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

Skip to comments.

"Electronic voting errors detailed ..."
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ^ | 4 January 2007 | Rich Cholodofsky

Posted on 01/05/2007 3:46:06 AM PST by lifelong_republican

"Problems at the polls experienced in November by voters in Allegheny and Westmoreland counties were emblematic of nationwide failures of electronic voting systems..."

(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: america; american; representation; vote
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
America just isn't America without valid elections. Let's put an admirable page into the history books of the future by restoring representation in government. Our descendants will be proud of our accomplishments when they learn that we worked to preserve the vote. No more ballotless 'elections': Americans must create and count their own physical votes only. We don't need to outsource that job to anyone.
1 posted on 01/05/2007 3:46:07 AM PST by lifelong_republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

There's never been a perfect election system. We never seemed to have a problem understanding that until Algore's temper tantrum.

I find it interesting that Democrats seemed concerned with a flawless voting system, but not concerned at all with voter ID laws that would prevent fraudulent voting.

The chads were a problem, so we changed to electronic...at a great cost to most states. Now the electronic are a problem.

If we wrote down our vote on a piece of paper, dipped our finger in purple ink, and then waited days to get the results counted...somebody would question those counting the votes.


2 posted on 01/05/2007 3:51:02 AM PST by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

Ping!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1762735/posts


3 posted on 01/05/2007 3:52:36 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

I vote we end secret ballots.


4 posted on 01/05/2007 4:01:17 AM PST by Sybeck1 (Southaven Mississippi Freeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dawn53

No one is claiming that any system would be perfect, only pointing out that the electronics make fraud quick, easy, and undetectable.

The concern with ID is valid, indeed, and the problem is that we don't have identification of those who can manipulate the electronic voting systems.

The voters shouldn't be deprived of ballots they create and confirm for themselves, and those physical ballots can be observed via intense security measures throughout the counting process.


5 posted on 01/05/2007 4:09:27 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

You make a very salient point about the secrecy of the ballot. Originally, voters made their choices in public, and the privacy issue didn't arise until after the Civil War, if I recall correctly.

I'm proud of my vote, which is a good thing, since the voting machines where I voted were positioned so that they could be read by others. Of course anyone in the parking lot could check via the wireless connections as people went in to vote, too.


6 posted on 01/05/2007 4:12:10 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
"Of course anyone in the parking lot could check via the wireless connections as people went in to vote, too."

Are you saying the wireless network the voting machines were on was visible and readable to the public?!?

7 posted on 01/05/2007 4:17:05 AM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: KoRn

Yes, the 'voting' system forced on us by corrupt Democrats in PA has and uses a very vulnerable wireless connection. Not only can people in the parking lots outside the polls see what's going on, they can change what's going on.


8 posted on 01/05/2007 4:22:56 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
In Westmoreland County, all 800 machines had a programming glitch that resulted in some of the computers being inadvertently shut down by poll workers.

Never underestimate the stupidity of a poll worker.

9 posted on 01/05/2007 4:25:35 AM PST by sportutegrl (This thread is useless without pix.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dawn53
Maybe what we ought to have is a system in which each voter votes twice, once using method A, and once using method B. The results of both methods would be tallied, by different groups of people with no interconnections, and then the results would be compared against one another. If there is a greater than x (?) numerical or percentage difference, this would warrant recount and investigation. It wouldn't take more than a minute or two more per voter, and it would be much harder (although not impossible) to manipulate the results of both methods such that the fraudulent results matched. Just a thought.
10 posted on 01/05/2007 4:26:34 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
I'd like to see some confirmation of that possibility, if you don't mind and have something handy to link to.

Thanking you in advance.
11 posted on 01/05/2007 4:30:13 AM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
No one is claiming that any system would be perfect, only pointing out that the electronics make fraud quick, easy, and undetectable.

I don't know if the push for electronic voting machines came primarily from Republicans, dems, or elections professionals, but there are some serious arguments in favor of them. They eliminate stray marks on ballots, which are sometimes an issue. They eliminate all the chad nonsense. They eliminate overvotes. You can build in a prompt to make sure undervotes are intentional, not accidental. IOW, they go a long way towards idiot-proofing ballots, and when you idiot-proof the ballots you take away innumerable opportunities for dead-of-night shenanigans by crooked counters.

As to the "fraud is undetectable on electronic machines" argument: if someone tampers with the counter on an old, pull-the-lever machine, that fraud is undetectable (except by statistical inference) once the deed is done. If someone spikes punchcard ballots, fouls paper ballots, stuffs a ballot box, or swaps out paper or punchcard ballots, the deed is undetectable (except by statistical inference) once done. I am having some difficulty understanding why electronic voting is supposed to be less secure. I understand that the dems have been making smoke to contest the legitimacy of elections in which they lost, but that doesn't make it so. I'm not sure there's anything more involved with this complaint.

The basic checks on fraud in any voting system are a good voter registration list, voter id at the polls, controls on absentee ballots, etc. Those checks remain the same regardless of the mechanics of the ballot.

12 posted on 01/05/2007 4:30:38 AM PST by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

Oh my God.....

Wireless networks are easily closed using some type of firewall, and the data is easily encrypted.

Hell, if it was as open as you say it was, a knowledgeable person with a laptop could intercept and manipulate the data. All one would need to do is ARP poison the network(tell the server that your laptop is a voting machine, and tell the voting machines your laptop is the server). I can't get more specific than that without some knowledge of how the voting machines communicate on the application level, and it would probably be illegal to say such things. ;-)


13 posted on 01/05/2007 4:33:00 AM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Interesting...but you'd have to have voters without malice. If a group decided to overturn an election that was obviously going to the "other guy," all they'd have to do is agree to collectively vote differently on the two ballots. It might not give their guy the victory, but it could create havoc and unnecessary recounts.


14 posted on 01/05/2007 4:33:08 AM PST by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dawn53
Chads were not a problem. Florida 2000 was just an exercise to prepare the country for Hillary to become president through massive electronic vote fraud. The Republicans fell for it hook, line, and sinker and are actually supporting the process by which she will steal the presidency.
15 posted on 01/05/2007 4:33:42 AM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
Yes, the 'voting' system forced on us by corrupt Democrats in PA has and uses a very vulnerable wireless connection. Not only can people in the parking lots outside the polls see what's going on, they can change what's going on.

Source, please?

16 posted on 01/05/2007 4:38:55 AM PST by Terabitten (How is there no anger in the words I hear, only love and mercy, erasing every fear" - Rez Band)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dawn53
Good point, but if that happened it would bring to light like never before the reality of fraudulent voting and the intent of groups of people to invalidate elections. Maybe then, with such tangible evidence, we would finally enforce this as a felony and incarcerate the perpetrators. I may have missed it, but when is the last time anyone went to jail for vote fraud?
17 posted on 01/05/2007 4:43:07 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten; lifelong_republican; Iwo Jima

I believe Wimax digital wireless supplies the voting technology.

Correct me if I'm wrong Lifelong.


18 posted on 01/05/2007 4:44:44 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl

The poll workers get a lot of unwarranted blame because the racketeers and corrupt officials won't take personal responsibility for the problems with the equipment they have wrongfully forced on the pollworkers, and, worse, on the voters.

I don't fault users of Microsoft products, for example, when Windows or some application over it fails due to faulty design and low security.


19 posted on 01/05/2007 4:51:15 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl

Why dont you work at the polls and try to add your intelligence to the process. The electoral board is always looking for poll workers. The pay is little the day is long. The accusations of stupidity are always present. I am sure your district could use someone of your obvious superior intellect.


20 posted on 01/05/2007 4:52:17 AM PST by sgtbono2002 (Peace through strength.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

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.

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