NY Times Targets Diebold In Op-Ed (FACTS Destroy Voter Fraud Conspiracy)

December 19, 2005

[new yorker 77]

This post is in response to the Sunday, December 18, 2005, New York Times Op-Ed piece,originally posted by freeper 'salbam' here, which calls into question electronic voting machines. This is an argument being pushed by the liberal kook fringe because of the results in Ohio and Florida which liberals can not come to terms with.

Fact: If you compare the results of Election 2004 to the results of Election 2000, President Bush had Net Gains in 39 states while his Democrat Opponent had Net Gains in only 11 states. This proves that President Bush won a national election.

The Formula for Net Gain in a State is a s follows:

(# of Bush’04 Votes - # of Bush ’00 Votes) – (# of Kerry ’04 Votes - # of Gore ’00 Votes) = Net Gain of Votes

If the Net Gain # is Positive, it is a Net Gain for Bush.

If the Net Gain # is Negative, it is a Net Gain for Kerry.

I tabulated the following results of Net Gains using data of Election 2000 and Election 2004 which I have sourced below. Feel free to correct me if need be, but I obtained these Net Gain results using a spreadsheet and double-checked the numbers inputed.

Fact: President Bush had a Net Gain of 749,296 Votes in the Northeastern states that he lost. The states include Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, & Maryland. Most of these states are run at the state and local level by Democrats.

President Bush had a Net Gain of Votes in 39 States

State--------------Net Gain

Alabama----------233,899

Arizona-----------114,459

Arkansas-----------52,773

California----------58,115

Connecticut--------91,259

Delaware-----------14,288

Florida------------380,441

Georgia-----------244,615

Hawaii-------------29,924

Idaho---------------29,837

Illinois-------------24,001

Indiana------------166,571

Iowa----------------14,203

Kansas-------------78,407

Kentucky---------123,112

Louisiana---------146,343

Maryland----------17,195

Massachusetts—---5,294

Michigan-----------51,842

Mississippi---------46,664

Missouri----------117,756

Nebraska-----------56,404

New Jersey-------263,250

New Mexico--------6,354

New York---------352,610

North Carolina-----61,846

North Dakota-------6,031

Oklahoma---------185,765

Pennsylvania-------60,592

Rhode Island-------28,239

South Carolina—--55,899

South Dakota------11,444

Tennessee---------267,669

Texas--------------328,320

Utah---------------110,500

Virginia------------42,017

West Virginia-----56,259

Wyoming-----------9,387

John Kerry had a Net Gain of Votes in 11 States

State--------------Net Gain

Alaska--------------8,530

Colorado----------45,998

D.C.---------------27,864

Maine-------------33,306

Minnesota--------39,712

Montana----------10,699

Nevada-----------------97

New Hampshire-16,485

Ohio---------------48,136

Oregon------------69,567

Vermont-----------33,640

Washington-------66,519

Wisconsin----------5,676

The following data shows the votes obtained by Bush in 2000, Bush in 2004, Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 in all 50 States and D.C..

State-------------Bush 2004---Bush 2000—Kerry 2004—Gore 2000

Alabama---------1,176,394-----941,173------693,933-------692,611

Alaska-------------190,889------167,398------111,025--------79,004

Arizona----------1,104,294-----781,652------893,524-------685,341

Arkansas----------572,898------472,940------469,953-------422,768

California--------5,509,826---4,567,429----6,745,485-----5,861,203

Colorado---------1,101,255-----883,748-----1,001,732------738,227

Connecticut------693,826------561,094------857,488-------816,015

Delaware---------171,660------137,288------200,152-------180,068

D.C.----------------21,256--------18,073------202,970-------171,923

Florida-----------3,964,522----2,912,790----3,583,544-----2,912,253

Georgia----------1,914,254----1,419,720----1,366,149-----1,116,230

Hawaii------------194,191------137,845------231,708-------205,286

Idaho--------------409,235------336,937------181,098-------138,637

Illinois-----------2,345,946----2,019,421----2,891,550-----2,589,026

Indiana----------1,479,438----1,245,836------969,011-------901,980

Iowa---------------751,957------634,373------741,898-------638,517

Kansas------------736,456------622,332------434,993-------399,276

Kentucky-------1,069,439------872,492------712,733-------638,898

Louisiana-------1,102,169------927,871------820,299-------792,344

Maine-------------330,201------286,616------396,842-------319,951

Maryland-------1,024,703------813,797----1,334,493-----1,140,782

Massachusetts-1,071,109------878,502----1,803,800-----1,616,487

Michigan-------2,313,746----1,953,139----2,479,183-----2,170,418

Minnesota------1,346,695----1,109,659----1,445,014-----1,168,266

Mississippi-------672,660------572,844------457,766-------404,614

Missouri--------1,455,713----1,189,924----1,259,171-----1,111,138

Montana----------266,063------240,178------173,710-------137,126

Nebraska---------512,814------433,862------254,328-------231,780

Nevada-----------418,690------301,575------397,190-------279,978

New Hampshire-331,237------273,559------340,511-------266,348

New Jersey-----1,670,003----1,284,173----1,911,430-----1,788,850

New Mexico-----376,930------286,417------370,942-------286,783

New York------2,962,567----2,403,374----4,314,280----4,107,697

North Carolina-1,961,166----1,631,163----1,525,849----1,257,692

North Dakota----196,651------174,852-------111,052-------95,284

Ohio-------------2,859,764----2,350,363----2,741,165----2,183,628

Oklahoma--------959,792------744,337-------503,966------474,276

Oregon-----------866,831------713,577--------943,163------720,342

Pennsylvania---2,793,847----2,281,127----2,938,095----2,485,967

Rhode Island----169,046------130,155--------259,760------249,508

South Carolina—937,974-----785,937--------661,699------565,561

South Dakota----232,584------190,700--------149,244------118,804

Tennessee------1,384,375----1,061,949-----1,036,477------981,720

Texas-----------4,526,917----3,799,639-----2,832,704----2,433,746

Utah---------------663,742------515,096--------241,199------203,053

Vermont----------121,180------119,775--------184,067------149,022

Virginia--------1,716,959----1,437,490-----1,454,742----1,217,290

Washington----1,304,894----1,108,864-----1,510,201----1,108,864

West Virginia----423,778------336,475--------326,541------295,497

Wisconsin------1,478,120----1,237,279-----1,489,504----1,242,987

Wyoming---------167,629------147,947---------70,776-------60,481

Total-----------62,028,285---50,455,156---59,028,109---50,992,335

Source of Election 2000 Data: http://www.gwu.edu/~action/resultsgfin.htm

Source of Election 2004 Data: http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/eday/results1104f.html

[zeugma]

What about the paper trail?

A paper trail is used to audit the vote. It could either be machine readable, human readable, or some combination of the two. 

 Is this a little slip of paper that the voter gets to show he voted, kind of like a receipt?

No. It will be deposited at the polling place just like regular paper ballots. 

What if it does not reflect the voter's wishes? Does he go to the poll worker and have his vote deleted so he can revote?

If it doesn't reflect the voter's wishes, it would be handled similarly to the way that spoiled ballots are today. I would image in any well-designed electronic voting machine, a bad ballot would be able to be  dealt with. The voter would probably have to sign that it was defective for whatever reason or something. In fact, a properly designed electronic system would display all of the voter's choices before printing. Perhaps it would be set up in such a way that after printing, it couldn't be second-guessed. This would be a problem though if you had paper feed problems, though paper fed through rolls jam much less often than sheet-fed paper.

One reason why you wouldn't want the voter to get a reciept for his vote is because it opens the door for verifiable fraud. Let's say Joe Democrat is offering $5 or whatever for votes for a candidate. If the voter got a reciept, Joe  could demand the receipt (that he could check) before paying. Currently Joe Democrat can offer to pay for votes, but what the voter does in the booth is really his own choice. Personally, if I was offered something for a vote, I'd take it and then vote for the opponent. 

Do we really want poll workers to be able to delete votes?

They can delete votes now with paper ballots. I believe a fair amount of this happened in Florida in the past couple of elections with the 'spoiled' ballots (overvotes mostly).

[js1138]

Disagree Steve... How can you verify the source of a paper ballot when it appears out of the wood work two weeks after the election? Thats the Dems modus operandi.

The same way you verify the authenticity of Lotto tickets. It isn't hard to produce an auditable paper trail. The easiest way is to produce a continuous tape of encrypted votes, using bar code technology, for each machine. The cost of the printer is negligible.

[jerry639]

After changing from paper ballots and mechanical voting machines to scanning machines in my county Republicans gained votes every election. The first time Republicans have gotten a true vote count in decades because of voter fraud by the Democrats. Democrats control the elections in this county and are likely to for many elections but at least we finally get an honest count.
Dims can't win in state or federal elections anymore so, to them, it has to be that Republicans are manipulating the machines. Not true but that is what their evil little minds believe. Now they want to go back to paper ballots so the Dims can create more voter fraud. As if there isn't enough voter fraud by Dims already.

[jerry639]

Why now should there be a paper trail for voting machines?
What about the mechanical voting machines we used in the past? No paper trail there.
The new electronic voting machines are more fraud proof than anything we have used in the past, including paper ballots.

[KC_Conspirator]

After changing from paper ballots and mechanical voting machines to scanning machines in my county Republicans gained votes every election. The first time Republicans have gotten a true vote count in decades because of voter fraud by the Democrats.

You in essence have discovered why democrats want to return to paper balloting. Its much easier to fake a vote by punching a card in the backroom.

[steve-b]

The new electronic voting machines are more fraud proof than anything we have used in the past

An electronic machine does what it's programmed to do. If it's programmed to spit out a billion votes for Hillary, it'll do so.

That's why paper verification is essential.

[steve-b]

Its much easier to fake a vote by punching a card in the backroom.

Nonsense. Producing fake paper votes requires a significant investment of effort, and a chance of getting caught, for each fraudulent vote. Fixing an electronic count requires less effort and risk to generate as many fake votes as desired.

[Wristpin]

I find it hard to believe that Diebold can't produce a machine capable of securely and accurately recording a vote tally. The Voting machine market is small potatoes compared to their business in the financial world. They have too much at stake to produce corruptible machines. This is all a Dem smokescreen.

That being said here is the Dem's fifth column in regards to voting IMHO:

A. Fight to the death for IDless voting as it allows multiple voting in Dem districts.

B. Paper is Essential!...Necessary votes can be gleefully generated weeks after the fact in the homes of Dem operatives while they enjoy "The Jerry Springer show" and "Oprah".

C. Tighten rules, mail out late, and discard as many military ballots as possible.

D. Push for Felonry Voting rights as they vote 90 percent Demorat.

Did I miss anything?

[KC_Conspirator]

Try going to the inner city in a heavily democrat area. Many times the GOP can't even find a monitor to keep things on the up and up, but then they do they are subtly threatened. Then when it comes to actually deliver the votes, its packed into a van that is driven around the highway for hours and hours while special "vote technicians" press out fake votes. There was a great article in the WSJ (relating to the vast vote fraud in Philly) not too long ago in which someone admitted to taking part in this.

[colorado tanker]

Lessee, the moonbats love motervoter, internet voter and every kind of voter that's easy to commit fraud with. What they don't like are reliable electronic voting machines. Let's go back to paper ballots, they say, which are the easiest of all to stuff or lose, depending on the fraud.

Same-old, same-old.

[jerry639]

An electronic machine does what it's programmed to do. If it's programmed to spit out a billion votes for Hillary, it'll do so
Well, I don't think electronic voting machines are programed to do any such thing. There may be a few bugs in the systems but programing them to commit fraud is doubtful. Dims can't win with their message so it must be the voting machines is a bunch of BS. Republicans don't run every county or local elections in this country so don't you think the elections ran by the Dims would refuse to buy the machines if they thought they were programed to make Dims lose? I for one am not believing it. It's just MSM and liberal propaganda. Besides, if they give paper receipts to each voter in a precinct that has 10,000 voters just how big a roll of paper we going to need? Will be hiring fork truck drivers to put a 1000 lb roll of paper in the machine? Logistics of giving a paper receipt to each voter is not as simple as some would think.

[tcrlaf]

bump