Hotel minibar key opens Diebold voting machine!!!!

Freedom-to-Tinker ^ | Monday September 18, 2006 | Ed Felten

[Wormwood]

Paper ballots and photo IDs, and finger ink.

Finally, a system I can support.

[RichInOC]

Well, yeah, but can you chill martini fixins in the Diebold?

[SquirrelKing]

ROFL! That ROCKS!

[DBrow]

"As usual, some freepers are too quick to mock & deride."

Do you think that this is true? Is there corroborating evidence?

I find it highly unlikely that hotel minibars would all use the same key. Last time I saw one it took the plastic electronic doorkey, not a metal key. Why would the front desk want to keep two sets of keys per room, and what's the point of keying them all the same?

And for the hotel key to have the same stamp as the Diebold key, also is unlikely.

Has Diebold 'fessed up to this, or has some other source said it was true?

[blam]

There's the proof.

Cynthia McKinney won!!

[ConservaTexan]

This means that Ted Kennedy now has total control of all voting in Massachusetts!

[dfwgator]

"They minitiarized an entire voting machine just for me."

[technomage]

It is VERY obvious what is going on with the recent, never ending stories, concerning voting machines:

Some libs in the media and acadamia now believe they may not win the house and could possibly end up drawing even or winning just 1-2 seats. So, they are now laying the groundwork for the typical post election tirades like

"They stole the election by manipulating the machines"

or one of numerous variations of the above.

Sorry, but the peeples are growing rather weary of your chicken little impersonations.

One other thing: Is it not interesting that whenever these supposed things occur, it only happens to Democratic voters in districts run by Democrats?

You would think that if this liberal could come up with a program that supposedly alters the vote count that there would be other technically savvy liberals that would go after Republican votes using the same method.

Oh, I forgot, liberals would NEVER manipulate the vote. That is something that only those mean and nasty conservatives do /sarcasm>

[technomage]

No voting system is perfect, but I trust paper ballots that can be verified much more than a machine.

I have yet to see a 'machine' or computer that malfunctions only when someone of a certain party votes.

I want to meet whoever wrote that program and just might hire them!!

[SmoothTalker]

I think there are some serious concerns with the new computerized voting. I'd be much happier if there was an actual paper trail of somesort and something that could be verified. Eventually we'll have an incidence where someone hacks these machines and changes the results of an election. Given how the Dems have behaved in recent elections, I wouldn't be shocked if they don't find ways to cheat on these systems.

[technomage]

Given how the Dems have behaved in recent elections, I wouldn't be shocked if they don't find ways to cheat on these systems.

Please! We all know that only Republicans would manipulate the vote. After all, the only bitching we hear after each election comes from the Democrats!

[Feiny]

I am not worried about a malfunction as much as a hacker, a virus or maybe a cabal of diebold machine genius poll workers working in unison across the country.

[Feiny]

Not true. I bitch about the illegals voting, the dead voting and multiple votes for 1 person. That is also a real problem. They don't even ask for photo ID's here in CA.

[dead]

If you kick a Diebold machine in the right place, a little window slides up and you get to see the naked dancing girl inside.

[DBrow]

I trust paper ballots that can be verified

The current vote fraud setup is based on paper ballots. Look back and see what goes on. A recount is called, and suddenly tallies are fouled up, precinct counts don't match, there are extra votes. So another recount and another until the correct party wins.

This is all based on manipulating paper ballots, swapping around boxes of ballots, and making new ballots while deep-sixing others and faking box tallies, while also manipulating absentees (saving them for last). This is how in Milwaukee, you can have 70,000 voters by tally and 87,000 ballots by count- ops, somebody's faking math was a tad off!

A hard drive, though, gives the same number back every time and there is little room to wiggle or lie.

Remember back in 2000, the video of the recount? Person A looks and says undervote. Hands it to person B, undervote. hands it to person C, who bends it, pokes it, bends it- hanging chad, see? It's now a Gore vote! All based on manipulating paper.

[John Lenin]

I don't trust these machines for nothing. There should always be a backup hardcopy of each ballot in case the election is close and a recount is ordered.

[small voice in the wilderness]

It did seem odd that all the voters in Cynthia McKinney's district exited their voting booth with macademia nuts.

[freedumb2003]

[Feiny]

Yes, but a machine with a vote stealing virus can switch votes from one party to another and the votes count would match.

Of course, I agree with South Park creators. Our choice of candidates is almost always between Turd Sandwich or Giant Douche.

[stylin19a]

I think you read the memo wrong...Kennedy now has total control of all Mass. mini-bars.