Posted on 12/15/2005 8:18:39 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
Bush won.
GOOD -- Easier for us to cheat next time. Take that DU.
Oh my God, the Attack of the Dangling Chads...this ought to get the ballot-box-stuffing libs going again...
Well, they can be hacked. The reality is that having election machines with no paper trail is stupid.
I don't know what is wrong with the optical scanners used here in Oklahoma. The things are scanned for an easy and quick reading, but the actual ballots remain in case it is close and there is a challenge.
But that would make too much sense - much better to just say there is a problem and exploit the information to set the stage to steal elections when the Dims lose the election.
I don't know; after watching what's going on in Iraq, I am all for the Purple Finger.
Given that the old paper balloting system could be "hacked" too, via the mass manufacture of fake paper ballots (ref: Democrat operative caught in Florida with a voting machine in his trunk), what's the difference?
If it is possible to commit vote fraud, it will happen every time...........
and be committed by both both parties.
Perhaps this report is the reason behind the big cheese at diebold's sudden resignation?
Now there's an idea I'd back wholeheartedly!
Am I alone in my desire to keep paper voting? Electronic counting is fine, but what is so hard about coloring in a bubble?
"News" always comes around in full circle, literally. Bush won then and he still won today.
The problem with paper is that the Dems can manufacture the necessary ballots weeks after the fact. There a countless examples of more ballots than registered voters in Dem precincts.
Are these systems networked with internet access? I don't see how a closed system could be hacked.
ALL machines can be hacked. There is no fool-proof system. We certainly know that paper ballots can be *hacked*.
One way to vastly improve voting security with computerized machines would be to have the machine print out a paper summary of the vote which would also be stored. The voter would get to see the paper ballot marked with his choices and put it into the ballot box. That way if there is a discrepancy, the votes can be verified by human beings. This would be a very simple and inexpensive safeguard. Why this is/was not a requirement of all automated voting machines is beyond comprehension.
Somehow, the machines perform perfectly when Democrats win. Look at the CA election last month. All of Arnold's propositions were defeated and nary a word about intimidation, fraud or disenfranchisement.
Yikes! The purple finger looms
over American voters!
My bullhorn heckled Irv for days in front of that Emergency Operations Building in West Palm Beach during the recount.
He ended up giving me the Democrat Party salute with one finger!
Given their history since at least 1960, I strongly suspect that these openings would most likely be exploited by the Democrats, but if anybody of either party is found guilty, they should be shot. Literally, not figuratively.
The Dems in Florida demanded electronic voting machines after 2000. We fill in a circle next to the name with a Sharpie. Works everytime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.