Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Will the Next Election Be Hacked?
Friday, September 22, 2006 5:28 AM
FUTUREMRSFILLION
Friday, September 22, 2006 5:52 AM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Quote:Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion: ...The right to vote is simply too important - and too hard won - to be surrendered without a fight. It is time for Americans to reclaim our democracy from private interests.
Friday, September 22, 2006 5:59 AM
RIGHTEOUS9
Friday, September 22, 2006 6:00 AM
SPACELIPS
Friday, September 22, 2006 6:28 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: Problem with your post GEEZER is that as far as I know, there has been no evidence of massive voter fraud. There's a lot of evidence of election fraud. Id's for voting are essentially a poll tax. You can argue that people are supposed to have one by law anyway, but for poor people, who don't have the extra 10 or 15 bucks it takes to get an I.D. card, if they don't have one they simply won't vote. That's a chilling effect on our election turn-out and not one that a purported democracy should be advocating.
Friday, September 22, 2006 6:44 AM
RUE
I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!
Friday, September 22, 2006 6:46 AM
FELLOWTRAVELER
Quote:Originally posted by rue: It's FAR too late in the election cycle to insist on this now. How about a 5 year lead time? But I agree with righteous. There is NO evidence of massive voter fraud. That's a republican decoy. There IS evidence of massive election fraud. What do YOU all propose to do about it?
Friday, September 22, 2006 6:59 AM
Friday, September 22, 2006 7:24 AM
Friday, September 22, 2006 7:38 AM
Friday, September 22, 2006 7:41 AM
Friday, September 22, 2006 7:49 AM
HERO
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: Problem with your post GEEZER is that as far as I know, there has been no evidence of massive voter fraud. There's a lot of evidence of election fraud.
Friday, September 22, 2006 8:56 AM
Friday, September 22, 2006 9:16 AM
DREAMTROVE
Quote:Righteous: There has been no evidence of massive voter fraud.
Quote:Id's for voting are essentially a poll tax.
Quote:Spacelips: If every voter had to be validated it would be a Republican landslide every four years.
Quote:Rue: It's FAR too late in the election cycle to insist on this now. How about a 5 year lead time?
Quote:Rue: But I agree with righteous. There is NO evidence of massive voter fraud. That's a republican decoy. There IS evidence of massive election fraud.
Friday, September 22, 2006 9:33 AM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: Unless you are a poor black who was born in the south at home - no birth cert, no SS#, no driver's license - none of the usually accepted IDs. In which case free = impossible.
Friday, September 22, 2006 9:47 AM
Quote:You're willing to spend multi-millions to completely revamp the process of casting ballots ... but aren't willing to spend a bit of the taxpayer's money to verify that the people voting actually have the legal right to vote?
Friday, September 22, 2006 12:22 PM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Quote:Will the Next Election Be Hacked?
Saturday, September 23, 2006 8:52 AM
KANEMAN
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: Hehe...so in all of google all I have for prima county voter fraud are freerepublic links and one to Hannity. That's your hard evidence? oh here. http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/starmedia/43645 Graf - the guy arguing for the prop said that there were at least 3 or 4 cases of voter fraud in the county
Saturday, September 23, 2006 10:20 AM
Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:24 AM
Saturday, September 23, 2006 7:33 PM
PIRATEJENNY
Saturday, September 23, 2006 8:22 PM
NEWOLDBROWNCOAT
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: for poor people, who don't have the extra 10 or 15 bucks it takes to get an I.D. card, if they don't have one they simply won't vote. That's a chilling effect on our election turn-out and not one that a purported democracy should be advocating.
Saturday, September 23, 2006 9:02 PM
Saturday, September 23, 2006 9:23 PM
SOUPCATCHER
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: There is one thing they can do to improve elections: make it a Federal holiday.
Saturday, September 23, 2006 9:27 PM
Saturday, September 23, 2006 10:35 PM
CITIZEN
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: There is one thing they can do to improve elections: make it a Federal holiday. I mean, there are people that I talked to who had to run out on their lunch break in order to vote. LUNCH BREAK for crissake! And there are people who don't even get that. Combine that with the three or eight-hour waits in some places- no WONDER people had to leave before they got a chance to vote!
Sunday, September 24, 2006 3:25 AM
Quote:Originally posted by citizen: How long do your voting stations stay open? Ours stay open easily long enough for people to make it after or before work.
Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:38 AM
PDCHARLES
What happened? He see your face?
Sunday, September 24, 2006 5:46 AM
Sunday, September 24, 2006 5:58 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:36 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: And, strangely, my workday is from 7 AM to 7 PM. I don't know about most other places, but in the USA the working poor often work 2 jobs and have a 2-3 hour bus commute to and from work.
Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:12 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: And, strangely, my workday is from 7 AM to 7 PM. I don't know about most other places, but in the USA the working poor often work 2 jobs and have a 2-3 hour bus commute to and from work. --------------------------------- Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:25 AM
Monday, September 25, 2006 12:10 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: Well Auraptor, the butterfly ballots were bad. Pat Buchanon suggested that he got 1000's of votes he shouldn't have gotten in 2000 because of those ballots, which means in a fair election where people know who they're voting for, the democrats would have won. Do you have any evidence of large scale democratic vote tampering or do you like to just spew that crap to try to smear everybody? And what kind of logic suggests that because we didn't like the last system we should take whatever system our gop government puts in place to replace it as something better. - with no facts have you denied the validity of the claims - and so you go after them by just stamping democrats as complainers. I understand how sick to your stomach it must make you to read through post after post at freerepublic, but some sort of distorted fact would be appreciated when you're making your claims.
Monday, September 25, 2006 5:06 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: ...What pisses me off about that is all the lies and false allegations the Dems raised about blacks being kept from voting. Not a single case was verified. Not one. ...Don't blame the GOP, blame your local Democrats for any voter fiasco you think exists...
Quote:At first, Florida specified only exact matches on names, birthdates and genders to identify voters as felons. However, state records reveal a memo dated March 1999 from Emmett "Bucky" Mitchell, a lawyer for the state elections office who was supervising the felon purge, asking DBT to loosen its criteria for acceptable matches. When DBT representatives warned Mitchell that this would yield a large proportion of false positives (mismatches), Mitchell's reply was that it would be up to each county elections supervisor to deal with the problem. In February 2000, in a phone conversation with the BBC's London studios, ChoicePoint vice-president James Lee said that the state "wanted there to be more names than were actually verified as being a convicted felon" On 17 April 2001, James Lee testified, before the McKinney panel, that the state had given DBT the directive to add to the purge list people who matched at least 90% of a last name. DBT objected, knowing that this would produce a huge number of false positives (non-felons). Lee went on saying that the state then ordered DBT to shift to an even lower threshold of 80% match, allowing also names to be reversed (thus a person named Thomas Clarence could be taken to be the same as Clarence Thomas). Besides this, middle initials were skipped, Jr. and Sr. suffixes dropped, and some nicknames and aliases were added to puff up the list. "DBT told state officials", testified Lee, "that the rules for creating the [purge] list would mean a significant number of people who were not deceased, not registered in more than one county, or not a felon, would be included on the list. DBT made suggestions to reduce the numbers of eligible voters included on the list". According to Lee, to this suggestion the state told the company, "Forget about it". Florida has re-cedited its felon list five times since 1998 to correct errors. The first list DBT Online provided to the Division of Elections in April 2000 contained the names of 181,157 persons. Approximately 65,776 of those included on the first list were identified as felons. In May 2000, DBT discovered that approximately 8,000 names were erroneously placed on the exclusion list, mostly those of former Texas prisoners who were included on a DBT list that turned out never to have been convicted of more than a misdemeanor. Later in the month, DBT provided a revised list to the Division of Elections (DOE) containing a total of 173,127 persons. Of those included on the "corrected list", 57,746 were identified as felons. There were many specific problems with the purge list regarding the verification of felons, including over 4,000 blank conviction dates, and over 325 conviction dates dating in the future. Nearly 3,000 out-of-state ex-felons with voting rights restored, as well as voters linked to felonies in states which do not remove felons from voting rolls or that automatically restore voting rights that were included on the list. According to a 1998 ruling by the 2nd District Court of Appeals, they cannot then be ruled ineligible by another state. DBT had decided in March of 1999 not to include felon lists from South Carolina or Texas, which automatically restore voting rights, but that was overruled by the head of the Florida Office of Executive Clemency, Janet Keels, who ordered inclusion of any felon who did not have a written order of clemency, even from these states, wrongly placing 996 voters on the felon list. Florida did not restore their voting rights until three months after the election. Additionally, a number of persons listed as felons had been convicted of misdemeanors only, and therefore were eligible by law.
Quote: In the 10 counties contacted by Salon, use of the central voter file seemed to vary wildly. Some found the list too unreliable and didn't use it at all. But most counties appear to have used the file as a resource to purge names from their voter rolls, with some counties making little -- or no -- effort at all to alert the "purged" voters. Counties that did their best to vet the file discovered a high level of errors, with as many as 15 percent of names incorrectly identified as felons.
Quote:According to records given to the courts by ChoicePoint, the company that generated the computerized lists, the number of Floridians who were questionably tagged totals 91,000. Willie Steen is one of them. Recently, I caught up with Steen outside his office at a Tampa hospital. Steen's case was easy. You can't work in a hospital if you have a criminal record. (My copy of Harris's hit list includes an ex-con named O'Steen, close enough to cost Willie Steen his vote.) The state admitted Steen's innocence. But a year after the NAACP won his case, Steen still couldn't register. Why was he still under suspicion? What do we know about this "potential felon," as Jeb called him? Steen, unlike our President, honorably served four years in the US military. There is, admittedly, a suspect mark on his record: Steen remains an African-American.
Monday, September 25, 2006 6:33 AM
Monday, September 25, 2006 7:16 AM
Monday, September 25, 2006 7:45 AM
Monday, September 25, 2006 8:03 AM
Monday, September 25, 2006 8:05 AM
Monday, September 25, 2006 2:57 PM
Quote: Righteous9 wrote: Monday, September 25, 2006 06:33 Quit spewing bullshit auraptor. It's not the democratic election boards that have been the problem. I had to point that out to you on another thread about ohio and of course you ignored it, but at least find a new lie. The point about Buchanon is that he got a disproportionate ammount of votes in a democratic voting area where he didn't campaign, and even he, kooky conservative that he is, was willing to see the screw-up there. That's a lame way to judge somebody's intelligence by the way. It has no more basis than me saying anybody who voted for Bush is too incompitent to be given the right to vote. So first you guys had to go back to 1996...now we have to go all the way back to 1960? Next you're going to be screaming about the pictograms on cave walls, that prove beyond a doubt democratic voter fraud is a problem.
Monday, September 25, 2006 3:45 PM
Quote: Well, there's your one verifiable case: Willie Steen.
Quote: (My copy of Harris's (sic) list includes an ex-con named O'Steen, close enough to cost Willie Steen his vote.)
Monday, September 25, 2006 6:03 PM
Monday, September 25, 2006 6:24 PM
Monday, September 25, 2006 7:54 PM
Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:41 AM
Quote:Republicans say the laws are needed to combat fraud, especially among illegal immigrants. Democrats say there is minimal fraud, if any, and accuse Republicans of suppressing the votes of those least likely to have the required documentation — minorities, the poor and the elderly — who tend to vote for Democrats.
Quote:Daniel J. Parker, chairman of the state Democratic Party, said: “Close to 10 percent of registered voters here do not have driver’s licenses. Who does that impact most? Seniors and minorities.”
Quote:“Democrats believe they represent stupid people who are not smart enough to vote,” said Randy Pullen, a Republican national committeeman from Arizona who championed a statewide initiative on the new requirements. “I do not.”
Quote:There is no data, however, to show more than isolated instances of so-called impostor voting by illegal immigrants or others. Experts in election law say most voter fraud involves absentee balloting, which is unaffected by the new photo identification laws. Few people, they say, will risk a felony charge to vote illegally at the polls, and few illegal immigrants want to interact with government officials — even people running a polling place.
Quote:Of Arizona’s 2.7 million registered voters, 238 were believed to have been noncitizens in the last 10 years; only 4 were believed to have voted; and none were impostors, plaintiffs stipulate in their lawsuit to overturn the law, statistics the state has not challenged.
Quote:It was during a registration drive at her assisted-living center, Desert Palms, that Mrs. Steele learned she could not vote. Disabled, with a son, an Army staff sergeant, on active duty, she left Missouri recently to stay with her brother and subsequently moved into the center. Lacking a driver’s license, she could get a new state identity card, but she said she had neither the $12 to pay for it nor, because she uses a wheelchair, the transportation to pick it up.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:53 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Sorry, but there's still nothing about that case to suggest he wasn't allowed to vote because he was black.
Quote:What pisses me off about that is all the lies and false allegations the Dems raised about blacks being kept from voting. Not a single case was verified. Not one. Yet the rumors and mythology continue on in the media as if they were true.
Quote:Despite the specious claims by The Nation ( yeah, there's an objective source ) ....
Tuesday, September 26, 2006 10:16 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: Such disdain for your fellow human beings Auraptor. I will say that I don't think you're an idiot. On the other hand, intelligent people aren't neccesarily right more often than other people, they're just a hell of a lot better at rationalizing their position to themselves, right or wrong. I'm not sure why you wouldn't want people's actual intentions to be heard on eleciton day, and I'm not sure why it should matter whether you think a person dumb or slow or senile, when judging if a person deserves a vote on election day, unless you're an elitist of the ilk that doesn't really believe in democracy - I don't think you need to answer that. ..... I'll point out again that the election board in Chayahoga County, where much of the alleged voter suppresion took place was Republican dominated, so please at least patch that hole in your argument if you want to continue to fly your hot air baloon in the real world.
Quote:Auraptor --- the measures of that preemptive strike are clearly laid out in the manual and all have to do with protecting the voters in that election. None of the items in the proposed press release suggest making shit up. So where's your beef? with what line? just 'preemptive strike?' hehe, how weird that that phrase would offend a Bush apologist.
Quote: Here are the items the DNC wanted to be addressed. i. Reviewing Republican tactic issued in the past in your area or state
Quote: ii. Quoting party/minority/civil rights leadership as denouncing tactics that discourage people from voting
Quote: Prime minority leadership to discuss the issue in the media; provide talking points Place stories in which minority leadership expresses concern about the threat of intimidation tactics
Quote: Warn local newspapers not to accept advertising that is not properly disclaimed or that contains false warnings about voting requirements and/or about what will happen at the polls
Tuesday, September 26, 2006 10:24 AM
Tuesday, September 26, 2006 10:34 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Righteous9: Okay, if you're speaking specifically about Florida then why are you talkinga about the DNC manual? But fine, reserve my example for another day, and respond to the example SYGM gave on Florida - not interested? surprise surprise. .......... Your smearing of the DNC as basically fabricating complaints of voter suppresion was a false premise, and way too easy to disprove. There's plenty of evidence to support voter suppresion in Ohio. If that evidence is bunk, it should be just as easy for you to disprove it.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL