Need Some DU Help w/New Hampshire Stuff!!! (URGENT)

[IdaBriggs]

I need some more help from DU. I need to get some "word" out about the importance of a recount in New Hampshire -- you can read all about it in this thread -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2617155 -- and I could use some help with a little "public pressure" from you folks....

The bottom line is that the math just doesn't add up in New Hampshire, and we can double check things easily. This is NOT brain surgery; its common sense. When the numbers don't make sense, you double check them. Not doing a hand recount double check in a state that shows such WEIRD numbers would be like ... well, refusing to EVER balance your check book ...

You know what to do -- PLEASE do it -- TO THE MEDIA BLASTER!!!

(Oh, and it would be great if you could donate some money at www.votenader.org to help cover the costs of the recount, and maybe a lawyer or two to get the ball rolling, if people need some "help" in seeing logic....)

And keep this post kicked, please.

Best, Ida

[Obviousman]

1. kick

[batchdem04]

2. kick....lets get it started folks

lets do what we do best!

[redsoxliberal]

3. just emailed nader

Nader/Camejo campaign:
All summer, I volunteered for the Kerry Edwards campaign. I am 15 years old, so I could not vote for them, but if I had been eligible I would have. This is not because I liked John Kerry or necessarily believed in what he was saying, but because I dislike George W. Bush immensely.
Now, however, I realize I made the wrong decision. Seeing John Kerry role over so easily with possible voter fraud has made me sick to my stomach. You never never would have done that. I wish John Kerry would have won, and I hope he still can if fraud is proven, because I realize that four more years of Bush may do too much damage to repair.
I believe in your work, and I feel that those who call you a spoiler are wrong. Everyone has the right to run for president (so long as they're eligible,) and the fact that only two candidates have a viable chance every year is a reason why this country needs reform. Next election, I will be 19 years old, and I will vote third party unless I see real change. I saw you speak at the ADC in 2003, which, combined with your efforts over your political life, really has opened my eyes. Thank you for trying to tackle this potential voter fraud, as voting is the most sacred part of our democracy. Please carry on, as we try to end voter fraud, and, hopefully, remove George W. Bush from the White House because of it.

[IdaBriggs]

5. You make me proud to be an American, redsoxliberal. nt

[redsoxliberal]

6. whoa... I just smiled for the first time since 11/2

thanks! :-) :-) :-)

[redsoxliberal]

4. olberman?

who else would be interested in this.

[redsoxliberal]

7. emailed the guardian in england. They will want to know

more than any newspaper in the U.S. would...


Dear Sir or Madam,

Ralph Nader has asked for a recount of votes in New Hampshire in an attempt to begin to prove voter fraud nationwide. Throughout America, there was a statistically significant difference between exit polls and the published count in states that used electronic voting. These exit polls were accurate almost to the person in 2000. All of these differences were in George W. Bush's favor. Mr. Nader is attempting to prove that the electronic voting machines are inacurrate.
For more information read this thread on Democratic Underground.

-

[Jo March]

20. I just emailed them as well

Gave them several links to here plus Bev's site.

I say we all email them!!

[John Q. Citizen]

8. Ida.

got anywhere else to donate money?

How's about blackboxvoting.org?

[Eloriel]

9. BBV.org has NOT financing this recount

(I've just edited the title, after getting clarification from Hedda_Foil -- see the end of my original post for more)

Both Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy made big plugs for donations to BBV yesterday, which is fine (as long as they didn't think it would help with this), BUT just understand that those donations will NOT assist this important initiative in the least.

By all means donate to BBV if you want to -- just understand that it won't help with financing this in the least, not one iota.

I am very concerned that there's been some unnecessary and possibly even inappropriate conflation of THIS issue with BBV.org, and I wouldn't want anyone to be misled.

-------------
Edited to add:

I just got off the phone with Hedda_Foil who is a co-founder of the Ballot Integrity Project (http://www.ballotintegrity.org/) and is working with IdaBriggs on this NH Recount issue. They ARE working with BBV.org, but BBV is not financing or helping finance the NH Recount initiative and in fact there are legal issues involved that may prevent them from assisting with that even if they wanted to. Be sure to donate to BBV if you want to, but just understand that your donation will NOT help fund the $40 - $80K NH recount.

There is currently no way to make contributions specifically for the NH Recount, BUT Hedda and Ida will be trying to set something up immediately (they do believe we've got the filing fee of $2K covered) -- and the legalities is one of the pieces that has to be worked on. Get your checkbooks/credit cards ready, but hang loose until something's set up.

[Pallas180]

14. That sucks! Everyone thought sending to BBV helped the NHampshire vote

counting thing....

and donated under those circumstances...

BBV should help out financially then, since they are receiving money that was thought to go to the NH recount.

This has been royally corkscrewed.

[IdaBriggs]

12. The BBV people are awesome....

and they are working the problem from a different angle so money to them would be great -- they are coming at it from the "tech" document angle, and will probably be extremely helpful in figuring out what the "problems" are *IF* the numbers are as bad as we expect.

We have to keep in mind there is a CHANCE nothing is wrong. :eyes:

I think the folks over at the National Ballot Initiative could use some funding, but I haven't talked to them about it or anything. I'll get their website in a minute.

Thank you for your help with this -- we are SO going to take back our country!!! :)

Best, Ida

[Eloriel]

13. Their website - National Ballot Integrity Project

http://www.ballotintegrity.org/

[mulethree]

10. Could you clear up some things please?

The electronic voting systems in question are NOT paperless touchscreens? They are deibold accuvote but not "accuvote-TS"?

CAN a manual recount be done on these votes?

Sorry but when I look up accuvote all I find is the touchscreen - apparently the name was used for an older system that scans paper or card ballots? How much does it have in common with the accuvote-ts touchscreens? same GEMS-OS and Tabulation software?

Because I am unclear on this, I don't know if :

A. There is an audit trail and a hand recount could show that the machines are distorting the vote.

B. You want to get them to admit that no effective re-count is possible because theres no audit trail.


Case A. would be glorious and Definitely worth every penny regardless of the outcome, but - per your research - it would likely be proof of tampering - er make that bugs and an insufficient certification process. It would at the minimum force the issue of having an audit trail and at maximum force both an audit trail and open-ness of voting software and tougher enforcement that the software used during the vote is actually the same as whats been publicly reviewed.

Case B. would not do much that BBV and California and such have not already done.

I think the confusion comes from the hype about deibold accuvote referring to touchscreen machines without paper trails, and Ralph's message which refers to paperless electronic machines.



edited typos

[IdaBriggs]

11. These are in the "type A" situation you mentioned. :) nt

[Pallas180]

15. I dont understand how it can be tracked WITHOUT BBV help - what the

hell is going on - turf war????

Harriss has the computer scientists...Nader has the authority.

Now let's get it together folks.

[mulethree]

16. no computer scientists needed

A statistician can show that theres reason to question the numbers.

A candidate can request the recount - apparently even without the statistician.

The recount compared to the original machine tally will hopefully show a very obvious discrepancy that translates the statisticians mumbo jumbo into plain english - 'these machines skewed the votes for certain candidates'

Then further re-counts and investigations ensue.

The computer scientists can only point out that these things are so over-complicated as to make errors and fraud extremely likely. And that the simpler the code, and the more eyes that see it, the better.

The need for an audit trail becomes undeniable.

The need to do at least a sample recount/audit as a routine part of canvassing/certifying election results becomes undeniable.

[IdaBriggs]

17. Mulethree has described it very eloquently --

I just want to add that there is NO TURF WAR. I'm a private individual, and I'm working with a lot of different people trying to get this resolved. I came at it from a "numbers" viewpoint, and they are coming at it from a "how to techie" viewpoint. I'm going to try to coordinate the numbers people so (once we get this going) we don't waste time duplicating effort, but right now its almost better that we have so many minds looking at things in different ways, so I'm pretty happy at the moment. :)

[RhodaGrits]

18. Just make sure you let us all know when you need anything-

I'm willing to pour cash on this and whatever else you need. I believe this a lot more dangerous to our American democracy than any terrorist and we need to fight this hands, heart and soul. I made a donation to BBV and I'll help any way you can suggest but I'm not sure you need a veterinarian's skills at this moment :-)

[IdaBriggs]

19. Thank you, RhodaGrits -- I appreciate that!

In the meantime, if you could do some media blasting on the topic, that would be GREAT! :) Best, Ida