Obama Fans Crying Diebold Fix.

[Al Czervik]

Pretty entertaining.

They're probably right, only the guy the corporate masters won't let win is bulldog John Edwards. I don't think they'd have a problem with a lightweight guy like Obama.

Nearly 15 point shift from last night's polls to today's vote, with unaudited Diebold scanners?
Well Diebold won again
ALL Diebold, ALL the Time - It's the NH Primary
The BRAD BLOG : NH Primary: Pre-Election Polls Wildly Different Than Results Announced for Clinton/Obama

[chachi]

This whole election is going to be a mess.

Didn't even make it past NH this time.

[EComCon]

Originally Posted by Al Czervik

Pretty entertaining.

They're probably right, only the guy the corporate masters won't let win is bulldog John Edwards. I don't think they'd have a problem with a lightweight guy like Obama.

Nearly 15 point shift from last night's polls to today's vote, with unaudited Diebold scanners?
Well Diebold won again
ALL Diebold, ALL the Time - It's the NH Primary
The BRAD BLOG : NH Primary: Pre-Election Polls Wildly Different Than Results Announced for Clinton/Obama

Brad Friedman makes some good points

Here's a screenshot of a round up of all of the latest polls from RealClearPolitics.com tonight, and more, to get an idea of the serious concerns here...

They were all not just wrong, but wildly wrong. But only for the Clinton/Obama race.

For a closer look, here's Zogby's predicted numbers, for both the Republicans and Democrats:

And here are the latest numbers from the MSNBC website (the numbers seem to be identical over at CNN and elsewhere):

As you'll note, the numbers in Zogby's latest polls, for all but Clinton and Obama, seem to have been dead-on the money for both the Republicans and Democrats. Edwards, for example, was polled at 17% in Zogby's poll, and he received exactly 17% in the MSNBC numbers, with 63% of precincts reporting.

So are we to believe that only those voters who preferred Obama previously, decided to change to Hillary at the last minute?
Can You Count on Voting Machines?

The winning ticket: Hillary and Diebold in 2008

[GRR Spartan]

I think Clinton's choking up about the rigors of the campaign got the last minute sea change of women voters.

BUT, I am very concerned by the blind run forward for all digital voting with no paper back up. In my MI township we have the scanner system so a recount is possible as all the ballots are numbered and retained.

Diebold's position on fighting the addition of a paper trail is troubling at best.

[chachi]

Well.. we all know what happened in OH in 2004... Here is a special quote for the Obama fans:

In a fall 2003 fundraising letter sent to Republicans, from Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell:

"I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president."

E-voting machine maker Diebold is based in North Canton, Ohio. Via earlier news items published mid-2004 by CNN, CBS, Mother Jones, and others.

Good luck.

[tuff bob]

hilarious.

[tuff bob]

Jason Smith is amused: “The news really isn’t that the nutroots are again blaming electoral defeat on conspiracy theories… but that they’re highlighting the fact that Democrats are out there trying to commit election fraud today. Quite the admission.”

[FC Juventus]

on monday the 8th, ohio state was #1 in the polls and the very next day they finish in 5th? all those people polled that voted ohio state #1 all of a sudden changed their votes to lsu when it actually counted? how could that be?

[Cym Jim]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

Jason Smith is amused:

Who?

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by Cym Jim

Who?

[The Great Danton]

The great thing about McCain vs. Romney is that they would BOTH make good presidents.

[Lochgelly]

All Diebold machines should be outlawed....I don'tcare if its fixed or not...to have voting machines with no paper backup?

NO WAY !

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Lochgelly

All Diebold machines should be outlawed....I don'tcare if its fixed or not...to have voting machines with no paper backup?

NO WAY !

We would just have dangling ****ing chads...

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by Lochgelly

.I don'tcare if its fixed or not...to have voting machines with no paper backup?

surely the votes that were optically scanned are the backup in this case

to point out an obvious flaw, a paper system has no "backup" and has many problems as uncovered in the 2000 election.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

surely the votes that were optically scanned are the backup in this case

to point out an obvious flaw, a paper system has no "backup" and has many problems as uncovered in the 2000 election.

Obviously, it'd be much more difficult to write a program that selects a different option on a paper ballot. Not saying it isn't possible, just that it's much much more difficult.

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by TheDoctorIsIn

Obviously, it'd be much more difficult to write a program that selects a different option on a paper ballot.

different eyes see different things. disputed votes are subject to tampering. paper votes degrade over time. paper votes degrade on each handling. paper voting places an undue burden on people who cannot use a paper vote. subjective "intention of the voter" evaluates each vote differently.

think back to the issue of FL 2000 - the thing that caused people to want electronic touchscreen voting in the first place.

[Enrico Palazzo]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

different eyes see different things. disputed votes are subject to tampering. paper votes degrade over time. paper votes degrade on each handling. paper voting places an undue burden on people who cannot use a paper vote. subjective "intention of the voter" evaluates each vote differently.

think back to the issue of FL 2000 - the thing that caused people to want electronic touchscreen voting in the first place.

yeah, but we didn't want the solution to be put forward by someone who was a major donor to one party and promised pubically to do everything in his power to ensure that party remained in power.

Hmmm, everything in your power, you create the machines that are counting votes.....I guess it's better than just dumping those votes out in the ocean as was done in 2000.

[DantonIzzo]

Originally Posted by The Great Danton

The great thing about McCain vs. Romney is that they would BOTH make good presidents.

[ming]

Originally Posted by Enrico Palazzo

yeah, but we didn't want the solution to be put forward by someone who was a major donor to one party and promised pubically to do everything in his power to ensure that party remained in power.

Hmmm, everything in your power, you create the machines that are counting votes.....I guess it's better than just dumping those votes out in the ocean as was done in 2000.

Yeah, because the CEO of Diebold was the sole programmer working on the voting machines and secretly coded in a back door to ensure that Republican operatives in every district could rig the election in their favor while keeping it a complete secret from everyone! If only he hadn't slipped up and made that comment that could be taken out of context and expose the entire operation!!

I can never understand why people make such a big deal out of the political leanings of the CEO of a particular company. As if they have direct control over such things as making riggable voting machines. What if it came out that the CEO of the company YOU work for was a Republican donor and everyone was claiming that you were complicit in some grand conspiracy or fraud. How you would you feel about that? Why would it be any different for the employees of Diebold?

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by Enrico Palazzo

yeah, but we didn't want the solution to be put forward by someone who was a major donor to one party .

are you saying the government was unable implement a solution. thats a shocker.

[Al Czervik]

Originally Posted by ming

Yeah, because the CEO of Diebold was the sole programmer working on the voting machines and secretly coded in a back door to ensure that Republican operatives in every district could rig the election in their favor while keeping it a complete secret from everyone! If only he hadn't slipped up and made that comment that could be taken out of context and expose the entire operation!!

I can never understand why people make such a big deal out of the political leanings of the CEO of a particular company. As if they have direct control over such things as making riggable voting machines. What if it came out that the CEO of the company YOU work for was a Republican donor and everyone was claiming that you were complicit in some grand conspiracy or fraud. How you would you feel about that? Why would it be any different for the employees of Diebold?

I know what you are saying, but there is some disturbing material out there if you dig a little.

[The Great Danton]

Originally Posted by DantonIzzo

[Dr. Strangelove]

Gee it's almost like the good people of New Hampshire thought they "should" vote for Obama and told that to the pollsters, but once they got in the voting booth they realized that they wouldn't/couldn't vote for a black man.

Obama will poll better than results in a straight primary/general election. Never discount inherent racism.

[TrapperGus]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

surely the votes that were optically scanned are the backup in this case

to point out an obvious flaw, a paper system has no "backup" and has many problems as uncovered in the 2000 election.

Either you are trying to make a joke and I am missing the point or you don't understand that except for the optic scanning systems (not touch screen) that there is no paper that the voters mark nor do they have a paper backup in most cases.

[Tommyboy]

Originally Posted by The Great Danton