All the news articles say there was no fraud.

[smartvoter]

Or not enough to tip the election.

The DNC dropped the ball on the fraud question. I know there are those who disagree -- had one when I posted an opinion on this in GD -- but I don't see any pegs on which to hang their hats because the articles are out everywhere now claiming W clearly won.

The report may recommend auditable balloting, but by saying there was no widespread fraud, there is no impetus to fix the problem.

The report should have said it is impossible to know if enough votes were flipped to make the difference in the election. This would provide some ammo for enacting reform.

Instead, we have a wave of articles confirming W's victory and assuring us that, despite the problems, our system works.

[dmkinsey]

1. Chairman Dean was on the News hour

last night and he did make the point that the real issue is VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Gwen and the rest of our glorious national media have a hard time grasping the concept that if voters can be kept from voting in Democratic precincts that the Republican will end up with more votes than the Democrat.

Just too complicated for them, I guess

[smartvoter]

3. I know, and suppression is a big deal. But I am starting to think that

the technology understanding gap is just killing us, even inside the party. They just don't "get" the ability to flip the machines, and how easy it is.

My experience, being around a bunch of tech-heads, is that people are more likely to get the problem by profession than party affiliation. My Republican friends and colleagues will openly admit that the article demonstrating problems on one machine suggest that all machines running that same software are suspect.

Others just kind of glaze over, even if they're Dems.

[blm]

2. The problem is that public lawmakers can't point fingers without proof in

hand.

The GOP thugs made sure there was no proof within hours. The machines are so easily manipulated and rigged and so under the control of the GOP thugs.

I think the ONLY move we can make now is to VERY PUBLICALLY expose how easily the machines can be rigged and who owns and operates the machines. Until the PUBLIC knows about this, nothing positive can happen.

[smartvoter]

4. Which is why they should have said it can't be determined (in my opinion).

[blm]

6. I agree with your opinion.

It would have been the smartest approach to assure more can be done about future fraud.

[smartvoter]

5. double-post delete

[mod mom]

7. Let's hear what John Conyers has to say. nt

[FogerRox]

8. Smart voter said:

"My experience, being around a bunch of tech-heads, is that people are more likely to get the problem by profession than party affiliation."

I agree, in the Essex County Task Force on E-Voting we have have about 8 PhD.s, (Math, Statistics, software etc), a couple of lawyers, a bunch of folks with Masters degrees.

I think your characterization based on Profession is right on.

[philb]

9. But the fraud and manipulation are documented by the EIRS data, etc.

and the Exit Poll data that show the election was swung.
From the Nashville Conference:
http://www.flcv.com/ohiosum.html