Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/14/2006 1:47:37 PM PDT by WmShirerAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: WmShirerAdmirer

A university that employs a death's head SS Totenkopfverbände cheerleader on its faculty has its own serious issues to consider.


46 posted on 09/14/2006 3:40:05 PM PDT by sergeantdave (Consider that nearly half the people you pass on the street meet Lenin's definition of useful idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WmShirerAdmirer

Democrats are deathly afraid of electronic voting precisely because it makes it much morbe difficult to rig votes. That's why you hear this bogeyman in the press all the time.


54 posted on 09/14/2006 7:58:34 PM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WmShirerAdmirer

One oddity. They say the software can delete itself at the end of the day. But they also say it can spread by infecting memory cards.

But if you infect a memory card that is being passed around, how are you going to get the software OFF the memory card to wipe out the trail? All you need is a diebold memory card checker, to run all your cards through at the end of the day. You find malicious software, you know someone is hacking.

Of course, you can't know WHAT they hacked. Oh well.

The real problem is treating the machines differently than unmarked ballots.

Oh, also, you could have a random number of votes entered in each machine at the start of the day -- with it set as a real election. You would then check, and if anything comes up bad you know someone is committing voter fraud.

I would say have one half the machines voted on for a few minutes and check them, then reset those half. Anybody putting software on would have to pick which machines to infect, and then guess whether they are a machine that will be run ONCE, or TWICE (or maybe THREE times), so they know which time to start faking data.

Of course, I presume Diebold simply fixes the software holes to prevent this stuff.

If you allow an individual to have access to ANY voting machine by themselves without supervision, you have made a BIG mistake.


55 posted on 09/14/2006 8:41:40 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WmShirerAdmirer

I thought it was illegal to steal voting machines.


57 posted on 09/15/2006 12:31:01 AM PDT by Tall_Texan (I wish a political party would come along that thinks like I do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WmShirerAdmirer
I just don't understand why machines that don't have a paper trail as a means of verification have become the norm in some states. It is just asking for contested elections and prevailing doubts on close elections.
67 posted on 09/15/2006 6:37:09 AM PDT by pepperdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson