Interesting voting tidbits
 

20 Amazing Facts About Voting In The United States
By Bob Rowe

1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S.

2. There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the US voting machine industry.

3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.

4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

5. 35% of ES&S is owned by Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, who became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.

6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, a long-time friend of the Bush family, was caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.

7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice- presidential candidates.

8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the US and counts almost 60% of all US votes.

9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.

10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.

11. Diebold is based in Ohio.

12. Diebold employs 5 convicted felons as developers. These are the people who write the voting machine computer code.

13. Diebold's Senior Vice-President, Jeff Dean, was convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree.

14. Diebold Senior Vice-President Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.

15. None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio.

16. California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie at http://blackboxvoting.org/baxter/baxterVPR.mov.)

17. 30% of all US votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.

18. Bush's Help America Vote Act of 2002 has as its goal to replace all machines with the new electronic touch screen systems with no paper trail.

19. All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and reported went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.

20. Major statistical voting oddities (odds on the order of 250 million to 1!) -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated by experts.

Such amazing odds, the equivalent of statistical miracles these were. Was it God? or was it Diebold...?

Your beating a dead horse, your guy lost. It's over, get over it.

Thom, fascinating stuff. I can validate the California portion of the list -- the electronic voting machines were incredibly insecure, especially at the collection point, and that got them rejected by our state.

Where did you find it?

Sorry, election fraud isn't something to be taken lightly. I'm sure your guy would like nothing better than for this issue to just quietly go away - just like he didn't want a paper trail for the voting machines.

12. Diebold employs 5 convicted felons as developers. These are the people who write the voting machine computer code.

This one made me shoot coffee out my nose! These guys should write a sitcom. Good stuff indeed.:)

I have a couple of questions.

Were there other companies considered, or was it a sole-source?
Are you saying that Ohio was won because W was supported by an executive of the company that made the machines?
Were these same computers used when Clinton won both his terms?
Were the voting machine errors that were detected, corrected?

It sounds like if we keep using these machines, Hillary has no chance.

Don't forget the programmer who just came out and spoke about how he was hired to rig the voting

http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Dec/EEN41b5f8f70cbf8.html

Since shortly after election day, progressive blogs have been filled with reports of voter intimidation and allegations of fraud, but not until recently have any individuals come forth with such compelling information. Curtis has apparently been in touch with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies. Curtis' congressional affidavit contains the following claims:

In the vote fraud prototype that I created things are not what they seem. Hidden on the screen are invisible buttons. A person with knowledge of the locations of those invisible buttons can then use them to alter the votes of everyone before them. By clicking the correct order of invisible buttons the candidate selected by the user is compared to other candidates within that same race. If the candidate they selected is leading the race nothing happens. If the other candidate is leading the race the vote totals are altered so that the selected candidate is now leading the race with 51% of the vote. The other candidates then share the remaining 49% in exact proportion to the totals they had previously. In the prototype supplied to Feeney the vote totals show on the screen. In an actual application the user would receive no visible clues to the fraud that had just occurred. Since the vote is applied by race, any single race or multiple races can be altered. The supervisors or any other voter would never notice this fraud since no visible sign would appear. Additionally, the procedure could be repeated as many times as was necessary to achieve the desired results. No amount of testing or simulations would expose the fraud as its activation and process is completely invisible to everyone except the person programming the vote fraud routine.

The same procedure could be automated to activate without any user intervention whenever the machine detects a certain pattern of voting. The algorithm could also be altered from hidden keys or triggers that would allow the fraudulent user to manipulate both the margins and percentages of any particular race. In most national elections it is not necessary to win every area.

-----------------

Curtis' affidavit goes on to say that Yang Enterprises, his former employer, later informed him that the software might be used to 'control the vote in South Florida'. Yang Enterprises is currently under investigation by the FBI.

Curtis states he initially believed that Feeney sought to stop Democrats from using such a program and 'wanted to be able to detect and prevent that if it occurred.' It was not until after the prototype was delivered that Curtis learned of a possible other motive for its development and use.

These sensational allegations are just starting to be made publicly known 24 hours after Ohio's vote was certified by its Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell and will probably add momentum to the multiple requests for recounts in that hotly contested state.

Right. Aren't you the same guy who doubted the Chairman of Diebold pledged to 'deliver Ohio's electoral votes to Bush'?

I'll be interested in seeing backup, myself.

No I'm not that guy, and am fully aware of the context of the statement. Anyway, I am getting at the wording which is purely misleading.

It says "Diebold employs 5 convicted felons as developers. These are the people who write the voting machine computer code.

This leads the reader to believe that these five guys wrote the code and are convicted felons.

When in reality I'm sure the truth is more along the lines of "Dielbold employs thousands of programmers, five of these thousands are convicted felons. We do not know at all if these five were actually involved in the code writing of the voting machines"

You guys really have some problems. I'm not kidding in the slightest, this is unhealthy. Live it up I guess, but in the end it will ruin you and your party. The sane in your party are going to run and run quick if being a Dem means you're one of these black helicopter types. Rage on!

This is my favorite ode-to-competence from Diebold:

Diebold internal memo, Lana Hires: “I need some answers! Our department is being audited by the County. I have been waiting for someone to give me an explanation as to why Precinct 216 gave Al Gore a minus 16022 when it was uploaded. Will someone please explain this so that I have the information to give the auditor instead of standing here "looking dumb".”

You Democrats are just jealous that the best you could come up with to insure Gore would get elected was to recruit a bunch of whiny old people complaining about hard to figure out paper ballots and hanging chads and us Republicans know how to go right to the source!:D

Not all 5 were programmers Len.

It's bad, yes, but leave the facts as they are. One was a coder, the rest, management.

I just don't think there's any story here. If any of this were really true, Dan Rather wouldn't have resigned.

He would be interviewing voting machine experts 'round the clock and we'd have 24/7 "Voting Crisis in Ohio" coverage on every cable channel - except the Fox News Channel, of course.

Jesse Jackson would be holding news conferences backed by disenfranchised black voters in Columbus churches and Cincinnati town halls and Terry McCaulif and James Carville and Paul Begalla would be trying to get the house Democrats to impeach W.

Where's the news coverage?

Actually I'm a registered Republican and I think people like yourself have wrecked this party so much I'm ashamed to admit I'm registered with a party that morphed into a Jesus freak Pro life/Pro bomb party.

Yeah, sure you are. And we believe every word of what you say.

Damn??!! Those are the reasons I joined the party.

You sir have MAJOR issues. Your comment on the other thread saying Repulicans are no different than Arian Nation types was quite pleasant indeed:rolleyes:

Registered Republican???? Which of our platform issues were you most magnetized by during this period of your life?:rolleyes: :rolleyes: Gimme a break.

I'm guessing the little voice in your tinfoil helmet told you to register Republican so "the man" would leave you alone.

You may be interested to know that I am not at all religious [gasp]. As far as pro life? Well I'm not pro death, but certainly not what you think. I would just like to see a line drawn based on logic not emotion.

You and many others have no idea what the next (or apparently even current) Republican party is all about.

I know what his party is all about now. Its a bunch of brainwashed zombies listening to Clear Channel radio, or Foxnews media monopoly to get your daily propaganda.

If you need to whip out Sean Hannitys 'black helicopter and tin foil' jabs so be it. I was never a registered democrat and don't have to prove **** to anyone. The republican party used to be a respected party that believed in small government, working for yourself, and accountibility, even fiscally.

Now its hijacked by a bunch of blood thirty rednecks with the bible in one hand and bomb in the other. Basically to make a long story short. A bunch of dumb big mouthed biggots have taken over.

There is no accountibility or reality with this party anymore let alone respect or tolerance. Its Jesus freaks gone wild hell bent on bringing on the rapture.

There is no way this party will last, it will implode just like the democrats did. And the sooner the better.

What I don't understand is why make a machine that doesn't offer a paper trail in the first place?

These were new machines in an effort to modernize the voting process. These are NEW machines. Brand new. Some project manager, along with the client (in this case, the government) probably sat down and outlined the specs. Why in the hell would the omit such an obvious key part in regards to fair voting practices?

Why DON'T they provide a paper trail? They're NEW!

Fascinating. Makes the USA sound like a 3rd world country or former Soviet Republic at best.

It would be if true...but like usual...it is obviously just fabrication. That is why it is only getting traction in the few "truely blue" states. The rest of us don't even know anyone who admits to being a liberal...so we can hardly imagine how Kerry got any votes, much less that the republicans needed to cheat.

Good point. Methinks it's the states that Kerry won that we should be looking for election fraud in...

What leads you to believe this is "fabrication?"

And you're probably right about the Kerry votes, but unfortunately, there is no way to AUDIT it! What's up with that?

I can verify that both of these are incorrect:

6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, a long-time friend of the Bush family, was caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.

7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice- presidential candidates.

First, Hagel is no republican. He make all of us Nebraska republicans ashamed to have him, and if he ever does run for president, it will be as a democrat. His record is solidly democrat, and he takes every opportunity to bash our President and the War.

Second, the idea that Hagel was considered to be Bush's running mate is ridiculous. Besides, if Cheney was running everything behind the scenes, do you really think he'd let that happen? You can't have all of your conspiracy theories, stick with one.

hmmmm
Hagel was co-chairman of Bush's re-election campaign in Nebraska.

Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 60% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 87% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 50% by CURE, indicating mixed votes on rehabilitation. (Dec 2000)
Rated 36% by the NEA, indicating a mixed record on public education. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 92% by CATO, indicating a pro-free trade voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated "A" by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 78% by NTU, indicating a "Taxpayer's Friend" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)

Is a registered Republican (a Republican Senator in fact).

Yet somehow you are able to convince yourself that he is a democrat & "disprove" the above post?

http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/chopper.gif

Seems some are just upset cuz Hagel had the audacity to speak against the "king" by saying Bush needs to run the war just a little better.

See, saying anything against the "king" is treason.......

I've been debating about wheather I sould take time off to help in the Ohio recount..............................this thread may of been the tipping point.SmileWavy

By all means pitch in. Then when the counting is over, there wont be any more threads about voter fraud conspiracy theories.

Being an "observer" in a BFE county of Ohio won't dismiss all my misgivings nationwide.

You have to check out http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ some time.

Hagel was co-chairman of Bush's re-election campaign in Nebraska.

Who else would have done it, Ben Nelson? Nelson has always been a republican in a democrat shirt, and he'd switch if it weren't for his loyalty to his former mentor, Frank Morrison. Hagel takes every single opportunity to go against the president, and he's given all of us in western/central Nebraska the finger numerous times. I think we'd know our leaders better than you would.

Well, in 2002 Hagel won his re-election bid by a landslide with 83% of the Nebraska vote. Why do Nebraskans keep voting for him in such huge numbers if he has such a long & consistent history of going against the President, and has been continually giving you guys the finger?

Wow. Sounds like the mirror political image of Zell Miller.
I guess every family has one.........

Not even close. Miller was a wolf in sheep's clothing...his voting practices, work, were conservative. He was basically a republican claiming to be a democrat.

Hagel, all he did was speak out against the way this administration was handling this war (along with a buttload of other republicans). His voting record, work, is conservative.

All Hagel did was to commit the "sin" of speaking out about the poor way this administration was handling this war.

There is a personal danger in not being in perfect lockstep with the leader. I think some of the comments here prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.

A little tid bit on how a liberal professor handeld the election:

Terrorists off-limits but Christians fair game
December 01, 2004

The faculty at UC Berkeley has a set of guidelines designed to keep professors from pushing their personal agendas on students. These guidelines were established to keep the campus from becoming a sanctuary for communist professors. Teaching should “stick to the logic of the facts.” This policy was largely forgotten until recently when a course catalogue for a “Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance” class warned that “conservative thinkers are encouraged to seek other sections.”

This type of agenda is to be expected at Berkeley; I doubt too many of you are surprised. It’s somewhat less expected; however, here at U of L. While “Social Stratification” sounds somewhat less threatening than the Arafat love-fest mentioned above, and its course description neglects to warn students of any political persuasion to “enter at their own risk,” the lack of tolerance for conservative opinion is no less prevalent.

The Thursday following President Bush’s resounding reelection, K.C. Martin walked into a class discussion of the election among the students and her professor, Dr. John McTighe. With much of the class upset over the outcome, one student asked how we managed to reelect “such an idiot” president.

Many exit polls suggested that voters considering morals made up a significant part of President Bush’s voting block. Dr. McTighe took this one step further when he said, “It was the religious zealots who say they are voting on morals. I think we should all buy AK47’s and shoot them all! That’s what I would suggest, if it were allowed.”

McTighe saw no problem with making this type of statement in class because apparently he felt among friends. According to Martin, “on several occasions the teacher [McTighe] said we were all liberals, so he probably assumed it was okay to bash Republicans.”

Understandably, Martin was upset: “I was offended that he would say such a thing…he has no idea what I believe. I don’t think that gives him the right to assume every student is a liberal and he can say whatever he wants.”

McTighe contends that he qualified his outrageous comments by saying “Yes, I’m being sarcastic,” and that while he does believe “religious zealots” were partly responsible for the president’s reelection, his reference to guns came while discussing the “implications of a widely perceived connection between fervent religious beliefs and support for gun ownership.” Not to get off the subject here, but maybe this “widely perceived connection” could be more that people who support the First Amendment also just happen to support the Second Amendment as well. You know, all those nuts who actually believe in upholding the Constitution.

McTighe told university officials that he said people should buy a weapon to protect themselves from those in the gun ownership movement. (Note: it’s not a movement; it’s a constitutionally-protected right.) He may as well have claimed that he was suffering from “post-election selection trauma” and knew not what he was telling his class.

The scorn for all of us professing to believe in God is clear in McTighe’s obscene remarks to his sociology class. The reason for this is simple: liberals feel threatened by God. Op-ed pages across the country were echoing with shouts that voters making decisions based on their morals is bad for America. It’s not bad for America; it’s bad for liberals.

Let’s put this in perspective here: liberals have spent the past three years whining about the need to protect the rights of terrorists. Remember the uproar over classifying detainees at Guantanamo Bay as enemy combatants? We were told that we should have more concern for the rights of terrorists. What about giving Saddam the death penalty? Oh, how inhumane! Liberals won’t allow us to shoot terrorists and murdering dictators, but if you believe in God, not only should you be shot, but they want to use an assault weapon.

Many of you are probably incensed at McTighe’s words right now; however, I’m prepared to let him off the hook. He’s understandably upset following a difficult election. He is in luck though; the American Health Association is offering free counseling for those afflicted with Post-Election Selection Trauma. He seems to be in dire need.