Posted on 01/06/2008 11:20:32 AM PST by neverdem
Jane Platten gestured, bleary-eyed, into the secure room filled with voting machines. It was 3 a.m. on Nov. 7, and she had been working for 22 hours straight. “I guess we’ve seen how technology can affect an election,” she said. The electronic voting machines in Cleveland were causing trouble again.
For a while, it had looked as if things would go smoothly for the Board of Elections office in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. About 200,000 voters had trooped out on the first Tuesday in November for the lightly attended local elections, tapping their choices onto the county’s 5,729 touch-screen voting machines. The elections staff had collected electronic copies of the votes on memory cards and taken them to the main office, where dozens of workers inside a secure, glass-encased room fed them into the “GEMS server,” a gleaming silver Dell desktop computer that tallies the votes.
Then at 10 p.m., the server suddenly froze up and stopped counting votes. Cuyahoga County technicians clustered around the computer, debating what to do. A young, business-suited employee from Diebold — the company that makes the voting machines used in Cuyahoga — peered into the screen and pecked at the keyboard. No one could figure out what was wrong. So, like anyone faced with a misbehaving computer, they simply turned it off and on again. Voilà: It started working — until an hour later, when it crashed a second time...
--snip--
The 2000 election illustrated the cardinal rule of voting systems: if they produce ambiguous results, they are doomed to suspicion. The election is never settled in the mind of the public. To this date, many Gore supporters refuse to accept the legitimacy of George W. Bush’s presidency; and by ultimately deciding the 2000 presidential election, the Supreme Court was pilloried for appearing overly partisan...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The old grey whore keeps hope alive for 2008.
It’s the same old.... “If the Republicans win they cheated. If the Democrats win.... nothing will be said.”
In other words... just setting the stage.
I do that every chance I get.
Hillary wouldn’t be running if she wasn’t guaranteed a win. Someone needs to have video proof of the number of people entering to vote at each location to match with the total votes registered on each machine. That way if only 4,000 people enter the polling site but the total on the machines is 5,000 we can have proof of tampering.
Not if you need to steal the election
I found this from Wikipedia, which also confirmed the second 5 - 4 vote that there was "no alternative scheme could be established within the time limits established by Florida Legislature."
The rule is, any election that any Demagogue loses was "stolen."
So much for anonymity, there's no way to check a recount.
This situation must be remedied before the Dems steal ‘08 like they did in the ‘06 mid-terms!
“The 2000 election illustrated the cardinal rule of voting systems: if they produce ambiguous results, they are doomed to suspicion.”
This is EXACTLY what the ‘Rats want. The WANT a system they can argue about and manipulate. What is so hard about installing a printer and allowing you to view your results behind a window before you confirm?
You can't guarantee that's how it will be tallied. There are going to be flaws in any system. I'd go for the optical scanners. The technology has been there since the machine scoring of multiple choice tests. I want a way to do a manual recount, and a way to verify undercounts, etc. These donks have been shameless since Andrew Jackson.
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.