Electoral Fraud Redux

[RedSkunk]

The internal logs of at least 40 Sequoia touch-screen voting machines reveal that votes were time and date-stamped as cast two weeks before the election, sometimes in the middle of the night.

Black Box Voting successfully sued former Palm Beach County (FL) Supervisor of Elections Theresa LePore to get the audit records for the 2004 presidential election.

After investing over $7,000 and waiting nine months for the records, Black Box Voting discovered that the voting machine logs contained approximately 100,000 errors. According to voting machine assignment logs, Palm Beach County used 4,313 machines in the Nov. 2004 election. During election day, 1,475 voting system calibrations were performed while the polls were open, providing documentation to substantiate reports from citizens indicating the wrong candidate was selected when they tried to vote.

Another disturbing find was several dozen voting machines with votes for the Nov. 2, 2004 election cast on dates like Oct. 16, 15, 19, 13, 25, 28 2004 and one tape dated in 2010. These machines did not contain any votes date-stamped on Nov. 2, 2004.

http://www.bbvforums..ile=/1954/19421.html

http://whitemalecons..ectoral-fraud-redux/

This confirms the reports that we heard immediately following the 2004 election. Continue on to the Black Box Voting forum topic for more info. And I’d like to state right here, that this isn’t a partisan issue. Fraud and inaccuracy in the voting process is something everyone should be informed about – and working to combat.

Thoughts on this issue? Why isn't it a bigger priority?

Discuss this issue at Soaring on a Rocket

[RedSkunk]

At 2/24/06 05:12 PM, redskvnk wrote: Soaring

I don't know my own forum's name >.<

[Politics]

At 2/24/06 05:12 PM, redskvnk wrote: Thoughts on this issue? Why isn't it a bigger priority?

Hmmm. After much deliberation, I think they should fix it.

Discuss this issue at Soaring on a Rocket

lol

[RedSkunk]

At 2/24/06 05:38 PM, Captn_ wrote: Hmmm. After much deliberation, I think they should fix it.

You brave, brave man.

So why isn't anyone publicizing this more?

[ReiperX]

Thats a lot of votes, is Florida the only state that says it may have had voter fraud?

[darkfiretime1]

I thought Ohia oh Iowa or one of the states in the area said the same thing about voter fraud.

[RedSkunk]

At 2/24/06 08:53 PM, ReiperX wrote: Thats a lot of votes, is Florida the only state that says it may have had voter fraud?

Not at all. But this organization only has limited resources, they are able to only focus on a few areas. Florida has been notorious through the past few elections, good enough reason to look there. But there's no reason to believe it's much better everywhere else.

[Demosthenez]

What were the results of the fraud (or computer malfunction or whatever the hell it was)?

[BeFell]

They didn't have microsoft design the software did they?

[IllustriousPotentate]

At 2/24/06 05:38 PM, Captn_ wrote:

At 2/24/06 05:12 PM, redskvnk wrote: Thoughts on this issue? Why isn't it a bigger priority?

Hmmm. After much deliberation, I think they should fix it.

Honestly, I don't think they should. As long as future elections don't have more errors, I'm perfectly content with not having fewer errors.

[ReiperX]

At 2/24/06 11:11 PM, IllustriousPotentate wrote:

At 2/24/06 05:38 PM, Captn_ wrote:

At 2/24/06 05:12 PM, redskvnk wrote: Thoughts on this issue? Why isn't it a bigger priority?

Hmmm. After much deliberation, I think they should fix it.

Honestly, I don't think they should. As long as future elections don't have more errors, I'm perfectly content with not having fewer errors.

They just studied Florida and it had over 100,000 errors. Now lets say a few other states have a similar finding if not worse, it could end up leading to the wrong people being put in the whitehouse, potentially in a close race.

[N-Antichrist]

At 2/24/06 10:06 PM, BeFell wrote: They didn't have microsoft design the software did they?

maybe it was a poor linux

[IllustriousPotentate]

At 2/25/06 04:51 AM, ReiperX wrote: They just studied Florida and it had over 100,000 errors. Now lets say a few other states have a similar finding if not worse, it could end up leading to the wrong people being put in the whitehouse, potentially in a close race.

Well, you figure that these errors are going to be nearly 50/50 for either candidate, so most of the erroneous votes will cancel out. And if the race is close enough that the few remaining erroneous votes make a difference, then the race is obviously so close that either candidate has the support of right around 50% of the voters, which isn't going to allow any real "wrong" people being put into the White House. It's not like someone with 65% of the vote getting beat out by someone with 35% of the vote because the 35% guy had voting errors going in his way.