to vote, we had to fight for it. We have that right because people stood up and fought against oppression to get it. They didn't just say "Oh well, it doesn't count, so I guess I'll just complain about it" and get it. It wasn't the laws that caused the problems with the election, it was people. The law didn't force her to not say anything when that machine didn't work, she decided it wasn't worthwhile to do so, or she was afraid to. Every person here in the US, if they are eligible, have the right to vote and the responsibility to make sure that they did everything they could to make sure it counted, old or no, minority or no, blind or no, deaf or no, low-IQ or no, and if they cannot themselves, find someone who can for them. The people who are willing to bend election laws and corrupt an otherwise good election system count on these people, because they know that they will not cause a fuss when they actually try to vote. Who is easier to fool, a person who knows their rights and will stand up for them, or someone who will let anything happen and just bitch about it afterwards? If there was corruption in this election (which I am not convinced of, even though I didn't vote for Bush nor Kerry, I voted for someone else) then they need to stand trial for it and be thrown in prison. But, that still doesn't take that lady off of the hook for not doing anything about it.

If it is ignorant to expect people to do their part, then I guess I am. I'd rather be ignorant and know 100% that I did everything to make sure my vote counted that I could than to be pissing and moaning because I was too lazy to do anything about it when I did vote. I guess it's too much to expect people to actually know their rights and stand up for them. And people wonder why we have so many problems in this country......

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"Its' not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes"

- Joseph Stalin (aka Karl Rove)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"Its' not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes"

- Joseph Stalin (aka Karl Rove)

---

Quote:

---

because she (and others) did not make a scene when it happened

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

because she (and others) did not make a scene when it happened

---

Actually, she did. After she tried over a dozen times to vote for Kerry, she called the election officials in. (so much for secret ballot) They also tried to vote for Kerry on that machine. It took about 7 of their tries before it went in. They noted in their records that they could not get that machine to accept a Kerry vote until a number of tries later. This was officially verified and documented EARLY ON ELECTION DAY. But it wasn't enough (apparently) for that machine to be taken out of service. Nor did anyone think to question how the other machines might be functioning.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"No wonder you lost the election." - Geezer

Tsk! Now WHERE did I put that thing? rummmages tabletop It MUST be here somewhere! Last I saw it, it was November 2... in a black box I think. Yeah that was it... in a black box. looks through desk drawers, finds a black box Now see, I KNOW I didn't lose that thing! If it was anyhwere, it would be here opens black box... long, shocked silence followed by stunned comment It's been... stolen...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"No wonder you lost the election." - Geezer

Tsk! Now WHERE did I put that thing? rummmages tabletop It MUST be here somewhere! Last I saw it, it was November 2... in a black box I think. Yeah that was it... in a black box. looks through desk drawers, finds a black box Now see, I KNOW I didn't lose that thing! If it was anyhwere, it would be here opens black box... long, shocked silence followed by stunned comment It's been... stolen...

---

Nice1. Great way to point out the difference between those who mistakenly believe they won something and those of us that believe all Americans had something stolen from them... thier country.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"No wonder you lost the election." - Geezer

Tsk! Now WHERE did I put that thing? rummmages tabletop It MUST be here somewhere! Last I saw it, it was November 2... in a black box I think. Yeah that was it... in a black box. looks through desk drawers, finds a black box Now see, I KNOW I didn't lose that thing! If it was anyhwere, it would be here opens black box... long, shocked silence followed by stunned comment It's been... stolen...

---

Nice1. Great way to point out the difference between those who mistakenly believe they won something and those of us that believe all Americans had something stolen from them... thier country.

---

Nice1. Great way to point out the difference between those who irrationally believe they had something stolen from them and those of us who are not psycho BushHaters stuck in a fantasy world where AlGore is President and Osama bin Ladden is a humanitarian.

H

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Unicorn:
Not everybody who believes the election could have been stolen is irrational.

Holding a belief despite a preponderance of evidence to the contrary is irrational.

There is no such thing as a weed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
And I'm retroactively removing the VDS from Ghoulman and Unicorn, who really didn't deserve them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
It's been a few days and George W. Bush has been declared the winner of the 2004 Presidential election... by the media.

Now the media is commited to "healing" instead of doing thier job - checking for fraud.

In an election that has brought out more Americans to punch thier vote since 1968 it is the shame of America that each and every vote wasn't counted, worse, many votes were simply destroyed in a cruel and fascistic campaign by many Republicans to steal an election they feared would go very badly for them.

This is really silly nonsense. Please stop making the Democratic party look bad.

It's plain the election is a fraud.

The line-ups for voting were a joke.
The Diebold voting machines are a joke.
The police prevented hundreds from voting.
Voters were prevented from voting at the booths.
Fake lists of people were created to prevent voting.
Poor areas were closed to voting.
Minority areas were closed to voting.
University voting booths were "stolen".

The list of stories about fraud go on and on. You might think these are the usual incidents... but voting isn't difficult, it shouldn't have any problems. If there are problems... THAT'S A PROBLEM! But this logic fails American media who are ordered to support thier man George W. Bush.

Worse... there is no controling election body to officially count votes and insure the count, rather like every other democratic government on the planet. Three Republican dominated corporations control over 80% of the vote count in the United States: Sequoia Voting Systems Inc; Electronic Systems & Software Inc. (ES&S); and Diebold" Inc.

... and the stories keep coming out. The number one issue Americans will not see on thier TVs, but the rest of the world will see, is the incredible corruption of the 2004 US Election.

Your vote didn't count.

---

Quote:

---

Wow, you guys are big on rewriting history.

And you wanted a draft. And you wanted the courts to step in and change the election results, and you don't want free speech, and you are against heterosexual marriage, and you want to raise everbody's taxes, deny health coverage to the rich, kill puppies in the name of cats, eat snails, ban beer in football stadiums, deny ketchup to millions of school kids, hug trees, deny hugs to SUV's, turn off Fox News, turn on Bill Clinton, turn in George Bush, turn over American soveriegnty, turn up the number of abortions, and turn down the chance to spread liberty to the Muslim world.

I've heard some Democrats say y'all need a new message, truth is y'all need new values. There's millions of Red state Democrats, like myself (being a Republican don't mean I aint a Democrat), who'd fight hard for a Democratic candidate that shared our values. Aint seen one since...maybe Truman, since I aint claiming Carter. He had all the right values, but knew peanuts about runnin a country. Now Reagan, there was a President the Red Democrats could love.

Me, I just live and let live, fight for what's right, work hard, play rough, and don't settle for second best. Thats why I almost always win and never really lose.

So take your pansy blue helemted, French licking, Starbucks coffee drinking, Vermont Teddy Bear ordering, luxery towncar driving, blue blooded, ivy league, liberal close minded elitisist VDS and stick right next to your virtual desktop stripper. I prefer the real thing. May be Bush League, but we gets the job done

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman:

Quote:

---

Wow, you guys are big on rewriting history.

And you wanted a draft. And you wanted the courts to step in and change the election results, and you don't want free speech, and you are against heterosexual marriage, and you want to raise everbody's taxes, deny health coverage to the rich, kill puppies in the name of cats, eat snails, ban beer in football stadiums, deny ketchup to millions of school kids, hug trees, deny hugs to SUV's, turn off Fox News, turn on Bill Clinton, turn in George Bush, turn over American soveriegnty, turn up the number of abortions, and turn down the chance to spread liberty to the Muslim world.

I've heard some Democrats say y'all need a new message, truth is y'all need new values. There's millions of Red state Democrats, like myself (being a Republican don't mean I aint a Democrat), who'd fight hard for a Democratic candidate that shared our values. Aint seen one since...maybe Truman, since I aint claiming Carter. He had all the right values, but knew peanuts about runnin a country. Now Reagan, there was a President the Red Democrats could love.

Me, I just live and let live, fight for what's right, work hard, play rough, and don't settle for second best. Thats why I almost always win and never really lose.

So take your pansy blue helemted, French licking, Starbucks coffee drinking, Vermont Teddy Bear ordering, luxery towncar driving, blue blooded, ivy league, liberal close minded elitisist VDS and stick right next to your virtual desktop stripper. I prefer the real thing. May be Bush League, but we gets the job done

---

Typical neofascist rebuttal - an attack on the person and never the issue.

Notice how this is a responce to Signym quoteing HERO? Instead of quantifiying his own words... he attacks Signym with "state of the art" right wing name calling.

Reading this it breaks down into: "you, you people, me, we who are rightious, and take your...

*sigh* ... good gracious, I'm morderating.

Having said that it's well written. Nice flow. Oh, and HERO, you can eat me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Typical neofascist rebuttal - an attack on the person and never the issue.

---

Quote:

---

he attacks Signym with "state of the art" right wing name calling.

---

Quote:

---

Reading this it breaks down into: "you, you people, me, we who are rightious, and take your...

---

Quote:

---

Oh, and HERO, you can eat me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hardware:
While tens of thousands of Ukrainians are in the streets defending the principles of democracy, most Americans probably aren't even aware of the University of California-Berkeley statistical study that found that irregularities with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 to 260,000 or more excess votes to Bush in Florida. For the sake of all future elections involving electronic voting, someone must explain the statistical anomalies in Florida, the professor who headed up the study said.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JenDandy:

If you're in Canada why do you care so much about what's going on in the U.S.?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Littlemanlovesfire:
In what kind of world wouldn't the people with all the power and money in the world sink to unethical means to keep hold of that?

---

Quote:

---

http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Polls_2004_Edison-Mitof
sky.pdf

Authors and Endorsers:
Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D. Temple University Statistics Department
Kathy Dopp, MS mathematics, USCountVotes, President
Steven F. Freeman, Ph.D. Visiting Scholar & Affiliated Faculty, Center for Organizational Dynamics, University of Pennsylvania
Brian Joiner, Ph.D. Professor of Statistics and Director of Statistical Consulting (ret), University of Wisconsin
Frank Stenger, Ph.D. Professor of Numerical Analysis, School of Computing, University of Utah
Richard G. Sheehan, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Finance, University of Notre Dame
Paul F. Velleman, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Department of Statistical Sciences, Cornell University
Victoria Lovegren, Ph.D. Lecturer, Department of Mathematics, Case Western Reserve University
Campbell B. Read, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Department of Statistical Science, Southern Methodist University
Jonathan Simon, J.D. Alliance for Democracy
Ron Baiman, Ph.D. Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of Illinois at Chicago
Bruce O'Dell, USCountVotes, Vice President

The exit pollster of record for the 2004 election was the Edison/Mitofsky1 consortium. Their national poll results projected a Kerry victory by 3.0%, whereas the official count had Bush winning by 2.5%.2 Several methods have been used to estimate the probability that the national exit poll results would be as different as they were from the national popular vote by random chance. These estimates range from 1 in 959,000 to 1 in 1,2403. No matter how one calculates it, the discrepancy cannot be attributed to chance.
Edison/Mitofsky disavowed the results of their own poll, saying that the data cannot be construed as evidence that the official vote count was corrupted, and hypothesized that Kerry voters were more amenable to completing the poll questionnaire than Bush voters.
However, Edison/Mitofsky's own exit poll data does not support their theory that a higher exit poll response rate by Kerry voters accounted for the discrepancies between the exit polls and the presidential election results.
Using Edison/Mitofsky’s data tables we demonstrate that the “reluctant Bush responder” hypothesis is implausible because it is inconsistent with the combination of high response rates and high discrepancy rates among the precincts with the highest percentage for Bush.

............
The fact that, in the 2004 election, all voting equipment technologies except paper ballots were associated with large unexplained exit poll discrepancies all favoring the same party certainly warrants further inquiry.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue [excerpt from report]:
The fact that, in the 2004 election, all voting equipment technologies except paper ballots were associated with large unexplained exit poll discrepancies all favoring the same party certainly warrants further inquiry.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Recent news (that won't get covered):
............
The fact that, in the 2004 election, all voting equipment technologies except paper ballots were associated with large unexplained exit poll discrepancies all favoring the same party certainly warrants further inquiry.

---

Quote:

---

Summary
There is already a strong case that there were significant irregularities in the presidential vote count from the 2004 election. Nevertheless, critics are asking for firmer proof before going
forward with a thorough investigation24. We feel strongly that this is the wrong standard. One
cannot have proof before an investigation.

In fact, the burden of proof should be to show that the election process is accurate and fair.
The integrity of the American electoral system can and should be beyond reproach. Citizens in
the world’s oldest and greatest democracy should be provided every assurance that the
mechanisms they have put in place to count our votes are fair and accurate. The legitimacy of
our elected leaders depends upon it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Hope they do an analysis of JFK's 1960 win.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Deutschmannecros:
I agree with ghoulman. As an american I believe the paper ballot where, the voter writes, the name of his canidate, (prerabliy, a third party, not a corrupt republican or democratic party).How simply is this folks?

YES!, PAPER BALLOTS ARE BETTER THAN HACKABLE COMPUTERS!!!!

---