Reality check time.

[rfrrfrrfr]

Ok I am a bit tired of seeing the there is no fraud we lost legitimately and the There was massive fraud posts that seem to keep comming in in about equal numbers.


The reality of the situation is this.

We have at least 2 sources that currently claim they have actual evidence of Voter Fraud. Neither one has released their eveidence to the public yet.

We have several documented cases of voter tabulation error in several states.

We have tons and tons of anecdotal information about fishy numbers in the counties that used the optical scan vote tabulators.

We have inconsistent exit poll and unofficial results who's differences need to be reconciled.

We have several other reports of other irregularities that need to be looked into.

Now does all that add up to enough evidence to sit and yell at the top of our lungs that Election Fraud actually occured with 100% confidence that we are right?

No it does not. What it does mean is we have a lot of work cut out for us to go out and find the truth about these things. That is something we must do. And in the very unlikely event it turns out the Bush did win the lotto and was legitimately elected, we will need to accept that fact, regroup and start the arduous work of taking back our country from the ignorant louts who put is in this position in the first place.

So lets support Bev Harris, Nader, and anyone else who will help us get to the truth behind the election. No matter what that truth may be. Report and save anything supicious you may come accross so we can investigate it.

So in summary We really don't have enough information yet to stand up and say we had a fair election nor do we have enough evidence to say we didn't. That will change over the next week or so. In the mean time our energies would be much better spent reporting irregularities and doing what we can to help getting to the bottom of these things than sitting around shouting 'get over it" or "fraud"

As to what I personally believe. I think the election results we currently have are incorrect whether thats due to a simple programming error somewhere or GOP conspiracy I don't know. And I will continue to believe that until each and every one of the noted above incosistencies is explained away to my satisfaction.

[madmax]

1. yeah ok ....right

:boring:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madmax]

4. lol

:hug:

[rfrrfrrfr]

7. How is

Insisting that the irregularities that have been uncovered so far be investigated and either proved true or false be construed as being a freeper troll?

We need to know whether all these fishy numbers are the results of cosmic coincidence or Real and tangible fraud. In some cases we will never know becuase of the lack of a paper trail.

I am mearly pointing out that at this point in time there is absolutely no basis for sitting here and declaring that Bush won this election fair and square and that neither is there enough proof yet to say that yes absolutely there was Voter fraud. And I am tired of seeing both kinds of posts.

Bev Harris and I think it was Mr Fisher from Florida who said they have evidence, they can stand up and say there was voter fraud, but until they tell the general public what eveidence we only have gueswork and supposition at this point.

They are a large part of the reason I do believe there was voter fraud, but I am not gonna go out on a limb and say there was voter fraud fact until we get more evidence in.

[ParanoidPat]

16. One slight correction.......

.......you might not have enough evidence to scream fraud but many of us here do. :evilgrin:

You don't hold a trial on line, you do it in a court of law. You don't run to the press or to a bunch of strangers that you don't know on the 'Internets' and present all of the evidence that you've collected to make your case before the trial. :)

If you are so sick of "both kinds of posts" with so few of your own here, I'd advise you to either grow a thicker skin or avoid both kinds of these threads altogether and go hang out in one of the many other excellent forums here.

Many people here have been actively working the BBV issue for quite some time, in fact we've been at it since before the Aviel Rubin / John Hopkins report. If you would like to come up to speed on what many of us already know, go to http://www.blackboxvoting.org and read Bev's book. The free Internet version is linked chapter by chapter from the front page of the site. Scroll down the page and look on the right. Read it, then stop back and let us know what you think.

Welcome to DU, the virtual front line of the second civil war. :hi:

[EST]

21. Yes-intentional fraud is at ths root of it.

However, isn't the biggest point of all the fact that this election and its results are totally invalid-precisely because the participants-government, courts, candidates, election boards, et sickening cetera, unable to guarantee us-the voting citizens-that our votes count and are counted?
My point-that it is not (should not be) incumbent on us to prove fraud, but is absolutely necessary for them to demonstrate to us that there was no fraud, or else forfeit the election and start over, with proper, and required, checks, balances, and hard, producible records.

[ParanoidPat]

37. I absolutely agree.......

.......hence the last line in my post. :evilgrin:

The revolution will not be televised, it will be on the Internet! :)

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. IN terms of fraud, we are better off safe than sorry. Searching for

evidence of fraud is NOT going to hurt making plans for '06.

------------------------------------------------------
Fight the fraud; fund the recount!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm

[Disgruntled American]

5. tanks in america

here a reality check

http://la.indymedia.org/uploads/tanks-on-la-streets.mov

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2004/11/118865_comment.php#118868

LOS ANGELES, November 9, 2004 - At 7:50 PM two armored tanks showed up at an anti-war protest in front of the federal building in Westwood. The tanks circled the block twice, the second time parking themselves in the street and directly in front of the area where most of the protesters were gathered. Enraged, some of the people attempted to block the tanks, but police quickly cleared the street. The people continued to protest the presence of the tanks, but about ten minutes the tanks drove off. It is unclear as to why the tanks were deployed to this location. Uploaded here is video from the event.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. Thought the dudes in the tanks were lost?

------------------------------------------------------
Fight the fraud; fund the recount!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm

[Disgruntled American]

8. martial law

america will turn into a police state in 5 ,4 ,3, 2 ...

[TexasChick]

9. From what I hear, there's a Veterans group thing going on over there. n/t

[donachiel]

10. I'm volunteering for whatever I can do here:

http://www.verifiedvoting.org

[Carolab]

11. I am pissed at Verified Voting and IEEE

I have corresponded numerous times with both and have gotten woefully inadequate responses. The one thing that they and every other proposal I have read misses (with the exception of the "disappeared" TruVote machine) is that there needs to be a receipt that the voter can take with them to check AFTER the election that the results entered in the database were correct.

Here is my solution, contained in an e-mail I sent to VV. Tell me what YOU think:

I have noticed that in all of these proposals for verifiable paper trails there has not been ONE, save for the TruVote International Solution (which mysteriously disappeared with the strange death of Athan Gibbs) that allows voters to check their votes AFTER the fact.

Mr. Gibbs proposed that voters would be issued a numbered receipt with which they could LATER check their votes via a secure website, with each ballot and its results corresponding to the number on the ballot.

I have suggested to Verified Voting and to IEEE a similar solution, and have been told that leaving each voter with a paper receipt could encourage "vote selling" because voters could use such receipts to prove how they voted in exchange for compensation.

This particular problem can be easily resolved. When their votes are cast, a ballot receipt is produced that the voter can check before it drops into collection box. The results are simultaneously recorded electronically.

Before leaving the polling station, each voter is also provided a receipt showing the number of the deposited ballot receipt and the voting results recorded thereon. The receipts can be checked by each voter before leaving the polling station to ensure that they are correct.

After the election, at their discretion, each voter may go to a local elections office (located in the city hall for the city/town in which the voting took place) and produce their photo identification along with their receipt. The appropriate official can then look up the electronically recorded database containing the results for the number on the receipt, allowing the voter (in private) to view the results to make certain that they match those of the receipt.

If the results in the database do not match the voter's receipt, the ballot receipt that was deposited into the ballot box can then be produced (they would be securely stored in sequentially numbered boxes) to validate the voter's receipt. The results shown on the original ballot receipt will supercede the voter's receipt, since there remains the possibility that the voter's receipt could have been altered.

If there is a discrepancy between the deposited ballot receipt and the results shown on the database, the results on the database will be altered to match the ballot receipt.

I am most certainly not a computer expert, but merely a casual user with a decent ability to reason. If I can come up with this solution, why in the world have a legion of "voting machine manufacturers" and advanced graduates of computer science been unable to do so?

I am tired of excuses from the government and from the voting industry. And so is most of the rest of this country. Voting integrity is the bedrock of a democracy. Without it, our nation and any other nation predicated upon the notion of "representative government" is doomed.

[donachiel]

12. That's it....

This is what we need. People of all competencies to get together and hash this problem out. It would be nice to get programmers, computer security experts, lawyers, sociologists, and others to work together on this. Surely, if we can work together as a group, we are bound to come up with something that would work. :kick:

[magellan]

14. We have the ability to do this NOW.

Saw it in Popular Science. Still, the Republicans keep setting up roadblocks to verifiable voting. "It's too expensive!" is the favorite excuse. Methinks the GOP doth protest too much.

[OneThirty8]

13. "I am tired of excuses from the government and from the voting industry."

That sentence sums up the biggest problem I see. Voting should not be an 'industry.' I believe it's Australia that uses an open-source program running on Linux systems to tabulate votes. That is what we need here. I should be able to go to the Dutchess County Board of Elections website and download the sourcecode for the software involved in recording or tabulating my vote and look for anything odd, and then have my Dad (a professional programmer) do the same. A program that records a few keystrokes/mouseclicks or counts and sorts a bunch of numbers need not be very complex, and anybody with a general understanding of how a program works should be able to see what such a program does. This would actually give me confidence in the voting system. If I found a problem, an open-source model would allow me, you, or anyone to apply a fix. If it was found to be a 'good' fix, it would be added to the source tree, and appear in future versions of the program. I've seen other people suggesting exactly the same thing. It should really be looked into.

As far as finding the fraud, given the fact that Bush & co have taken the opportunity these last four years to show just how untrustworthy they are, I wouldn't put anything past them. We should be looking for fraud. These guys didn't play fair last time, and since they've moved to DC they have continued to make their own rules. There is no reason to believe that this election would be the exception.

[donachiel]

19. Now we're talking. Linux, a "real" server based machine

I was shocked when I found out that these systems were Windoze based boxes. If they don't like open source Linux, they could have at least used one of the smaller IBM eServers. Don't know if they still run AIX which is a form of Unix or not. Haven't worked on one for a few years.

It just amazes me when I think that we're in the 21st century and our government selects such old archaic technology for their voting tabulators. I'd like to find the IT professional (if there is one) who recommended such machines and give them a good lesson in computer security.

Arghhhhh

[OneThirty8]

28. Any *nix system would be fine.

I said Linux because it's freely distributable, stable, and well-supported. It is constantly being worked on by dedicated people all over the world. FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD also would be acceptable choices in my eyes. They're asking for trouble with Windows. Any script-kiddie could hack into a Windows box.

The other thing about going open-source is that we could hold officials accountable. If a person finds a security hole or a bug that'll screw up the count, and somebody offers a viable fix, then if the fix isn't applied we could start demanding answers as to why it wasn't fixed. The way it is now, we don't even know what holes might be in these programs, or where there might be some bad code that's causing the counts to be inaccurate, even if it's an honest oversight on the part of the coder and not malicious intent. It's just a bad set-up, period.

[donachiel]

32. Tell me about it....

They don't realize that we've raised a group of children who had their first computer when they were 3 in schools and at home. They see such things on the tv and in the radio but believe it is an isolated issue. I worked managing the Internet and taught at a Penn State branch campus and saw it first hand. Some of these kids are quite bright.

[masshole1979]

18. one question about your proposal...

...and I'm sure you've answered it already, I just want to get it clear in my head...

If the voter has a receipt of his or her vote, even a coded receipt, that he or she takes out of the polling place (as opposed to existing proposals for verifiable printouts that are used as ballots and cast before leaving the polling place), doesn't that severely compromise the secret ballot? What's to say that the voters' employers won't then demand their receipts and fire them if they didn't vote a certain way? You can't just trust that the government records will be kept confidential, b/c that can always be breeched.

It's the same issue with anonymous vs. confidential HIV tests--the confidential test results can only be breeched with signed consent or court order, but people are scared enough of those unlikely events happening that they still prefer the anonymous test (or at least they did during the early days of the crisis). The insurance companies, theoretically, could demand you sign a release of test results as a condition of coverage. Who's to say employers couldn't demand the same of voting records? After all, they already ask for a cup of your urine.

[donachiel]

20. The plot thickens

Just because the paper that you are looking at says you voted one way, doesn't mean that it was stored electronically in the machine that way. The system has to have checks and balances in order to work effectively. A fail-safe system analysis needs to be in place for peace of mind.

[EST]

23. So you are suggesting that the voter be given a

"voted confirmation number" that the voter, himself only, can use to assure the proper voting record was made, and the confirmation number itself could not be sold (since it is otherwise unidentifiable) and has no other descriptive info, thus creating a vote-related paper trail, while eliminating the small-time graft as well?

If I have correctly interpreted your intent, then you did a good job of creating a positive solution and explaining it!

Too bad! If we eliminate all the ways those bastards can cheat, they will never go for it.

On edit-forgive typos, a massive amount of pain suppression chemicals and a sleeping pill can't seem to handle the current body problems, but do contribute to poor performance.

[ParanoidPat]

17. Don't they have GPS in those damn things?

Perhaps that's why they weren't sent to Iraq, they still haven't learned to read a map. :shrug:

[OneBlueSky]

15. we also have tons and tons of anecdotal evidence . . .

and supporting documentation of wide-spread and diverse attempts to intimidate and disenfranchise minority voters . . . these should all be blown up to poster size and used as visual aids by someone -- ANYONE -- willing to take this issue directly to the people in a major way . . . that person SHOULD be John Kerry . . . but each passing day makes it seem more and more likely that he's taking a pass . . .

what Kerry doesn't seem to realize is that this is no longer about him and whether or not he can "find" enough votes to overturn Bush's election . . . it's about the integrity of our electoral system, the very foundation of our democracy . . .

this, in my view, is the defining moment of John Kerry's public life . . . if he fails to come through, I will be more than disappointed and disgusted . . . I will hate the guy for allowing cowardice and/or narrow self-interest to prevent him from doing the right thing . . . and for not "having the backs" of the millions who gave of their valuable time, their scarce money, their considerable talents, and their boundless energy on his behalf . . .

[donachiel]

24. I hear you but we can't give up hope

I campaigned from the heart for Kerry and truly believed in him and Senator Edwards. I find it so hard to believe that a man who came back from Vietnam and had the audacity to speak the truth and protest against what he thought was wrong, would actually give up so easily. His whole life seemed like a battle to me for justice when I read through his book.

Doesn't anyone else think that it's strange? Just doesn't make sense?

I'm going with the thoughts that for the first time in years, they were totally prepared for this and are just sitting back and regrouping. Surely, after 2000, they didn't just think they were going not face the same old scenario.

[Sammi]

22. Florida voters

My friends and I were concerned about voter fraud in Florida until we looked at the Congressional Almanac and the demographics on people who live in the counties that 'looked' Democrat but voted Repub.

A friend's uncle is the head of one of the largest real estate agencies in the country. He is in the relocation end of the business. Many of the people on the panhandle are retirees from Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. Many of them are older baby boomers who can retire at 55 on pensions from auto factories, John Deere, etc.

The Congressional Almanac says that they registered as Democrats but they voted for Bush in 2000.

I don't know how to explain it but it is recorded.

It totally sucks that John Kerry lost. There are a couple of people on my floor at school who are despondent over the loss. That's why we looked into it. I hope this helps.

[Carolab]

25. The Congressional Almanac

How can you trust anything this government puts out?

Haven't you heard? They write their own "reality".

It was a planned takeover and they have been working on it for a long time.

Tell all of those elderly people in Florida who dedicated all of their spare time to GOTV that they voted for Bush.

What a crock.

Get working on pushing for an investigation into this election. This is the only hope we have for this democracy.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[newyawker99]

38. Hi Sammi!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[thatcoloredfella]

26. Next time you yell about the media not covering this...

Take 5 minutes and go to CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, etc and fire off an email and yell at them for not covering this story!:mad:

[mak3cats]

29. Here's another thought...

Can anyone tell me what the sources were for the Republicans’ assertion that the “morals issue” was the reason for Bush’s unexpected “mandate?” It seems odd that with all the pre-election scrutinizing of voter sentiments (poll after poll after yet another poll) that this issue never came up as a priority before? (And, if I’m not mistaken, current polls show that the issue has sunk again to being a non-priority.)

That means either (a) the “morals issue” spiked as an area of concern for a large segment of the voting population on Election Day only, or (b) the story was conceived and ready to be trotted out as an explanation for the unexpected election results. (And, of course, the sheep in the mainstream media picked it up without question and ran with it, as usual.)

As (a) seems unlikely to me, let’s assume for the sake of argument that it’s (b). Look what the strategy has done for the GOP:

1) It offers a quick sop to their base, leading the group to believe that their strength is growing.

2) It demoralizes the opposition. Look at all the hand-wringing going on in the Democratic Party. “We need to focus on bridging the cultural divide.” “We need to talk values, values, values.” What better than to get the Democrats to expend energies and resources to fix a problem that been, if not entirely invented, certainly exaggerated?

3) It gave the ever-lazier (and ever more corporate-controlled) news media a reason not to investigate anomalous election results.

And, last but absolutely not least,

4) With all the attendant media attention on the topic (even NPR has devoted several hours this past week showcasing religious figures), it has planted the notion in the minds of a generally unquestioning public that Republicans are morally superior to Democrats. And (hence my opening statement) this makes it all that harder for the allegations of vote fraud to be accepted; would such a “moral” group actually (gasp!) CHEAT to win an election?

[newyawker99]

39. Hi mak3cats!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[lefthandedskyhook]

30. Very sane post

We must separate facts from speculation and set a course to fill in the blanks. I hope and believe that this is exactly what is happening under the radar. Let's applaud the effort in that case.

[Ladybast]

31. But all the "off" numbers favor Bush--

which is the main part of any "reality check." The actual question is, "Is this a massive accumulation of mistakes and blunders if ALL of the 100s or 1000s of counties with "goofs" awarded Kerry votes to Bush, and NONE awarded Bush votes to Kerry?

On the contrary, it is huge PRELIMINARY PROOF OF REASON TO SUSPECT FRAUD. It is entirely CIRCUMSTANTIAL at this moment, only because we are in the initial stages of investigation. Circumstantial evidence is the foundation of any case, and there is plenty here to start issuing subpoenas and search warrants.

BTW, I would recommend the Ohio DA move in on Diebold ASAP, get phone records, impound computers to look at email, etc. I would wager considerable cash that there are links going to Whitehouse or Rove.

[donachiel]

33. Hi Ladybast

It boils down to more than just crying fraud. Just the possibility that it could happen is wrong.

It' no longer a matter of who wins and who doesn't. It's our responsibility as citizens to ensure that it doesn't happen again. Those who are our "leaders" are going to try to dismiss us because they benefit from the system the way it is.

[saddemocrat]

34. agree

I agree with you...It is easy to be blinded by ideology and our disappointment. I think it is not only important, but crucial that we all evaluate ourselves and the evidence critically. We have to ask ourselves if we are seeing what we want to see or if there was foul play...when we stop being self-critical, we run the risk of becoming exactly what the 'right' accuse us of being...left wing fruitcakes.

Thanks for reminding us to keep it honest.

kris

[PATRICK]

35. Real reality check

All those methods and many more "traditional" oopsies, the most shameful having to do with the cautious paternalism of the DNC in never fully protecting the civil rights of its black voter base have to do with the obvious potential, growing exponentially, that Americana have lost their right to vote to a ruling minority.

I won't even get to a fraudulent media blinding the nation compared very badly to the rest of the free world and most of the unfree(in several protected issues).

The presumption of legitimacy until proven fraudulent is not in the Constitution I suspect. More protection than that is granted by the common practice of frightened trust in the regal presidency and the myths of democracy. But what we ARE to presume all these means, most visibly exercised with impunity unless stopped by some court or other, stopped short of bestowing a desperately failing Bush candidacy via an easier INVISIBLE UNPROVABLE means of fraud, a means itself protected and sloughed off for four long years.

OK, presume away and then swallow ALL the "values" arguments etc. that show the ordinary human itself in a perpetual darkness unfathomable and unapproachable. Believe in Bush's honor or in what he would not dare. Define those limits for me sometime and prove them.

The election system is busted. Issue one. Kerry likely had it stolen from him. Issue two. Submission to more fog and murk that supports the legitimacy of a proven liar, fraud and incompetent, of a party that does not represents the material interests of most Americans, and national forums in arrogant disarray, alienation and functional treason regarding their very profession, their duty, their senses.

Selling subtle despair? Let's share the feeling.

I'm hitting the alert.

[Flubadubya]

36. "Ok I am a bit tired ..."

You're tired, eh? You ain't been around long enough to be tired. Just stick about a bit... you'll get tired alright! :)