Notices
Results 1 to 40 of 40
Like Tree2Likes
  • 2 Post By kojax

Thread: Election Fraud, Generally Speaking

  1. #1 Election Fraud, Generally Speaking 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    649
    In the democratic process, voting is a key component to ensure that the government of the people operates with the consent of those people. No matter how high or low the level of voter participation, the calculation of the results must accurately reflect the choice of those voters or the entire affair becomes a mockery and a waste of time.

    Obviously, the stakes are high and so is the chance of irregularity.

    What measures may be taken to detect or correct such irregularities?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    A couple ways.

    Test ballet formats on sample populations against bias.

    When you automate voting systems, take advantage of technology to make them more secure-- poorly implemented automated systems are far too often just direct pulls of paper systems that magnify their inherent problems.


    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Decertify fraudulent and legitimately suspect elections. Do over.

    Formally investigate all appearances of fraud, as criminal matters - appoint outsiders for the investigation, with subpeona power and testimony under oath.

    Require a paper trail of all electoral circumstances, audit them, and treat all institutionally unsecured trails as presumptively fraudulent until demonstrated otherwise. Allow no software not publicly available and publicly vetted.

    Disallow judicial oversight of election disagreements by compromised judges - appoint at least formally neutral judges, with no demonstrated conflicts of interest.

    That way, given a situation like Florida's in 2000, in which a large number of misprinted and confusing ballots somehow all ended up in the same couple of districts, so that the confusion damaged one particular candidate, some remediation of the damage would be possible.

    And in a situation like that of Ohio in 2004, when election rigging was proven in court and people were successfully prosecuted, the election itself could then be decertified, and the results annulled.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    703
    Benford Law can be used to test for fraud; ballot count from different area can be checked for "artificial pattern" and existent of this pattern can indicate tampering. Natural stuff usually obey Benford Law, but when forced (eg: change the numbers): you'll get deviation from Benford Law. -This make life easier for law enforcement agency to audit company financial statement & check for voting legitimacy without resorting to excessive spying and intruding privacy...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZUDoEdjTzg ;Benford law explaination in 6 minute.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Hand counts, deliberately done in an inefficient manner so as to assure that multiple eyes see every ballot. The more people involved, doing redundant work, the larger the size of a conspiracy that would be needed in order to thwart the process. It's easy for a single person with programming skills to conspire with a single security guard (2 people total) to plant malicious code into a machine, but very difficult for a room full of people all agree to miscount the votes manually.

    The age of automation is the age of small conspiracies. It can take as few as one person to thwart the entire system if that one person is very smart.
    msafwan and adelady like this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    At a different level, review the entire process, not only during the ballet casting (pressing...lol), but also for accessibility. Can citizens who should be able to vote, register in a simple and available process. Are hours amenable to folks without bias for people who work during the day- or have to buck travel or take a ferry to get to a poling location. Are the election centers secure--not only the building but the parking lots, bus stations--and can they be used without intimidation?
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Hand counts, deliberately done in an inefficient manner so as to assure that multiple eyes see every ballot
    Hand counts almost never get the same numbers. They are notoriously bad way of doing things in really close elections.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    649
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    A couple ways.

    Test ballet formats on sample populations against bias.

    When you automate voting systems, take advantage of technology to make them more secure-- poorly implemented automated systems are far too often just direct pulls of paper systems that magnify their inherent problems.
    What has ballet to do with the topic? And have you forgotten the infamous "hanging chads" of 2000? Who operates the automated systems and how do we keep them on the straight and narrow, that's the issue as I see it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    What has ballet to do with the topic?
    Read your opening post.

    You didn't say anything about how they vote would be taken, hands in the air, shout outs (yas and neys), by paper, or machine and since ballets are the most common way they are obviously part of the discussion--unless you expected us to read your mind somehow.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Hand counts, deliberately done in an inefficient manner so as to assure that multiple eyes see every ballot
    Hand counts almost never get the same numbers. They are notoriously bad way of doing things in really close elections.
    Yeah. Close elections are bad news all around. A good solution to that would be to simply call it a tie or non-result whenever the margin falls within a range smaller than the predicted accuracy. That's how scientists deal with imprecise data.

    As long as the vote isn't very close, and as long as the errors are truly random, then statistically they should balance out over a large enough population. There's no worry that 35% of the votes will favor one candidate and the other will be declared the winner. On the other hand, if fraud becomes easy enough to achieve that someone decides to try it and gets caught, our system could be in for a real shock.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Hand counts almost never get the same numbers. They are notoriously bad way of doing things in really close elections.
    They were more accurate than the machine counts, in Minnesota's Senate election that eventually went to Franken.

    At least, they were in Sherburne and Anoka counties, where I saw the comparison tallies and the questionable ballots.

    In Florida in 2000 the rigging of the ballot printing and physical setup was invisible to the machine count, but obvious to the hand count. In Ohio in 2004 the use of machines for ballot counting allowed the manipulation of machine availability to bias the vote, as well as providing opportunity for other mischief.

    Machine counting is reasonable, if the problems are taken seriously and forestalled. But it is not intrinsically better in any way except speed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Not sure what you mean by "machine count." It's a very broad catagory ranging from a machine that reads what's a paper ballet and subject to many of the problems intrinsic in paper ballets, to automated electronic ballet systems.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    Not sure what you mean by "machine count." It's a very broad catagory ranging from a machine that reads what's a paper ballet and subject to many of the problems intrinsic in paper ballets, to automated electronic ballet systems.
    In Minnesota, it's a machine count of a paper ballot.

    Are you recommending a completely electronic, software controlled system with no paper trail?

    I predict a hacked election for a major political office within one election cycle - three years - of the national or widespread adoption of such a system. We already saw symptoms of enough problems with the paperless machines in Florida, in 2000, to have changed the Presidency - we don't know whether they were serious enough to have altered the election, and we don't know whether they were intended. We probably never will.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    I'm not recommending either, though direct recording is in about a 3rd of the nation, with many more using paper + electronic scanning.

    State by State Voting Equipment - Ballotpedia

    --
    We trust hundred of $ billions in electronic bank transactions every day -- I pretty confident we could go to a fully electronic systems, with paper/scanned ballets for backup if there's any problems.

    --
    My biggest concern with voting isn't with the actual voting system but the rush to make it difficult for legitimate voters to accomplish their civic duty. The Supreme Court has several times had to intercede and rule against state restrictions such as residence time requirements and other conditions. Open maniputation of the right and ability to vote shouldn't be a political footbal.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    We trust hundred of $ billions in electronic bank transactions every day -- I pretty confident we could go to a fully electronic systems, with paper/scanned ballets for backup if there's any problems.
    That's what we do in Minnesota. It works OK - just that the hand count, in a close vote, was more accurate.

    My biggest concern with voting isn't with the actual voting system but the rush to make it difficult for legitimate voters to accomplish their civic duty.
    Quit voting for modern era Republicans. There's a Party advantage to corrupting the voting systems with dubious and cryptic machines and software, restricting the voter base, and other manipulations. When that Party is driven back under its rock, our concerns can turn to other matters.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    I'm not recommending either, though direct recording is in about a 3rd of the nation, with many more using paper + electronic scanning.

    State by State Voting Equipment - Ballotpedia

    --
    We trust hundred of $ billions in electronic bank transactions every day -- I pretty confident we could go to a fully electronic systems, with paper/scanned ballets for backup if there's any problems.

    --
    In the financial world, there are multiple ways to cross check against other records and continually recheck. Not only that, but multiple records are constantly interacting with each other. If someone rigged a money tracking machine to give them more money than they're supposed to have, it would inevitably yield results that conflicted with those other records and cause a large enough discrepancy the accountants wouldn't be able to miss it. Nobody's financial data is ever stored in just one place. At worst, the authorities can always go back through the transaction records to see when and where your money appeared (or disappeared).

    The problem with voting machines, is that if the machine is actually accepting your vote directly, then it can't claim this kind of fail safe, because there's only one record in existence. To make it even worse, voting is anonymous, so exit polls are the only way for voters to compare notes. However, the inherent inaccuracy of the exit polling process causes the public and the authorities alike to refuse to take those seriously when they disagree with the machines (even though no other way of determining the accuracy exists.)

    I would suggest that, if we want to continue using the machines, then voters should still be required to fill out paper ballots and scan them into the machine. The ballots should be stored somewhere, and need not be hand counted most of the time, but should always be hand counted whenever the exit poll disagrees by a significant margin.





    My biggest concern with voting isn't with the actual voting system but the rush to make it difficult for legitimate voters to accomplish their civic duty. The Supreme Court has several times had to intercede and rule against state restrictions such as residence time requirements and other conditions. Open maniputation of the right and ability to vote shouldn't be a political footbal.
    Good point, but I'm not understanding how machines fix this. Having voters fill out a piece of paper onsite rather than push a button would only affect those people who are not able to write on paper.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Good point, but I'm not understanding how machines fix this. Having voters fill out a piece of paper onsite rather than push a button would only affect those people who are not able to write on paper.
    I'm talking about things that don't even let you get into the voting booth, because you haven't lived their long enough...didn't fill our some form in triplicate and send it to the right location...don't have three forms of photo ID and your birth certificate etc. At the other end of the problem is double and triple voters, and dead voters, which automation could easily fix with database cross referencing.

    I also wouldn't check against exit polls. If there's both paper and auto recorded scanned data sampling can determine if there's some systemic problem. I'm perfectly ok with that system. Though like I mentioned before I'd be just as comfortable doing it through a web site and printing and saving a pdf file to the my desktop....much as I'll do when I file my taxes in a few weeks.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Hand counts almost never get the same numbers. They are notoriously bad way of doing things in really close elections.
    Dunno 'bout that. Australia uses pencil and paper ballots. Everything's counted by hand, with scrutineers appointed by all candidates watching - like hawks - to claim or to dispute every single vote.

    And remember we use both optional and exhaustive preferential voting, not simple counting by any means. Electoral system of Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It's be nice to think that other countries could get something as simple and as well organised as our system. But I expect Americans would be horrified at the thought of having individual voters elect presidents rather than the hierarchical electoral college system. Let alone having an independent bunch of public servants in charge of voter registration and setting electoral boundaries for the whole country. No opportunity for local politics to influence who gets to vote nor to mess about with boundaries.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    There's quite a few studies on this, I'll put one below that's consistent with most. Recounted, much about county size almost never get the same number. It is, as long as there were not custody or other issues, and as mentioned by someone above, usually accurate within a 1-2% margin of error which is fine for most elections.

    Rice University | News & Media

    --
    And I total agree about direct voting for president. I think many Americans actually want to go this route, but it only soft support from democrats and is opposed by republicans because, at present, some rural states electoral votes are worth more than 7 times what urban state voters are worth towards the presidential election. (e.g. Wyoming versus California).
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    I would suggest that, if we want to continue using the machines, then voters should still be required to fill out paper ballots and scan them into the machine. The ballots should be stored somewhere, and need not be hand counted most of the time, but should always be hand counted whenever the exit poll disagrees by a significant margin.
    That's how Minnesota does it, except we random audit a sample of the machines rather than use exit polls.

    The single record machines in the US - especially the touch screen models - are a zoo of problems, everything from using proprietary and commercially secret software written and installed by corporations with active Republican partisan CEOs, to recording vote totals in modules that can be swapped out for preloaded ones in five minutes by a chimpanzee with a screwdriver (literally, a chimp has done it, see the video on youtube), to online connections that allow internet access to the software, to weird hardware glitches in the vote registry (that for some reason seem to have been favoring Republican candidates, seven to one in reported incidents last I checked). The fundamental problem is that they cannot be audited. Secondary issues include the possibility of manipulation of availability - taken full advantage of in Ohio in 2004, for example.

    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    Recounted, much about county size almost never get the same number.
    The machines will give you the same number every time, but that doesn't mean they are more accurate. In the last Minnesota Senate contest recount, in Sherburne and Anoka counties (MN) the handcount picked up more than two extra votes per ward, average, for each Senate candidate - in more Dem leaning districts than those the extra vote total was more, which ended up throwing the election to Franken as expected.

    The issue seemed to be unreliable machine reading of smudges, erasures, rips, misprints, doodles, and the like, on the ballots.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    I'm not too interested in quibbling about your unsupported claim which when I looked them up account for much less than 1% anyhow.
    https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/a...rate-minnesota

    In a state that leads the nation in voter fraud convictions there were many more problems than if the hand counts were a fraction of a % more accurate.
    Minnesota Leads the Nation in Voter Fraud Convictions -- ST. PAUL, Minn., Oct. 13, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

    I hope with that amount of prosecutions, that state is finally getting it's arms around the problem.

    --
    Another way to say it?
    Not much point in quibbling about 2 extra people per ward when nearly 3000 dead people got to vote.
    http://www.redstate.com/jrichardson/...2-dead-voters/
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; February 8th, 2012 at 04:35 PM.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    In a state that leads the nation in voter fraud convictions there were many more problems than if the hand counts were a fraction of a % more accurate.
    Minnesota Leads the Nation in Voter Fraud Convictions -- ST. PAUL, Minn., Oct. 13, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

    I hope with that amount of prosecutions, that state is finally getting it's arms around the problem.
    We prosecute voter fraud in this State, even trivial cases. It keeps things clean, forestalls the kind of mudpile that stank up the 2004 Ohio polling.

    Other States would be well advised to emulate that practice - it's especially disconcerting to see places like New Jersey and Florida and Ohio and Texas and Illinois slack on the draw, after watching the last couple of election cycles.

    Of course it's a lot easier to prosecute vote rigging when your voting system produces a paper trail that can be audited - so we have that going for us as well.

    And we don't usually hand count ballots - it's just that when we do, we find it slightly more accurate than the machine count. Not a big deal, just noting the fact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    We prosecute voter fraud in this State,
    Yes, Yes.....and it's hard to prosecute dead voters...I understand :-)
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    --
    Another way to say it?
    Not much point in quibbling about 2 extra people per ward when nearly 3000 dead people got to vote.
    MINNESOTA VOTE FRAUD: 2,812 Dead Voters | RedState

    You agree then, that fraud is a bigger danger to democracy than systemic inaccuracy? With systemic inaccuracy, you'll be off a few percent one way or the other. With fraud, you'll get a result that may bear no resemblance at all to the outcome the voters themselves were aiming for.

    Registering dead voters will always be a problem unless you make voters submit all kinds of ID when they show up to vote. Machine fraud, on the other hand, remains just as easy regardless of how much ID people provide, because the place where it's susceptible to tampering is further down the line after the votes have already been cast.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Thus far there's a lot more fraud of the non-machine kind than of the machine kind, despite hundreds of millions of votes cast over the past 15 or so years. Minnosota as an example, already provided, has done the most conviction, not one of which had to do with machine fraud as best I could tell reading the article.

    Furthermore as these systems get more complex it gets increasing difficult to program them for fraud, because it takes teams of programmers and testers, not some evil guy in his garage--especially if the programing is done fully transparent process being used in many states already. System bugs and technical failures are probably a much more valid concern. Minnesota has a hybrid manual machine with manual back up system--which is an excellent. Of course that energy appear disproportionate on the wrong aspect of voting as all the convictions and continuing problems demonstrate.

    Not sure what you mean by all-kinds, but a photo ID, registry check or it's database equivalent and signature is reasonable.

    Elections are complex events with multiple possible failure points--a balanced and comprehensive design, testing and supervision are always going to be required well beyond just the technical aspects of counting votes; heck that's just one of several possible failure points. (as I personally know from being extensively involved in helping an Iraqi Army/Police Brigade prepare for theres)
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    Thus far there's a lot more fraud of the non-machine kind than of the machine kind, despite hundreds of millions of votes cast over the past 15 or so years.
    That's a matter of debate. The impossibility of auditing the machine systems in common use means some forms of fraud have only been detectable by statistical inference - and such inferences are both uncommonly done and open to question. There have been quite a few strange election results that seem to be associated with voting machines - make of them what you will.

    And the types of manipulations possible with poor machine employment are often left out of the "fraud" counts - the zoo in Ohio in 2004 being merely the most dramatic example of a very common pattern involving machine voting.

    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    Minnesota has a hybrid manual machine with manual back up system--which is an excellent. Of course that energy appear disproportionate on the wrong aspect of voting as all the convictions and continuing problems demonstrate
    There have been no real problems with electoral fraud in Minnesota for many years now - the convictions and so forth are examples of "broken window" policing, not evidence of serious troubles.

    That was one of the more comforting discoveries of the massive Senate recount that put Franken in - one of the few times any State has had its entire balloting examined so closely for irregularities, and the examination found essentially nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    Furthermore as these systems get more complex it gets increasing difficult to program them for fraud, because it takes teams of programmers and testers, not some evil guy in his garage--especially if the programing is done fully transparent process being used in many states already.
    The systems are not only easy to hack, but often commercially hidden - not "transparent" at all.

    We have to worry not only about some guy in his garage (guys in garages have actually been implicated, in several States and instances over the years) but employees of the corporations writing, testing, and installing the software. And the hardware. And doing the vetting. So "complexity" is no defense - interferes with oversight, actually.

    Every major corporation involved is actively and significantly partisan Republican, just to point to the obvious. The fact that most of the indications of fraud so far have favored Republicans (7 to 1, last I checked in 2010) may or may not be coincidence.

    And no, the entire process is not "transparent" in any state - even in Minnesota, one of the better and more secure setups, the public does not have access to all the code or complete information on the vetting procedure, and the machines are not completely isolated from the internet.

    - - but a photo ID, registry check or it's database equivalent and signature is reasonable.
    If the photo ID is supplied conveniently and at no cost to every registered voter, well in advance of any election, no problem.

    The photo ID requirement in most places is calculated to screen out likely Democratic Party voters, as part of the concerted Republican vote-rigging effort we've been seeing build for years. Its calculated effect in preventing legitimate Democratic votes is normally an order or two magnitude larger than its best potential effect in preventing fraud.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post
    The photo ID requirement in most places is calculated to screen out likely Democratic Party voters, as part of the concerted Republican vote-rigging effort we've been seeing build for years. Its calculated effect in preventing legitimate Democratic votes is normally an order or two magnitude larger than its best potential effect in preventing fraud.
    The resistance to voter ID is par of the concerted Democratic vote-rigging effort we have seen for years. It is a calculated effort to allow illegitimate Democratic votes which is normally 10 orders of magnitude greater than any legitimate votes that would be excluded. See, I can invent statistics too.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    The resistance to voter ID is par of the concerted Democratic vote-rigging effort we have seen for years.
    No such thing. That is, there is this thing called "reality", and it's stubborn.

    There have been no Democratic Floridas 2000, Ohios 2004, fraudulent persecutions of registration efforts such as Acorn, legal manipulations to prevent accurate counts in close elections (got a good look at that in Minnesota with the cadre backing Coleman, some of them veterans of both Florida and Ohio), etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    See, I can invent statistics too.
    You invent, I remember. They aren't "statistics". And your "ten orders of magnitude" absurdity is typical of you guys - your basic inability to comprehend the reality to which words and numbers refer is a real stumbling block.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    The resistance to voter ID is par of the concerted Democratic vote-rigging effort we have seen for years.
    No such thing. That is, there is this thing called "reality", and it's stubborn.

    There have been no Democratic Floridas 2000, Ohios 2004, fraudulent persecutions of registration efforts such as Acorn, legal manipulations to prevent accurate counts in close elections (got a good look at that in Minnesota with the cadre backing Coleman, some of them veterans of both Florida and Ohio), etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    See, I can invent statistics too.
    You invent, I remember. They aren't "statistics". And your "ten orders of magnitude" absurdity is typical of you guys - your basic inability to comprehend the reality to which words and numbers refer is a real stumbling block.
    Another evidence free, fact free post from Ice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    703
    The code should be "open", as in: can be checked and altered by the public. This isn't naive at all; firefox, google chrome, and other programs has shown that open-sourcing can produce good software. By allowing the code to be public, you essentially make it "transparent" and this is good to prevent fraud. (currently voting code were secret & proprietary)

    eg: Symantec release its code for peer-review: http://www.symantec.com/connect/down...ew-source-code .If Symantec can do this, then why can't we do the same with voting code? releasing the code to public is not silly at all...
    Last edited by msafwan; February 12th, 2012 at 02:07 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    There have been no Democratic Floridas 2000, Ohios 2004, fraudulent persecutions of registration efforts such as Acorn, legal manipulations to prevent accurate counts in close elections (got a good look at that in Minnesota with the cadre backing Coleman, some of them veterans of both Florida and Ohio), etc.
    - - -
    - - - -your "ten orders of magnitude" absurdity is typical of you guys - your basic inability to comprehend the reality to which words and numbers refer is a real stumbling block.

    Another evidence free, fact free post from Ice.
    I see several facts, which you are unable to counter (you cannot find a Democratic manipulation of machine availability, as in Ohio in 2004, Democratic corruption of voter registration and ballot printing, as in Florida 2000, or democratic persecution of Republican-favoring voter registration efforts, as in the Acorn situation, or systematic burdening of Republican voters as in the current slew of voter ID requirements, and so forth)

    and the "ten orders of magnitude" evidence of your inability to track physical reality is right there in the previous post.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    There have been no Democratic Floridas 2000, Ohios 2004, fraudulent persecutions of registration efforts such as Acorn, legal manipulations to prevent accurate counts in close elections (got a good look at that in Minnesota with the cadre backing Coleman, some of them veterans of both Florida and Ohio), etc.
    - - -
    - - - -your "ten orders of magnitude" absurdity is typical of you guys - your basic inability to comprehend the reality to which words and numbers refer is a real stumbling block.

    Another evidence free, fact free post from Ice.
    I see several facts, which you are unable to counter (you cannot find a Democratic manipulation of machine availability, as in Ohio in 2004, Democratic corruption of voter registration and ballot printing, as in Florida 2000, or democratic persecution of Republican-favoring voter registration efforts, as in the Acorn situation, or systematic burdening of Republican voters as in the current slew of voter ID requirements, and so forth)

    and the "ten orders of magnitude" evidence of your inability to track physical reality is right there in the previous post.
    Bush won Florida, as proven by subsequent recounts. Ohio 2004 is a Democrat conspiracy theory. Acorn was Democrat vote fraud exposed. Ten orders of magnitude was, as I stated, a made up statistic just like yours.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    Bush won Florida, as proven by subsequent recounts.
    1) The more thorough recounts - the ones that actually recounted a significant fraction of the ballots - indicated that Gore won a majority of votes cast. A Minnesota style recount would almost certainly have thrown the State - and the Presidency - to Gore. 2) Much of the rigging was in the voting process, such as misprinted ballots going to concentrated Dem districts only and corruption of the registration lists, which even honest and properly done recounts cannot fix.

    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    Ohio 2004 is a Democrat conspiracy theory.
    The long lines in Dem districts only, due to shortages and malfunctions of machines in Dem districts only, were not theoretical. Some of the minor manipulations resulted in jail time for Party operatives - proven in Ohio Republican-dominated court, they were. Most major possibilities were never investigated (the CEO of the machine provider who publicly promised to deliver Ohio to Bush was never deposed or put under oath in any investigation, and neither were the relevant executives of that corporation). The problems with the machines themselves were of course statistical inferences only - that's going to be a problem with machine voting until they all have paper trails and publicly audited software and tamper-resistant setups. They were never thoroughly investigated either.

    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    Acorn was Democrat vote fraud exposed.
    No, it wasn't. There was no Democratic vote fraud involved. The fraud was in the Republican persecution of honest voter registration efforts, and it was part of a pattern of (currently) Republican interference with voter registration that goes back a century and more, to poll taxes and literacy tests (when the current Republican base was a faction of the Democratic Party, so we see it's not an evil inherent in the name of the Party).

    Quote Originally Posted by harold
    Ten orders of magnitude was, as I stated, a made up statistic just like yours.
    There are no possible statistics that could support a "ten orders of magnitude" claim. You are disconnected from physical reality, as I noted. One order of magnitude - my claim - is supported by any number of common observations, if one can remember from one month to the next what they saw in the papers or on TV.

    Which the wingnuts can't, of course. Amnesia is the first prerequisite. You have to forget everything you saw and read about the Ohio voting mess, or the Florida voting mess, or the New Mexico problems, or the Texas redistricting, or the Acorn mess and the eventually revealed facts behind the hitjob videos, or any of the other couple of dozen messes and issues that have hit the news, in order to live in a world in which there is no Party and partisan pattern to this situation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Which multi-millionaire are you going to vote for?
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    my claim - is supported by any number of common observations,
    Which you can't for some reason actually find evidence to support and post. We're supposed to just trust your memory
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    Which you can't for some reason actually find evidence to support and post.
    I've posted six very well known and large scale instances of election rigging and attempted electoral manipulation ("election fraud") by organized and partisan Republican operatives: Florida 2000, Florida registration since 2000, Ohio 2004, Minnesota 2010, the Acorn persecution, and the Texas gerrymandering.

    Anyone who has been reading the newspapers and can remember from twelve to noon can come up with many more. Off hand, the New Mexico and Arizona anomalies of various cycles, the Colorado oddities around some conventions and voting, various problems in various SE states with robocalls of misinformation re polling dates and threats re registration, the long list of touch screen machine anomalies compiled at Black Box, and so forth.

    We will ignore the selective persecutions of elected officials for obscure and fictional crimes, failures of persecutions of elected officials for obvious and attested crimes, and so forth (more campaign fraud than an election fraud, those) and restrict the matter to the actual voting - the election proper.

    So far, crickets for comparable scale malfeasance - in numbers, area, or consequences - by any other political operation. We could all look at maybe Chicago or the like, and have a Party comparison, but meanwhile why am I, of all people here, being badgered for "evidence"?

    We're supposed to just trust your memory ?
    If you have none of your own, obviously you will have trouble in a political discussion forum. Try Google.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    That's you idea of support? Dubious things cherry picked out of your head, while ignoring more obvious things like the fact you live in the most voter fraud State in the nation where even the dead get to vote? Or this weeks arrest of Democrats in Florida for letting illegals registar to vote (I'll actually link to something:
    NBC2 Investigates: Voter fraud - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida)
    Or the last DOJ study which found no bias one way of the other in fraud, much of the same time frame you think it was 10:1 Republican fraud. In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - New York Times

    Or getting back to this thread--and your fears of machine voter fraud which seem widely out of proportion with actual fraud cases after more than a decade of thier use, and hundreds of millions votes cast.

    Ok...whatever.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    That's you idea of support? Dubious things cherry picked out of your head, while ignoring more obvious things like the fact you live in the most voter fraud State in the nation where even the dead get to vote?
    Yes, that's my idea of support - stuff everybody knows about or can easily find on the web, stuff that is clear cut by now and was all over the major media for weeks - and my idea of your typical response too - wingnut shit from somebody who can't seem to follow even the simplest of arguments.

    For example, here's your link:
    Or the last DOJ study which found no bias one way of the other in fraud, much of the same time frame you think it was 10:1 Republican fraud. In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - New York Times
    If you can find a single post on this thread (or anywhere) in which I asserted a large amount of the specific kinds of voter fraud Bush's DOJ investigated, please quote it.

    For that matter, on your own goofy terms, If you have an argument that rare fraud is therefore not Republican, let's see it.

    Otherwise, I will continue to stand by my observation that none of the manipulations and election riggings I posted were investigated by Bush's DOJ, and use your link for support - clearly Harold's Acorn was cleared, and the kinds of vote fraud you mention as Democratic are and have been trivial.

    I'm the guy who has been, all along, asserting that machine manipulations as in Ohio and registration corruption as in Florida and illegitimate persecution of organizations like Acorn and so forth are the big problems, and individual fraudulent votes cast by fraudulent individual voters are not a serious problem - in Minnesota as you babble ignorantly about, or anywhere else. So if you are going to post links like that in opposition to someone's assertions here, try Harold's or somebody like that - try your own. At least they'd be relevant.

    Look, there really isn't anything that complex about my posting around here. I dumb it down for you guys, really I do. Make an effort, for pity's sake.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    In other words you can't substantiate the veracity of your memory in the face of facts and data that suggest otherwise.

    As for trivial you defined it on your own terms when you complained about 2 votes per ward--but later in a strange twist of mental discordance, ignored the thousands of dead that vote in your own state.

    My opinion is most of the cases in this nation of voter fraud are of two types. Fraudulent registrations which creates tensions between too onerous requirements to verify which prevent legitimate people from voting and too loose, which allows the dead, pets, felons and illegals to vote--sometimes more than once. The other source is the constant shifting of district borders by both parties which is almost always politically charged and contentious. Neither of those problems are unique to a party--regardless of how politically charged they are or how poor some people's recollection of past events might be.

    I dumb it down for you guys, really I do
    Sorry you have little to no credibility on this issue. Until you actually come up with some facts we won't trust your memory--most of us remember things different than you--and their recollections happen to coincide with some evidence.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    In other words you can't substantiate the veracity of your memory in the face of facts and data that suggest otherwise.
    In other words, you can't post an honest question or reply. There are no such "facts and data" visible here, you know that, and you are attempting to cast doubt on my "memory" (they're posts, right up there, black and white pixels) while carefully avoiding any specifics on where any of them are doubtful (because, I think, you know very well what I'm talking about, and you can't get specific without immediately revealing the nature of your claims), and so forth.

    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    As for trivial you defined it on your own terms when you complained about 2 votes per ward-
    No, I did not "complain" about two votes per ward in two of the cleaner (Republican) wards - which adds up to the neighborhood of "thousands of votes", statewide with the city wards, of course, - and never entered them as evidence of serious anything, or posted anything which an honest reading could interpret in that bizarre fashion. I posted the exact opposite: I claimed no serious problems with vote fraud in MN, at the same time as retailing that number (relevant to another issue entirely, but let it go - - - ). You can follow that, surely? You aren't actually that flipping stupid - I don't believe you could possibly be that stupid.

    Which leaves your integrity, as an issue. You seem to be actually unaware of how flatly dishonest your line of argument is, here and basically everywhere you reply to my posts. That's a fairly serious problem. My only hassle is the occasional ban, from you. You, like Harold, have psychiatric issues that interfere with your comprehension of even very, very simple arguments.

    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    but later in a strange twist of mental discordance, ignored the thousands of dead that vote in your own state.
    Apparently, thousands of dead did not vote in my state - there was a record keeping problem, according to the officials in charge, and a thorough investigation, which is more than my examples of actual and significant rigging received (your link, for evidence) -

    but even if they did there was no such discord:

    the numbers and circumstances I claim are trivial have been about the same throughout my posting here. That is perfectly obvious, plain, simple, easy. No discord, no inconsistency, nothing like that. No excuse. You have an inconvenient truth about your posting, to deal with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx
    Until you actually come up with some facts we won't trust your memory--most of us remember things different than you--
    You keep making these vague claims embedded in insult, in response to my specific examples of famous stuff that was in all the papers and on TV and so forth - let's see the specific example of something I pointed to above that you, personally, "remember differently". More to the point: Let's see if you have any idea of what I've posted so far. Can you read, comprehend, and reply to my actual posting? Do you have any idea of what my "memory" is, as written down right in front of you? Give it a try - better late than never.

    The thesis is: the serious indications of "election fraud, generally speaking" - the OP, which is not limited to imposter voting and the more trivial "vote fraud" matters - in the US have followed a pattern for the past couple of decades: they have been organized for the most part by Republican operatives with national connections, involved voting machine and registration manipulations of various kinds suspected and verified, have not been investigated or prosecuted except in a couple of limited and artificially restricted circumstances, and form part of a continuum of vote rigging tactics that add up to a Republican-dominated corporate rightwing strategy for biasing elections nationally.

    I listed six examples easily recalled and found, observed that in the realm of odd voting machine issues the ratio when last I checked (compiled by Black Box, 2010) was running 7/1 indicated Republican perfidy (so hanging my hat on that guess, my 6 Rep examples were about the right number to counter a Dem example, which for some reason no one has bothered to find. There has to be one somewhere, right?).
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Voting system to avoid election fraud
    By Stanley514 in forum Politics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: December 21st, 2011, 02:22 PM
  2. Is the Final Theory of Everything generally accepted In the
    By Joe L. Ogan in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: December 15th, 2009, 12:10 PM
  3. Hello, Dr Mark Diesendorf speaking...
    By Deathridesahorse in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 10th, 2008, 11:15 PM
  4. Speaking of parrots
    By shiva108 in forum Biology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May 2nd, 2007, 11:26 AM
  5. A generally ignored indictment of American 'culture'.
    By That Rascal Puff in forum Behavior and Psychology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 13th, 2006, 09:28 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •