If Diebold doesn't control an entire state, much more difficult to cheat

[Awsi Dooger]

I think this is correct: Georgia is 100% Diebold but in Florida and Ohio, half the state or less is Diebold. There are still optical scanners and other forms of voting in those states.

Let's say an optical scanning precinct spits out 54-46 Kerry, then a nearby Diebold precinct with a virtually identical registration breakdown and partisan voting history comes up with 54-46 Bush. That would scream of irregularity, in fact a near statistical impossibility.

Plus the trends can be easily checked by looking at other races. You have to cheat on every partisan race, otherwise it's blatant fraud. In Florida, for example, there is a tossup senate race between Castor and Martinez. If every non-Diebold county shows a direct relationship between the presidential race and senate race, which should be the case, then a Diebold county has the presidential vote 55-45 Bush and the senate contest 55- 45 for Castor, the Democrat, a 4th grader could tell it's illegit. The machines would be confiscated and never used again within a month.

I agree even a subtle alteration could make the difference in a polarized 50/50 race, especially in a high populus Diebold precinct/county. You might be able to alter a few thousand here and a few thousand there without concrete proof of theft. Not guaranteeing a Bush victory, but a little bit of unjust cushion similar to purging voter rolls or ripping up registrations.

At least we have paper trails here in Nevada. The Diebold issue is a legitimate concern, but I'm not a cynic and don't accept Georgia 2002 as concrete proof. The Cleland/Chambliss race was tied in the final polls, momentum clearly with the GOP and twerp Ralph Reed. Barnes was significantly "ahead" of Perdue in the gov race, however, about 6-7 points average. No one saw that coming.

However, Georgia state polls have consistently overestimated Democratic strength, much more than any other state and long before Diebold. Examples are Zell Miller's gov race in '94, Cleland's senate race in '96 and the Gore/Bush race in 2000. In each of those races, final polls were many points more Democratic than the actual result, usually 6 or 7. Diebold conspiracy theorists conveniently leave that out.

One question: if Kerry wins the presidency via a victory in Ohio and/or Florida, and the Diebold precincts check out as normal -- you know damn well they'll be relentlessly scrutinized -- do we accept and embrace our new boxy friends?