patrick.net

marcus says

I had a was watching the election "market" IEM and in the afternoon (ca time) andKerry's chances of winning were over 90% based the money and based on Ohio exit polls. But then...

Are you suggeting that the exit polling and online betting were more accurate than the *actual vote count*?

Sheesh are we still fighting over this? Why not fight over Florida 2000, which was much closer?

Yeah these problems are less in degree than the .0002% of 1% of the elderly Vote with the hanging chads and all.

Liberals be careful what you fix, you just might break it.

I saw this coming a mile a way, and was the straw of stupidity that swore me off from liberals, the idea that electronic voting would somehow mitigate the problems of a few feeble people that casted a hanging chad, that should have been home convalescing instead of being bussed in to vote.
Was short sighted stupidity to say the least.

Now as far as what stories Fox would run, I'm still waiting for HufPo to run a story on the absentee voter fraud, and the dead folks casting votes in the last few years in Florida.

CaptainShuddup says

Now as far as what stories Fox would run, I'm still waiting for HufPo to run a story on the absentee voter fraud, and the dead folks casting votes in the last few years in Florida.

Huffington Post has run dozens of stories on the so-call voter fraud you are so concerned with:

http://www.google.com/search?q=site:www.huffingtonpost.com+voter+fraud&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGHP_enUS436US436&ie=UTF-8&hl=

enjoy.

rooemore are you freakin' retahdead?
I said " absentee voter fraud, and the dead folks casting votes in the last few years in Florida."

http://www.google.com/search?q=site:www.huffingtonpost.com+voter+fraud&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGHP_enUS436US436&ie=UTF-8&hl=#hl=en&rlz=1B3GGHP_enUS436US436&sa=X&ei=XPw8UNeWNYbM9gSI3oGABw&ved=0CBsQvwUoAQ&q=site%3Awww.huffingtonpost.com+absentee+ballot+voter+fraud+florida&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=f0823261d2025598&biw=1258&bih=828

Which Sure they have ran, stories about Voter fraud, "THEY" fucking champion it, and were upset when Florida purged their voter rolls to start over, because we can't trust or Rolls as they are.

Which Florida had to do, because ACORN and other organizations, canvas retirement communities getting Seniors to fill out absentee forms, turning in the ones they liked, reforging the ones they didn't.

CaptainShuddup says

Which Florida had to do, because ACORN and other organizations, canvas retirement communities getting Seniors to fill out absentee forms, turning in the ones they liked, reforging the ones they didn't.

Pure bullshit. Get involved in voting sometime, as in going out working in an election as a volunteer, and find out how the process actually works. There have been exactly 31 cases of voter fraud investigated in the last 4 years in Florida. Only 3 have resulted in charges. Wow. That's impressive. You do know that Oregon only uses absentee ballots don't you. Must be all kinds of fraud out there.

The huge potential problems of fraud and lack of accountability for electronic voting have been brought up time and time again but states have ignored any concerns and some have simply refused to set up any kind of systems to prevent fraud. It's a heck of a lot easier to change electronic records than paper voting rolls and I would be very surprised if it hasn't happened already.

bob2356 says

The huge potential problems of fraud and lack of accountability for electronic voting have been brought up time and time again but states have ignored any concerns and some have simply refused to set up any kind of systems to prevent fraud. It's a heck of a lot easier to change electronic records than paper voting rolls and I would be very surprised if it hasn't happened already.

Does electronic voting allow corporations to vote?

CaptainShuddup says

rooemore are you freakin' retahdead?
I said " absentee voter fraud, and the dead folks casting votes in the last few years in Florida."

I guess I am "retahdead" for engaging you, but your own post confirms they have run stories on this. Just because the stories don't confirm your beliefs does not mean they don't count.

In fact, when you do a general "absentee ballot voter fraud florida" google news search you find pretty much the same coverage as Huffpo's news stories. Sure there are some wing-nut blog posts with unsubstantiated claims, but you're not some conspiracy theorist who buys into that kind of bs, are you?

Which Florida had to do, because ACORN and other organizations, canvas retirement communities getting Seniors to fill out absentee forms, turning in the ones they liked, reforging the ones they didn't.

Oh wait, you are.

In other words http://truth-out.org says there's GOP voter fruad.
But anyone who thinks Liberal organizations do the same are Teabaggers.

I see how it works now.

CaptainShuddup says

In other words http://truth-out.org says there's GOP voter fruad.

But anyone who thinks Liberal organizations do the same are Teabaggers.

I see how it works now.

I could care less what truth-out says. I was defending Huffpo's news coverage of voter fraud.

Anyway, voter fraud is a minor issue on either side. The response by states like Florida and Pennsylvania are much more troubling.

rooemoore says

voter fraud is a minor issue

Actually a conspicuous example from Massachusetts is getting some attention, in other countries at least:

VOTER FRAUD UNMASKED - And, um, it's Mitt Romney committing it

Irony is fun. And I am really eager to hear Pat Robertson explain why a hurricane is disrupting the Republican convention.

curious2 says

Irony is fun. And I am really eager to hear Pat Robertson explain why a hurricane is disrupting the Republican convention.

That is an easy one.

According to the Mormon scripture, that Romney professes to believe in, Pat Robertson is corrupt and his religion is an abomination (you know like the gays or shellfish).

Of course the hurricane is god punishing the GOP for selecting a heretical cultist as their candidate. I am sure any day now Pat will come out and say so himself.

freak80 says

Does electronic voting allow corporations to vote?

Yes. Specifically, Diebold (now "Premier Election Solutions"). Wally O'Dell did "a heckuva" job for W, even better than Brownie.

What surprised me though, and I'm sure the Captain was not surprised at all, was when California decided to join the multistate direct election lottery.

Idealism + naïveté = Ohio and Texas can throw California's electoral votes.

The founders knew better, which is why they wrote the electoral college into the Constitution.

curious2 says

Yes. Specifically, Diebold (now "Premier Election Solutions"). Wally O'Dell did "a heckuva" job for W, even better than Brownie.

Are you saying that Diebold rigged the elections?

freak80 says

Are you saying that Diebold rigged the elections?

I don't have sufficient evidence to accuse them of changing the outcome, but then that's the point: with paperless electronic voting, there is no evidence. What is known is (a) the guy in charge of Diebold was a Bush fundraiser, (b) independent experts proved the Diebold machines could easily be hacked by whoever had physical access to them, (c) the exit polls said Kerry, (d) the Diebold results said Bush.

http://www.hackingdemocracy.com/

The lead-up is a lot like 2000, where Jeb and W said Florida would go for Bush, "You can write it down," and Secretary Harris was in charge of counting the votes while at the same time she was working for the Bush campaign. The difference is in Florida all the votes were eventually counted, and they showed the voters had actually chosen Gore.

With paperless electronic voting, there is no way to know. It would be a lot better to have an electronic system that prints out a paper ballot, which the voter then verifies and hands in for counting; that would solve the problem of "dangling chads" while preserving accountability. Certain states chose deliberately the paperless option.

CaptainShuddup says

But anyone who thinks Liberal organizations do the same are Teabaggers.

Anyone who thinks liberal organizations do the same should have a reason for thinking that. Acorn registering voters is a different issue, although we all know why the republicans had their propaganda campaign against acorn. They register poor people who vote democratic in large numbers.

We're talking about some of the same people that are prevented from voting by pointless voter ID laws.

In my view, I can understand both sides. I understand why democrats want the poor to vote, it's because they represent their interests more. And I understand that the republicans know that they do not represent the interests of the poor.

But I feel like it takes a certain lack of morality and values to think there is no problem with requiring voter ID, ostensibly because of voter fraud, to have a chance of winning the election.

How does it make republicans feel to know that without

1) Bringing fundamentalist in to their tent with BS issues of *gay marriage and *abortion,prayer in school, devolution etc.,

and

2) Resorting to scumbag tactics to prevent a significant number of poor people from voting,

they couldn't win elections.

(*Irrelevant issues that they only talk about)

It must make you republicans so proud. And some of you don't have a clue what it's really about.

Many very fishy things happened in Ohio in 2004, but this "new" (as of 2011) filing does not conclusively describe how vote totals were changed. It provides statistical evidence that they were changed. It describes a plausible scenario that could have lead to them being changed. It falls short of proving that this scenario lines up much with reality.

There's some circumstantial evidence that it does. It is rather dodgey that GovTech subcontracted out their hosting to a de-facto partisan entity, and that the Secretary of State authorized that. It seems likely that data was stored there that could have been used to gain a tactical campaigning advantage. Possibly a very significant one.

The first network diagram is interesting, in that it seems to show a direct replication relationship between the partisan-hosted database and the official election database. (This runs contrary to how I read the Connell deposition's description of what was going on.) The technical details of that relationship aren't clear. There are ways it could be safe and legitimate (a mirror), and ways that it could be plainly corrupt (multi-master.) There doesn't seem to be a smoking gun anywhere that points to the latter. Which is probably part of why the filing is asking for discovery powers.

I cannot find any more recent information on this case. That would be terribly interesting. I hope they got their discovery powers. I've also been interested in the 2004 Ohio election since it happened, and more or less share Marcus' experience of that night. Even these allegations notwithstanding, it was undoubtedly the most impactfully corrupt Presidential election of the last few decades. Much more so than Florida 2000. The RFK Jr. piece in Rolling Stone (included in the filing) goes into plenty of detail on the rest.

marcus says

I feel like it takes a certain lack of morality and values to think there is no problem with requiring voter ID....

This is where I lose patience with Democrats. It does not take a "lack of morality and values" to think voting should require ID, and such insults perpetuate the same divide and misrule trench warfare that actual people (as opposed to corporate "people") inevitably lose. When Republicans say people should have ID so they can exercise basic rights like voting, Democrats should say YES, people NEED ID for many things including voting, so we should PROVIDE free ID so that everyone can have one. You don't have to pay to get a Social Security card. You don't have to pay for a birth certificate (though you may have to pay for a certified copy). You shouldn't have to pay for ID. But, instead of seizing an opportunity to get ID for their constituents who can't afford that currently, Democrats whine about how the issue of voter fraud is trumped up by Republicans and Faux News with almost no basis in reality. Of COURSE it's trumped up by Republicans and Faux News, THAT'S WHAT THEY DO, but whining about it is like whining about the weather. DO something about it, USE IT to demand free ID so that people can vote.

BTW, the best response to this was Mayor Bloomberg. When he realized that many New Yorkers (primarily black kids living in the projects) had no ID and therefore couldn't apply for jobs, he sponsored a public-private partnership to set up ID booths in their neighborhoods and ISSUE THEM FREE ID. The program cost hardly anything. As far as I know, they didn't waste time or resources on "means-testing" or other divide-and-misrule nonsense either; anyone who was willing to venture into those neighborhoods could get free ID. Think of the civil rights movement, people risking their lives to register voters. Can't today's Democrats muster the courage to say everyone should have ID so that they can vote and apply for a job and open a bank account?

curious2 says

Of COURSE it's trumped up by Republicans and Faux News, THAT'S WHAT THEY DO, but whining about it is like whining about the weather. DO something about it, USE IT to demand free ID so that people can vote.

It's a state by state issue, and key states are implementing this shortly before the election, or in states where democrats won't be able to legislate getting free IDs out to everyone, even after the election, let alone in the short time before the election. At the federal level sure. Get IDs out to everyone if that's what's required, whatever it costs. But it's a crime that it should come to that.

So yes maybe I should have added all of this to my point, but if you really understand what's going on, then you understand why I say it's just one more example of republicans being dirtbags.

freak80 says

Does electronic voting allow corporations to vote?

Only if they don't get caught. Then DOJ will follow it's standard procedure of not prosecuting.

curious2,

Voting in a Democracy is a good unto itself; suppressing it is, indeed, evil. Of course: so is voter impersonation.

But it happens to be the case that far more people don't have IDs (almost all of them poor who can't afford to drive, and who vote Democrat) than are impersonated. Democracy is about choosing the lesser of two evils. This one is clear.

Moreover, even having this discussion in this country is a little unsettling. We share a long and sordid history around voting rights. That history should caution decent folk to be deeply suspicious of efforts that serve to limit the franchise.

Barriers erected to prevent voting have almost always been directed at --against-- some particular group. The only difference between ID checks and literacy tests is that illiteracy was actually a problem. Both are naked attempts by the party in power to limit the franchise to their own electorate; to strengthen incumbency, and consolidate power. Those who seek to limit the franchise should face a high bar to show that any new limit is warranted and necessary. Americans should default to putting the onus on the proposer.

In the case of voter ID laws, the body of evidence supporting any problem worth solving would be laughably small, if evil were the stuff of comedy.

they can't.
half the liberal voting base would not be eligible for an ID card....

curious2 says

DO something about it, USE IT to demand free ID so that people can vote.

msilenus says

But it happens to be the case that far more people don't have IDs (almost all of them poor who can't afford to drive, and who vote Democrat) than are impersonated. Democracy is about choosing the lesser of two evils. This one is clear.

It should be obvious by the laws passed by Congress to both prevent insider trading in stock markets and to ensure proper controls are implemented for individuals in corporations...

and yet even when Congress fails the same tests .. it ignores the move to best practices..

Your very wrong.. voter ID would, more than willing to be paid by govt money , ensure proper procedures are followed. Its very simple ... we all do it in our daily lives.

Just common sense. It was not possible in the past, but can and should be done today.

All you Republicans who constantly beat the drum against "high" taxes and "high" government spending want the government to institute a "free" ID card system.

How ironic.

david1 says

All you Republicans who constantly beat the drum against "high" taxes and "high" government spending want the government to institute a "free" ID card system.

How ironic.

The vast majority of people can pay for their ID card.. thats not an issue.
For the poor, its very easy .. infact Pennsylvania did exactly that.

Congress and the states always imposes regulations over business, yet they are unable, unwilling to run by similar regulations that control accuracy and soundness over government voting...

Now that is ironic!

New ‘voter-only’ photo ID card is unveiled

By Amy Worden and Jessica Parks

INQUIRER STAFF WRITERS
Post a comment

HARRISBURG - With 10 weeks until Election Day, the Department of State rolled out Monday a new photo identification card designed to help those who have exhausted other options for complying with Pennsylvania's new voter ID law.

Voters who lack the documents necessary for a Pennsylvania nondriver's ID card will now be able to obtain a free Department of State voter identification card at Department of Transportation driver's license centers.

"Our goal is to ensure that every person who needs an ID can get one, and this new ID serves as a safety net for those who can't find or obtain verification documents normally required for a PennDot secure identification card," said Transportation Secretary Barry J. Schoch.

The plan for the "voter-only" cards was announced this summer after it became clear that some voters, particularly elderly people born in other states, were running into an array of difficulties obtaining their birth certificates or Social Security cards.

Unlike the nondriver's ID, which requires a raised-seal birth certificate and Social Security card, the new ID requires applicants to provide just their name, address, Social Security number, proof of residency, and previous name and/or address if either changed in the preceding 12 months.

The applicant must also be registered to vote.

thomaswong.1986 says

Congress and the states always imposes regulations over business, yet they are unable, unwilling to run by similar regulations that control accuracy and soundness over government voting...

I don't know whether we need voter IDs or not. I don't have a problem with the idea, if it's done at the right time and in the right way, although I believe the stats that say that voter fraud of the kind that voter ID would prevent is virtually non existent.

But regardless, let's see how honest you are Thomas.

TAke Pennsylvania for example, rolling out their voter card 10 weeks before the election.

Do you think that this is more about preventing fraud or suppressing voting among a certain groups ? It might not be that hard to get the card, but it does make voting a little less convenient than usual for some people.

Which is it more about ? Is the impact on the election just a coincidental side benefit ?

I feel that someone not only has to basically be a dirtbag to think this is okay. They also have to be stupid enough to not admit it to themself.

Here is an example of an anti American dirtbag that doesn't even know he's a dirtbag.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/EuOT1bRYdK8

marcus says

Do you think that this is more about preventing fraud or suppressing voting among a certain groups ? It might not be that hard to get the card, but it does make voting a little less convenient than usual for some people.

It should have been done long ago! It only makes sense proper procedures are carried out.

I care very little which political party benefits, since when properly implementation only benefits the voters and enforces controls over the process as we have similar processes implementation in many other areas in our lives.

thomaswong.1986 says

It should have been done long ago! It only makes sense proper procedures are carried out.

another problem that needs fixing.. Bogus Tax Refunds...

Billions in Tax Refund Fraud--and How to Stop Most of it

http://www.forbes.com/sites/leonardburman/2012/05/28/billions-in-tax-refund-fraud-and-how-to-stop-most-of-it/

Once again, if you implement sound controls to the process the Govt could save Billions..the same processes mandated by govt on business.

But some call it Racism!

thomaswong.1986 says

I care very little which political party benefits

So, let me get this straight. You have no opinion as to whether some states are doing this right before the election for a desired impact on the election ?

"see no evil ?" Is that it ?

Are you another one ? That doesn't even have the sense to know what this implies about your integrity (or lack there of)?

Maybe it's that the ends justify the means ? Anything to beat that socialist America hater.

marcus says

So, let me get this straight. You have no opinion as to whether some states are doing this right before the election for a desired impact on the election ?

"see no evil ?" Is that it ?

there is no excuse for a poorly designed and frankly dated election process. you see this purely as a political if not a racist attempt by me..

Well its not.. it matters you design preventive measures to ensure integrity in a process.

Does your employer hand out a electronic pass IDs to ensure only legitimate employees can enter your place of business or does anyone just waltz in ?

It no wonder that private industry runs better than public which time and time again shows its dreadful regarding Internal Control over its processes causing waste and inefficiency.

thomaswong.1986 says

The vast majority of people can pay for their ID card.. thats not an issue.

It is an issue though - this is where you are missing the boat. This is a high stakes game with billions of dollars at stake. You don't think that Republicans have done enough research on this to determine that the vast majority of their constituency will not incur hardship with this law? That is, as you say, they already have their ID card (Usually a drivers license).

However, they have also done the research to know that the vast majority of people who will incur hardship with this law support democrats. Perhaps they are working and paid hourly, and the DMV is only open M-F, 8-5. Then it isn't free, is it? They have to take off work, not get paid, to go down to the DMW for anywhere from 1-75 hours. Maybe they don't have a ride to the DMV, and getting there takes 4 different bus trips. Each bus trip costs a dollar or two. Then it isn't free.

The basic idea here is creating barriers to vote and shaping the electorate in a way that favors Republicans.

This is not to say the democrats would be any different if the demographics for this law would mean more voters who are likely to support Republicans would incur hardship.

At least be honest with yourself though. Every independent study done has shown that voter fraud does not influence or change elections. Giving out a "free" card costs the government something. Be it the cost of the materials in the card, manpower, database storage, etc.

So you are advocating increasing government spending for the sole reason of shaping the electorate in such a way that will likely benefit your political views.

Voter Fraud is a Red Herring.

Why should anyone but a taxpayer be allowed to vote?
It is the taxpayer that funds the government. It should be a privilege 'earned'.

marcus says

Do you think that this is more about preventing fraud or suppressing voting among a certain groups ? It might not be that hard to get the card, but it does make voting a little less convenient than usual for some people.

If it takes you more than 10 weeks to mozy down to your local DMV and have your picture taken, you can't be taken as a serious voter in the first place.

marcus says

thomaswong.1986 says

I care very little which political party benefits

So, let me get this straight. You have no opinion as to whether some states are doing this right before the election for a desired impact on the election ?

xrpb11a says

Why should anyone but a taxpayer be allowed to vote?
It is the taxpayer that funds the government. It should be a privilege 'earned'.

Since everyone pays taxes in some form (payroll, sales, income, corporate, property, estate) you aren't really limiting anything here are you?

By this measure illegal aliens could vote. And corporations. Dead people. (or their executors) Children.

Or did you mean something else?

Yes, federal income tax payers.

david1 says

Or did you mean something else?

xrpb11a says

Yes, federal income tax payers.

You might have heard of this then:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation

Yes, I've heard of it.

If you pay

Federal taxes, you should get to vote in federal elections...

State taxes, you should get to vote in state elections

County taxes, you should get to vote in county elections

Local taxes, you should get to vote in local elections.

In other words, if you pay a tax to an entity, you should get to vote in an election held by that entity.

david1 says

xrpb11a says

Yes, federal income tax payers.

You might have heard of this then:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation

xrpb11a says

County taxes, you should get to vote in county elections
Local taxes, you should get to vote in local elections.

This would exempt most non-landowners from voting in local and county elections. Is this your intention?

xrpb11a says

State taxes, you should get to vote in state elections

So illegal aliens and visiting foreigners have the right to vote in state elections.(by way of paying sales taxes) Correct?

xrpb11a says

Federal taxes, you should get to vote in federal elections...

So this means Federal Income Taxpayers and Federal Payroll taxpayers will vote, right? Plus corporations and executors of estates...

Not if you run a business ( license tax)
Not if you purchase anything that is locally taxable ( sales tax )

david1 says

xrpb11a says

County taxes, you should get to vote in county elections
Local taxes, you should get to vote in local elections.

This would exempt most non-landowners from voting in local and county elections. Is this your intention?

By definition illegal aliens are not citizens, so they do not have the right to be qualified to vote.

The original statement "Why should anyone but a taxpayer be allowed to vote" assumes that the taxpayer is a citizen of the US. I should have made that point to be clear.

david1 says

xrpb11a says

State taxes, you should get to vote in state elections

So illegal aliens and visiting foreigners have the right to vote in state elections.(by way of paying sales taxes) Correct?

I am referring to "Federal Income Taxpayers", to be clear.

david1 says

xrpb11a says

Federal taxes, you should get to vote in federal elections...

So this means Federal Income Taxpayers and Federal Payroll taxpayers will vote, right? Plus corporations and executors of estates...