|
DeBold
Nov 12, 2007 18:28:51 GMT -4
Post by shortcircuit on Nov 12, 2007 18:28:51 GMT -4
Is anyone on here good with photoshop? I would love to see Lamar's head on there instead of GW's.
|
|
|
DeBold
Nov 22, 2007 12:46:18 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Nov 22, 2007 12:46:18 GMT -4
Northampton County may sue Advanced Voting SolutionsAVS, manufacturer of WINvote, Northampton County PA's voting software, is refusing to subject its hardware and software to further testing. If nothing changes, the AVS equipment will not be usable for the 2008 elections. The county is considering its legal options, including litigation, to recover its money from this unscrupulous company. Posted Nov 22, 2007 06:28 AM PST www.mcall.com/news/local/all-b1_3vote-r.6149928nov21%2C0%2C4197723.storyNone of us know if Union County voting is fair. None of us are willing to cause the trouble necessary to correct things. We just can't seem to understand we have to rely totally on what we are told about the voting. If they say it's fair then it is FAIR. We don't want to make a spectical of ourselves.
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 11, 2007 15:00:39 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Dec 11, 2007 15:00:39 GMT -4
RON PAUL SUPPORTERS COMING OUT OF THE WOODWORK – AND IOWA GOP HAS TO DELIVER A ROMNEY VICTORY TO PLEASE THEIR MASTERS IN NYC AND WASHINGTON D.C. – OH, MY! WHAT TO DO?? Here’s the incredible information flushed out by Ernest Hancock. Let’s let him tell it – with the link to the entire article at the Freedom’s Phoenix website listed below: From Ernest Hancock on Freedom’s Phoenix:
“I did my best to determine the method of validating the election results and could get no "official" response until today. Mary Tiffany is the Iowa State GOP Communications Director. After finally getting her on the phone and introducing myself as a visiting radio talk show host from Phoenix she was kind enough to take my questions seriously and promised to get back to me today. I had planned to arrive at their downtown office in Des Moines should she not call me by 4:30 pm Iowa time. I was on my way to the Iowa State GOP HQ when I received Mary's call at 4:35 pm. She was clear and straight to the point. “Each campaign was welcome to have representatives witness the feeding of the paper ballots into the counting computers but that there would not be a manual count of any kind. I then asked what would happen to the original paper ballots. She asked me to hold for a moment while she checked. In our earlier phone conversation she said that I needed to talk to "Eric" the Iowa State GOP's Political Director so I can only imagine she was likely getting directions from him. She came back on the line to say that the paper ballots would remain with the machines and would not elaborate further. I asked if the paper would be destroyed and she would not/could not answer. “So there you have it. The same machines that California just decertified 3 days ago and Florida is in the spot light about as well, are going to be used to determine the future . . . .” (End of quote from Ernest Hancock and his conversation with the Iowa GOP.) The whole article is found here: www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=022071
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 11, 2007 15:08:37 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Dec 11, 2007 15:08:37 GMT -4
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 11, 2007 16:03:36 GMT -4
Post by queenbee on Dec 11, 2007 16:03:36 GMT -4
VOTE FOR HILARY
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 11, 2007 16:30:31 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Dec 11, 2007 16:30:31 GMT -4
Not a chance.
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 11, 2007 21:53:18 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Dec 11, 2007 21:53:18 GMT -4
This video is about nine minutes in length. About This Video Clinton E. Curtis, ex-programmer tells all Added: August 02, 2006 Clinton E. Curtis, ex-programmer tells all during a Congressional hearing on voting fraud. In October 2000, Curtis was asked by Tom Feeney (R), then Speaker of the House in Florida, to write a computer program that would render electronic voting fraud undetectable. Curtis did just that. Here>>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky-YXvxYbck&feature=related Lie more knows unless the "boyz" turn against him there in not a dam thing you can do or that will be done. The vote count is "hidden from view" and takes place "inside" the machine. The paper strip the machine prints is a lie. THE ONLY WAY TO HOLD FAIR ELECTIONS IS PAPER BALLOT HAND COUNTED BY BOTH SIDES!!!! And I doubt the "SPLOST" actually past and this is reason enough to doubt.
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 21, 2007 18:36:02 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Dec 21, 2007 18:36:02 GMT -4
Diebold Now Also Under DoJ Investigation as Stock Price Hits FIVE-YEAR Low!Once-Great, Now-Disgraced American Company Also Facing SEC Probe, Lawsuits, Upcoming 2008 Election Meltdowns Not to Say We Told Ya So, Diebold Shareholders... The death spiral for the 131 year-old company, once respectfully known as Diebold, continues, as its stock price falls to a 5-year low today, near year's end (currently $29.23/share and still sinking, from a 52-week high of $54.50/share), along with the additional news that the U.S. Department of Justice has now joined the SEC in an investigation concerning the company's "Enron-like" bookkeeping tricks... www.bradblog.com/?p=5468
|
|
|
DeBold
Dec 22, 2007 16:35:02 GMT -4
Post by sometimeman on Dec 22, 2007 16:35:02 GMT -4
State Officials Eye Reliability Of Electronic Voting
POSTED: 5:55 pm CST December 21, 2007 State Officials Eye Reliability Of Electronic Voting] BATON ROUGE, La. -- Louisiana officials are looking into a report that concluded that an electronic voting machine similar to one used in state elections may be unreliable.
Secretary of State Jay Dardenne said he wants to know more about Colorado's decision to "decertify" three of the four voting equipment manufacturers including Sequoia Voting Systems, used in Louisiana for early voting.
Accuracy and security concerns were cited.
|
|
|
DeBold
Jan 13, 2008 12:49:24 GMT -4
Post by shortcircuit on Jan 13, 2008 12:49:24 GMT -4
Primary votes to be recounted Published on Saturday, January 12, 2008.
Source: Concord Monitor Votes cast in New Hampshire's Democratic and Republican presidential primaries will undergo a hand recount, after two candidates who garnered little support here questioned the results. The Democratic recount was requested by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who won about 1 percent of the vote in Tuesday's primary. In a letter to Secretary of State Bill Gardner, Kucinich cited "unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots" and pointed to the divergence between opinion polls leading up to the primary - which showed Barack Obama ahead by a wide margin - and the final outcome. Hillary Clinton narrowly won the Democratic contest.
On the Republican side, a Michigan chauffeur and little-known presidential candidate named Albert Howard joined forces with supporters of Rep. Ron Paul yesterday to request a full recount of the Republican ballots from Tuesday's primary.
Howard is a 41-year-old father of eight from Ann Arbor who says he believes an angel of the Lord came to him and told him he would beat Clinton in a run for the presidency. He flew to New Hampshire on Thursday night and was at Gardner's office at 8:30 yesterday morning with the necessary paperwork.
Now, Gardner said, the state is required to conduct a full hand recount of the nearly 240,000 ballots cast in Tuesday's Republican primary and the more than 285,000 ballots cast in the Democratic primary.
By law, the recounts will start Wednesday. Because every ballot in the state must be recounted by hand, "we're talking days and probably weeks," said Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan.
"We're very confident that the results that were reflected after the primary was over are going to be the results that would be the outcome of a recount," Scanlan said.
The last time the state conducted a recount in the presidential primary it was 1980 at the request of perennial candidate Lyndon LaRouche, Gardner said. The recount gained LaRouche 11 votes, from a total of eight to 19.
Under state law, if a candidate finishes more than 3 percentage points behind the winner, he or she must pay the cost of a recount. Kucinich representatives arrived at Gardner's office late yesterday - just in time to meet the deadline to request a recount - with the $2,000 fee required to initiate the process. They also agreed to pay for the full cost of the recount, Scanlan said.
Gardner is working on estimates for the recount costs, but they'll likely be significantly higher than $2,000. Gardner will announce the time and location of the recount after he estimates the total cost and the state has received a payment for that estimate.
The Republican recount is being bankrolled by backers of Paul, the libertarian-minded Texas congressman whose presidential candidacy has become an internet phenomenon. Two Paul supporters, Margaret and Eric Newhouse of Moultonboro, arrived at the secretary of state's office at noon yesterday with a wad of $100 bills totaling $2,000.
The Newhouses they said that an online drive for recount funds has already raised $18,000, and that the $2,000 was some of their own money plus contributions from other Paul supporters.
Kucinich's request for a recount came amid considerable internet speculation about the discrepancy between results of ballots counted by hand and those counted electronically. Bloggers and voters have pointed to Clinton's lead over Obama in towns where ballots were machine-counted as evidence of possible vote tampering.
"I am not making this request in the expectation that a recount will significantly affect the number of votes that were cast on my behalf," Kucinich wrote, according to a press release. But "serious and credible reports, allegations and rumors have surfaced in the past few days. . . . It is imperative that these questions be addressed in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery - not just in New Hampshire, but in every other state that conducts a primary election."
In a letter to the Monitor, Alton residents Nick and Patty Diliberto also questioned the results. "In cities and towns that counted ballots by hand. . . . Obama came out the winner, 39 to 36 percent," compared with communities with machine counts, where Clinton led, they wrote. Voting machines "can be hacked into and votes can be flipped. A hand recount of all ballots might reveal a different outcome."
But speculation about the disparity in the vote counts overlooks a crucial fact, said Dante Scala, an associate professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.
"People expected Clinton to do well in cities, blue-collar cities, many of which have these automated balloting," Scala said. "And towns, where Obama was expected to do better, do hand counts, because they don't have the electronic machines." Cities where Clinton won convincingly - such as Manchester, Somersworth, Rochester, Nashua and Berlin - all rely on electronic counting.
"The people who are espousing all these theories have no understanding of the New Hampshire electorate, so they leap on these things," Scala said. He added that such recounts will only "strengthen the credibility of New Hampshire's system."
An Obama spokesman didn't return a phone call yesterday.
On the Republican side, the Newhouses said they were spurred to action by concerns about the integrity of Diebold voting machines plus word that some 31 votes for Paul were not at first recorded in the town of Sutton. (State officials say the votes were counted but were not originally passed on to the state due to a transcription error.)
"That's pretty huge," said Eric Newhouse, a carpenter and father of five who brought a videotape to record him handing the money over.
They hoped the recount in New Hampshire would be watched across the country.
"If we can prove something with the election voting machines in this state, we've changed this entire election," said Newhouse, who deemed the recount fee "the best money I've ever spent in my life."
Paul spokeswoman Kate Rick didn't return a phone call yesterday.
Howard said he grew concerned watching the results roll in on C-SPAN on Tuesday. With 12 percent of the precincts counted, Howard said, C-SPAN showed he had 150 votes, then 187. Suddenly, Howard said, his name disappeared and his vote total dipped down to 30.
"I was actually ahead of Alan Keyes for a while," Howard said. "That's what triggered some real emotion in me."
According to unofficial tallies, Howard won 44 votes in the primary. Keyes snagged 203.
|
|
|
DeBold
Jan 13, 2008 12:54:41 GMT -4
Post by shortcircuit on Jan 13, 2008 12:54:41 GMT -4
|
|
|
DeBold
Jan 13, 2008 12:55:53 GMT -4
Post by shortcircuit on Jan 13, 2008 12:55:53 GMT -4
Vote Fraud Plagues NH Primary Published on Wednesday, January 09, 2008.
By Lee Rogers The New Hampshire voting results should not be considered credible in either the Republican or Democrat races. There is a great deal of circumstantial and hard evidence indicating vote fraud. The most glaring is the fact that 31 votes for Ron Paul were not counted in Sutton, NH. This was confirmed by vote fraud expert Bev Harris who contacted the head clerk of the town who admitted that this was the case of human error. It is difficult to believe that 31 votes could not be counted when the only job of the people counting the votes is to count the votes. The question is, where else did something like this take place? Beyond that, the vast majority of the state made use of Diebold voting machines that are easily hacked and have a number of proven security issues. Even worse than that, is the fact that all of the Diebold machines have been programmed by one company called LHS Associates with a suspect background. In fact, John Elder a key employee of LHS Associates has been confirmed by Bev Harris to have had a jaded past of cocaine trafficking and election complaints. The results that came in last night actually looked like they came in from a programmed algorithm instead of actual real votes. The results didn’t even match up with polling data that indicated Barack Obama taking the state by 10% and Ron Paul polling in the teens. This election is a farce, and a recount should be conducted immediately. Let’s look at the two winners. McCain has stated that he wouldn’t mind if America is in Iraq for 100 years and Clinton voted for the Iraq war and has spewed the same rhetoric that George W. Bush has used in his Iran war mongering. New Hampshire voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in the hope that they would end the Iraq war. It doesn’t make sense that Clinton and McCain two of the most pro-war establishment candidates in each of their respective political parties won. It also doesn’t make sense that the most anti-war candidates like Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel and Ron Paul didn’t do much better than the results indicated.
Obama was ahead of Clinton by margins of 10% and in some cases even higher in polls a few days prior to the New Hampshire primary. It does not make sense that Clinton was able to overcome such an overwhelming margin in such a short amount of time. Even ABC News thought there was something wrong with this. The incident of her crying was a carefully timed and staged event by Clinton as an excuse the media could use to justify the implausible comeback. The media is going into overdrive with how that event helped her identify with the voters. Of course Clinton is the same person that adopts phony accents when addressing southern audiences so this whole crying incident is a farce.
There have also been polls commissioned indicating that over 30% of Republicans are against the Iraq war. With this in mind, Dr. Paul should have received the vast majority of Republicans against the war since he’s the only Republican candidate against it. Dr. Paul was also up to 14% in some establishment polls which were skewed against him in the first place. There was even a poll conducted by the Federal Forecast that indicated victories for Obama and Paul and a poor turnout for Clinton. New Hampshire is also a state with many Libertarians and independent voters so if there was a state that Dr. Paul would have done well in, it would have been this one.
Not only that, but the disparity between the votes cast for Giuliani and Dr. Paul kept increasing by around 100 votes for Giuliani over Dr. Paul each time the vote results were updated towards the end of the night. First it was an increase of 10 early in the night and then as the night went on it was an increase of 100. It looked more like a programmed algorithm manufacturing the votes than actual totals coming in.
There are also reports of election observers for the Obama and Paul campaigns being kicked out and not allowed to view the election process. This was reported by the Boston Globe. The two campaigns that have been the primary victims of vote fraud had their observers kicked out. What are the chances of this happening?
The U.S. electoral process appears to be entirely co-opted. The media presents a reality with rigged polls and focus groups which are used to convince people that the rigged results are actually what happened. We cannot trust any of these electronic voting machines and we need to go back to a paper ballot 100% across the board.
|
|
|
DeBold
Jan 13, 2008 12:56:21 GMT -4
Post by shortcircuit on Jan 13, 2008 12:56:21 GMT -4
New Hampshire's Polling Fiasco Published on Wednesday, January 09, 2008.
Source: ABC News There will be a serious, critical look at the final pre-election polls in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire; that is essential. It is simply unprecedented for so many polls to have been so wrong. We need to know why. But we need to know it through careful, empirically based analysis. There will be a lot of claims about what happened - about respondents who reputedly lied, about alleged difficulties polling in biracial contests. That may be so. It also may be a smokescreen - a convenient foil for pollsters who'd rather fault their respondents than own up to other possibilities - such as their own failings in sampling and likely voter modeling.
There have been previous races that misstated support for black candidates in biracial races. But most of those were long ago, and there have been plenty of polls in biracial races that were accurate. (For more on past problems with polls in biracial races, see this blog I wrote for Freakonomics last May.) And there was no overstatement of Obama in Iowa polls.
On the other hand, the pre-election polls in the New Hampshire Republican race were accurate. The problem was isolated to the Democratic side - where, it should be noted, we have not just one groundbreaking candidate in Barack Obama, but also another, in Hillary Clinton.
|
|
|
DeBold
Jan 14, 2008 18:17:55 GMT -4
Post by maddy on Jan 14, 2008 18:17:55 GMT -4
|
|