[Huebolt]

unless it is your intention to skew the results. with the chances of success high, and the chances of detection low, and the prize enormous, it isn't a matter of if, but when.

Perhaps, but all programs I've been involved with ALWAYS had a gigo test where one put in data and knew what the output should be. In one case, we had 15 different data sets which had been analyzed and the output HAD to match or someone had some 'splainin to do.

Of course, anything is possible, some things are just unlikely.

Occam's razor is: Would a democrat lie, or is a huge organization corrupt and are 25 or 30 professional programmers able to keep a secret?

I think democrats lie, steal, cheat, and sodomize each other and wild animals.

[camle]

inre #50

you are assuming that the company producing the software WANTS it honest. a company can make far more money by promising elections than it can by a simple accurate count.

and the political parties want to preserve the option to swing the vote, else there would be simple, easy to understand and verify methods of voting.