Rigged ***2008*** Elections - Page 4

Father Dagon · 25th November 2007, 02:02 PM

Thanks, JDG!

JEROME DA GNOME · 25th November 2007, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by Father Dagon

Thanks, JDG!

You are welcome.

The funny thing is; most will take what i presented as an anomaly.

332nd · 25th November 2007, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Always hated Fosters, even the imported stuff before they started brewing it domestically. Heineken is also brewed domestically now btw.

At any rate, I always found Foster's too sweet with a bad aftertaste.

And there's plenty of great beers brewed in America by the many different microbreweries. I'm still pissed off that Bell's is no longer distributed in Illinois, stupid beer distributuon monopolies.

At least there's still Sierra Nevada, the Celebration Ale's will hit the stores shortly. My favorite beer period, imported or domestic.

But... You have Fat Tire in Chicago.

technoextreme · 25th November 2007, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by Father Dagon

No, but the mere possibility that you can hack into an electronic voting machine is a cause for grave, really grave concern.

This is such an idiotic argument. Why the hell is there such grave concern for electronic voting machines when the other machines have just as high of a chance for failure. Electronic, paper, and mechanical all have an equal chance of being [Rule 10]ed up and screwed around with.

JEROME DA GNOME · 25th November 2007, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

This is such an idiotic argument. Why the hell is there such grave concern for electronic voting machines when the other machines have just as high of a chance for failure. Electronic, paper, and mechanical all have an equal chance of being [Rule 10]ed up and screwed around with.

It is more difficult to manipulate multiple paper ballots than change the code within a machine.

defaultdotxbe · 25th November 2007, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

It is more difficult to manipulate multiple paper ballots than change the code within a machine.

what about the machine that counts the paper ballots?

JEROME DA GNOME · 25th November 2007, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

what about the machine that counts the paper ballots?

You have the paper ballots to count by hand if there is a dispute.

defaultdotxbe · 25th November 2007, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

You have the paper ballots to count by hand if there is a dispute.

but thats only if a discrepancy is noticed AND a hand recount is approved, otherwise the counting machine is just as susceptible as as an electronic voting machine

maybe we should always count all paper ballots by hand, just to make sure no one can even try anything?

JEROME DA GNOME · 25th November 2007, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

but thats only if a discrepancy is noticed AND a hand recount is approved, otherwise the counting machine is just as susceptible as as an electronic voting machine

maybe we should always count all paper ballots by hand, just to make sure no one can even try anything?

I am arguing for continuing with the current safeguards. I am not arguing that having paper ballots negates cheating.

You seem to be arguing that the opportunity and ease of cheating is equal with and without paper ballots. Is this true?

technoextreme · 25th November 2007, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

I am arguing for continuing with the current safeguards. I am not arguing that having paper ballots negates cheating.

You seem to be arguing that the opportunity and ease of cheating is equal with and without paper ballots. Is this true?

Yes in fact if done correctly Im 100% positive that a computer would be more reliable than counting ballots by hand. In fact it's probably easier to destroy paper ballots than to tamper with a computer if it's done corretly.

defaultdotxbe · 25th November 2007, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

I am arguing for continuing with the current safeguards. I am not arguing that having paper ballots negates cheating.

You seem to be arguing that the opportunity and ease of cheating is equal with and without paper ballots. Is this true?

i would say they are about equal

certainly you cant hack the actual paper ballot itself, but you can destroy it, or simply not feed it through the machine, or otherwise simply not count it, the opportunities might not be available to the same people as with a electronic voting machine, but there are still plenty of opportunities

Damien Evans · 25th November 2007, 06:40 PM

This thread shows, to me at least, that the USA really needs an organisation like our AEC

Father Dagon · 25th November 2007, 06:54 PM

As far as I know, ballot counting is done by large groups of people from the whole mainstream political spectrum. People that has all the reason to be vigilant against foul play and keeping their own noses clean.

technoextreme · 25th November 2007, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by Father Dagon

As far as I know, ballot counting is done by large groups of people from the whole mainstream political spectrum. People that has all the reason to be vigilant against foul play and keeping their own noses clean.

True but as Jerome inadvertently pointed they can screw up. Recounts of multiple counties showed that Nixon actually received too many votes in some counties.

Corsair 115 · 25th November 2007, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

amazing how many non-citizens feel the need to pipe up on the US elections...

Have no fear, this Canadian will offer no opinion on the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. It's your mess, you deal with it.

Okay, joking aside, I will follow the U.S. election to the extent of wanting to know where the two candidates will stand on U.S.-Canadian relations, trade, and the current irritants that exist between the two countries.

I would say that in terms of the process I do find the American system, well, a bit crazy. But then I expect plenty of Americans would find the Canadian system a bit crazy.

Oliver · 25th November 2007, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

Have no fear, this Canadian will offer no opinion on the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. It's your mess, you deal with it.

Okay, joking aside, I will follow the U.S. election to the extent of wanting to know where the two candidates will stand on U.S.-Canadian relations, trade, and the current irritants that exist between the two countries.

I would say that in terms of the process I do find the American system, well, a bit crazy. But then I expect plenty of Americans would find the Canadian system a bit crazy.

I would say that the American election system is ******* straightway
stupid. One big smokescreen. Completely undemocratic with all the
dimwitted rules like having to register to a party like in some states.

Then there is this stupid Idea that you need Delegates for a candidate
to get nominated, then the candidate has to raise money (WTF?), then
it's not you as a citizen who's vote counts, it's the Electors vote that
goes to the candidate. Then if the Media doesn't like you, you can forget
about any coverage on your behalf. And only one candidate for the
Presidency for each party will be in the final round - if you like him or not.

And third parties are pretty much ignored.

And then there is the voting machines issue.

Sorry - this is no election-procedure, it's the stupidest thing
I ever heard of. No wonder that idiots get elected all the time. Nothing
from the above has something to do with democracy. But hey, let's
just name it Democrazy. This way the whole thing makes sense...

ETA: I take that back. Creationism is the stupidest thing I ever heard of...

1337m4n · 25th November 2007, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Oliver

I would say that the American election system is ******* straightway
stupid. One big smokescreen. Completely undemocratic with all the
dimwitted rules like having to register to a party like in some states.

Then there is this stupid Idea that you need Delegates for a candidate
to get nominated, then the candidate has to raise money (WTF?), then
it's not you as a citizen who's vote counts, it's the Electors vote that
goes to the candidate. Then if the Media doesn't like you, you can forget
about any coverage on your behalf. And only one candidate for the
Presidency for each party will be in the final round - if you like him or not.

And third parties are pretty much ignored.

And then there is the voting machines issue.

Sorry - this is no election-procedure, it's the stupidest thing
I ever heard of. No wonder that idiots get elected all the time. Nothing
from the above has something to do with democracy. But hey, let's
just name it Democrazy. This way the whole thing makes sense...

So, basically, there's no conspiracy to deliberately rig the election, just a poorly designed mechanism for electing people.

In which case this thread belongs in Politics not Conspiracy Theories.

"The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual.

Damien Evans · 25th November 2007, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by 1337m4n

So, basically, there's no conspiracy to deliberately rig the election, just a poorly designed mechanism for electing people.

In which case this thread belongs in Politics not Conspiracy Theories.

"The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual.

They are true though

WildCat · 25th November 2007, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by Redtail

But... You have Fat Tire in Chicago.

Fat Tire <<<<<< Sierra Nevada

And as a further insult to Colorado, the Bears made a spectacular comeback against the Broncos today!

eta: full disclosure, I'm on my 6th 2006 Celebration Ale (left over from last year) as I type this...

leftysergeant · 25th November 2007, 11:55 PM

There are enouigh anomolies to cast doubt on whether or not the electronic devices work, or can be trusted. Like precincts where nearly everyone voted for things like Port Commisioners, but as many as ten percent did not vote for a congressman or president. Take the machines that recorded those votes apart and decompilel and forenscily examine their software, and proprietory secrets be damned.

The machines that recorded our vote were always owned by the people, not by a corporation when I was young. TRhere is no reason for that not to be so now. Nor did the corporations who made the machines have the sole right to know how they worked, and the sole right to calibrate them and record the data. There is no excuse for that now. Corporations have no right to own our voting system. This is an affront to all that it means to live in a free society. Should a coprporation decide that they will, by hook or crook, decide who will be the next president, there is no way to stop them if their software cannot be examined.

The gubenatorial election in Washington in 2004 was almost given to a snivelling little Republican punk who fought tooth and nail to prevent a hand recount. Seems a lot of ballots double-fed going through the counting machine. Additionally, a few ballots got shoved aside without being counted the first time through.

A machine does not care whether there is a discrepancy. A human does.

Oliver · 26th November 2007, 12:15 AM

Originally Posted by 1337m4n

So, basically, there's no conspiracy to deliberately rig the election, just a poorly designed mechanism for electing people.

In which case this thread belongs in Politics not Conspiracy Theories.

"The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual.

You should watch the HBO Documentary:
http://video.google.de/videoplay?doc...76866669054201

In the 2000 elections there was a case in Florida that showed
that Al Gores Votes were counted backwards. Al Gore had
MINUS 16,000 votes. And that's just the harmless introduction
of the documentary which reveals a whole series of shocking
details about what's going on behind the scenes - especially
on technical side where nobody has oversight about what's
going on within the machines ... until someone stumbled over
the Diebold FTP-Server and downloaded the software...

ETA: And yes - it's a political issue, that's why I started the
thread in politics. I have no Idea for what reason it was moved
here - or by whom....

leftysergeant · 26th November 2007, 12:53 AM

During the 2004 gubenatorily flap in Washington State, the GOP was whining constantly about Dems committing voter fraud and that dead people and felons were being counted to give Gregoire the lead. The Tacoma News Tribune did a little digging and tracked down three illegal voters. Two cast votes on behalf of their deceased spouses, for Dino Rossi. One, a convicted felon, voted Libertarian.

Damien Evans · 26th November 2007, 02:05 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

During the 2004 gubenatorily flap in Washington State, the GOP was whining constantly about Dems committing voter fraud and that dead people and felons were being counted to give Gregoire the lead. The Tacoma News Tribune did a little digging and tracked down three illegal voters. Two cast votes on behalf of their deceased spouses, for Dino Rossi. One, a convicted felon, voted Libertarian.

defaultdotxbe · 26th November 2007, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by 1337m4n

"The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual.

and even then i dont the problem is with the election system itself, just witht he current 2 party political system

but then oliver has some funny ideas about how democracy should work, i recall a few months him saying the US wasnt a real democracy because we elect the president directly (as opposed to one being appointed by congress)

technoextreme · 26th November 2007, 05:36 AM

Originally Posted by Oliver

You should watch the HBO Documentary:
http://video.google.de/videoplay?doc...76866669054201

In the 2000 elections there was a case in Florida that showed
that Al Gores Votes were counted backwards. Al Gore had
MINUS 16,000 votes. And that's just the harmless introduction
of the documentary which reveals a whole series of shocking
details about what's going on behind the scenes - especially
on technical side where nobody has oversight about what's
going on within the machines ... until someone stumbled over
the Diebold FTP-Server and downloaded the software...

ETA: And yes - it's a political issue, that's why I started the
thread in politics. I have no Idea for what reason it was moved
here - or by whom....

No. You created a CT in your first post.

Quote:

A machine does not care whether there is a discrepancy. A human does.

Once again something that is only true in woo woo land. Humans screw up worst than a properly designed machine.

Father Dagon · 26th November 2007, 06:30 AM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

True but as Jerome inadvertently pointed they can screw up. Recounts of multiple counties showed that Nixon actually received too many votes in some counties.

Yeah, but if you have a system of analouge counting and where some 240-260 lost votes is frontpage news, I'll say it's a pretty good system.

Oliver · 26th November 2007, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

No. You created a CT in your first post.

Huh? How so?

defaultdotxbe · 26th November 2007, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Oliver

Huh? How so?

Quote:

Will they be rigged again since Diebold and Friends are still
running the party?

sounds like a conspiracy to me

Oliver · 26th November 2007, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

sounds like a conspiracy to me

Well, okay - I'll grant you that - I should've said "discrepancies"
to be more picky about the wording instead using a sarcastic undertone.

Nevertheless - I started the thread in politics since the "discrepancies"
aren't woo, they're factual.

Oliver · 26th November 2007, 06:36 PM

For those who are interested in this issue - here's the
Wikipedia entry about "Premier Election Solutions,
formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc." - explaining
all the problems with those systems and points out
the problems in the last elections :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...ecurity_issues

PhantomWolf · 26th November 2007, 07:05 PM

Hillary for Pres, Obama for VP, Bill for First Lady!!!!!

Brainster · 26th November 2007, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by Oliver

For those who are interested in this issue - here's the
Wikipedia entry about "Premier Election Solutions,
formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc." - explaining
all the problems with those systems and points out
the problems in the last elections :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...ecurity_issues

Um, Oliver, you're not seriously linking a Wikipedia entry to prove your case, are you? In a skeptics' forum?

Oliver · 26th November 2007, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Um, Oliver, you're not seriously linking a Wikipedia entry to prove your case, are you? In a skeptics' forum?

Well, I could post a the summary about this
issue from Alberto Gonzales or Alex Jones
Website - but both refuse to provide valid
sources, in contrast to Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...olutions#Notes

defaultdotxbe · 26th November 2007, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by Oliver

Well, I could post a the summary about this
issue from Alberto Gonzales or Alex Jones
Website - but both refuse to provide valid
sources, in contrast to Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...olutions#Notes

then why not link to the relevant sources?

Brainster · 26th November 2007, 07:53 PM

Let me add here that those who point to Cook County, Illinois in 1960 need to look a little harder at the election. Kennedy won the electoral college by a count of 303-219. Take away Kennedy's 27 electoral votes from Illinois and add them to Nixon's total and Kennedy still wins, 276-246.

JEROME DA GNOME · 26th November 2007, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Let me add here that those who point to Cook County, Illinois in 1960 need to look a little harder at the election. Kennedy won the electoral college by a count of 303-219. Take away Kennedy's 27 electoral votes from Illinois and add them to Nixon's total and Kennedy still wins, 276-246.

Lyndon Baines Johnson of Texas.

Elizabeth I · 26th November 2007, 09:35 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

Hillary for Pres, Obama for VP, Bill for First Lady!!!!!

No way is Bill a lady. He's not even a gentleman.

pomeroo · 27th November 2007, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

There are enouigh anomolies to cast doubt on whether or not the electronic devices work, or can be trusted. Like precincts where nearly everyone voted for things like Port Commisioners, but as many as ten percent did not vote for a congressman or president. Take the machines that recorded those votes apart and decompilel and forenscily examine their software, and proprietory secrets be damned.

The machines that recorded our vote were always owned by the people, not by a corporation when I was young. TRhere is no reason for that not to be so now. Nor did the corporations who made the machines have the sole right to know how they worked, and the sole right to calibrate them and record the data. There is no excuse for that now. Corporations have no right to own our voting system. This is an affront to all that it means to live in a free society. Should a coprporation decide that they will, by hook or crook, decide who will be the next president, there is no way to stop them if their software cannot be examined.

The gubenatorial election in Washington in 2004 was almost given to a snivelling little Republican punk who fought tooth and nail to prevent a hand recount. Seems a lot of ballots double-fed going through the counting machine. Additionally, a few ballots got shoved aside without being counted the first time through.

A machine does not care whether there is a discrepancy. A human does.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/..._stealing.html

leftysergeant · 27th November 2007, 01:00 AM

The Republicans had a chance to do the same thing that the Dems did about the contested ballots. They didn't. They probably knew it would not have been much help.

And we still do not know whether the electronic voting machines produced an accurate count. I somehow doubt it. The most heavily Democratic area of the state which used electronic machines went Republican? That's odd, to say the least.

Note, please, that the GOP tried to block a hand-recount. I suspected right away that they were hiding something.

Also note that the Secretary of State in Washington is a Republican. He probably won due to the endorsement of his predacessor, also Republican, who was widely respected by all parties for his honesty.

I don't think, after he so casually certified the electronic voting equipment, that we will see Mr Reed back for another term.

eeyore1954 · 27th November 2007, 04:41 AM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

Have no fear, this Canadian will offer no opinion on the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. It's your mess, you deal with it.

Okay, joking aside, I will follow the U.S. election to the extent of wanting to know where the two candidates will stand on U.S.-Canadian relations, trade, and the current irritants that exist between the two countries.

I would say that in terms of the process I do find the American system, well, a bit crazy. But then I expect plenty of Americans would find the Canadian system a bit crazy.

Well your dollar is called a Loony.

25th November 2007, 02:09 PM	#122
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837	Originally Posted by Father Dagon Thanks, JDG! You are welcome. The funny thing is; most will take what i presented as an anomaly.
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837

25th November 2007, 02:23 PM	#123
332nd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 11,278	Originally Posted by WildCat Always hated Fosters, even the imported stuff before they started brewing it domestically. Heineken is also brewed domestically now btw. At any rate, I always found Foster's too sweet with a bad aftertaste. And there's plenty of great beers brewed in America by the many different microbreweries. I'm still pissed off that Bell's is no longer distributed in Illinois, stupid beer distributuon monopolies. At least there's still Sierra Nevada, the Celebration Ale's will hit the stores shortly. My favorite beer period, imported or domestic. But... You have Fat Tire in Chicago.
	__________________ The poster formerly known as Redtail

25th November 2007, 04:44 PM	#124
technoextreme Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,785	Originally Posted by Father Dagon No, but the mere possibility that you can hack into an electronic voting machine is a cause for grave, really grave concern. This is such an idiotic argument. Why the hell is there such grave concern for electronic voting machines when the other machines have just as high of a chance for failure. Electronic, paper, and mechanical all have an equal chance of being [Rule 10]ed up and screwed around with.
	Last edited by technoextreme; 25th November 2007 at 04:45 PM.

25th November 2007, 05:18 PM	#125
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837	Originally Posted by technoextreme This is such an idiotic argument. Why the hell is there such grave concern for electronic voting machines when the other machines have just as high of a chance for failure. Electronic, paper, and mechanical all have an equal chance of being [Rule 10]ed up and screwed around with. It is more difficult to manipulate multiple paper ballots than change the code within a machine.
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837

25th November 2007, 05:23 PM	#126
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME It is more difficult to manipulate multiple paper ballots than change the code within a machine. what about the machine that counts the paper ballots?
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

25th November 2007, 02:02 PM	#121
Father Dagon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,193	Thanks, JDG!

25th November 2007, 05:30 PM	#127
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe what about the machine that counts the paper ballots? You have the paper ballots to count by hand if there is a dispute.
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837

25th November 2007, 05:37 PM	#128
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME You have the paper ballots to count by hand if there is a dispute. but thats only if a discrepancy is noticed AND a hand recount is approved, otherwise the counting machine is just as susceptible as as an electronic voting machine maybe we should always count all paper ballots by hand, just to make sure no one can even try anything?
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

25th November 2007, 05:42 PM	#129
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe but thats only if a discrepancy is noticed AND a hand recount is approved, otherwise the counting machine is just as susceptible as as an electronic voting machine maybe we should always count all paper ballots by hand, just to make sure no one can even try anything? I am arguing for continuing with the current safeguards. I am not arguing that having paper ballots negates cheating. You seem to be arguing that the opportunity and ease of cheating is equal with and without paper ballots. Is this true?
JEROME DA GNOME Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 8,837

25th November 2007, 05:52 PM	#130
technoextreme Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,785	Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME I am arguing for continuing with the current safeguards. I am not arguing that having paper ballots negates cheating. You seem to be arguing that the opportunity and ease of cheating is equal with and without paper ballots. Is this true? Yes in fact if done correctly Im 100% positive that a computer would be more reliable than counting ballots by hand. In fact it's probably easier to destroy paper ballots than to tamper with a computer if it's done corretly.
	Last edited by technoextreme; 25th November 2007 at 05:53 PM.

25th November 2007, 05:54 PM	#131
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME I am arguing for continuing with the current safeguards. I am not arguing that having paper ballots negates cheating. You seem to be arguing that the opportunity and ease of cheating is equal with and without paper ballots. Is this true? i would say they are about equal certainly you cant hack the actual paper ballot itself, but you can destroy it, or simply not feed it through the machine, or otherwise simply not count it, the opportunities might not be available to the same people as with a electronic voting machine, but there are still plenty of opportunities
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

25th November 2007, 06:40 PM	#132
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 34,458	This thread shows, to me at least, that the USA really needs an organisation like our AEC
	__________________ i loves the little birdies they goes tweet tweet tweet hee hee i loves them they sings to each other tweet twet tweet hee hee i loves them they is so cute i love yje little birdies little birdies in the room when birfies sings ther is no gloom i lobes the little birdies they goess tweet tweet tweet hee hee hee i loves them they sings me to sleep sing me to slrrp now little birdies - The wisdom of Shemp.

25th November 2007, 06:54 PM	#133
Father Dagon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,193	As far as I know, ballot counting is done by large groups of people from the whole mainstream political spectrum. People that has all the reason to be vigilant against foul play and keeping their own noses clean.

25th November 2007, 08:34 PM	#134
technoextreme Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,785	Originally Posted by Father Dagon As far as I know, ballot counting is done by large groups of people from the whole mainstream political spectrum. People that has all the reason to be vigilant against foul play and keeping their own noses clean. True but as Jerome inadvertently pointed they can screw up. Recounts of multiple counties showed that Nixon actually received too many votes in some counties.
	Last edited by technoextreme; 25th November 2007 at 08:35 PM.

25th November 2007, 08:45 PM	#135
Corsair 115 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 14,519	Originally Posted by rwguinn amazing how many non-citizens feel the need to pipe up on the US elections... Have no fear, this Canadian will offer no opinion on the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. It's your mess, you deal with it. Okay, joking aside, I will follow the U.S. election to the extent of wanting to know where the two candidates will stand on U.S.-Canadian relations, trade, and the current irritants that exist between the two countries. I would say that in terms of the process I do find the American system, well, a bit crazy. But then I expect plenty of Americans would find the Canadian system a bit crazy.
	__________________ "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."

25th November 2007, 09:12 PM	#136
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396	Originally Posted by Corsair 115 Have no fear, this Canadian will offer no opinion on the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. It's your mess, you deal with it. Okay, joking aside, I will follow the U.S. election to the extent of wanting to know where the two candidates will stand on U.S.-Canadian relations, trade, and the current irritants that exist between the two countries. I would say that in terms of the process I do find the American system, well, a bit crazy. But then I expect plenty of Americans would find the Canadian system a bit crazy. I would say that the American election system is ******* straightway stupid. One big smokescreen. Completely undemocratic with all the dimwitted rules like having to register to a party like in some states. Then there is this stupid Idea that you need Delegates for a candidate to get nominated, then the candidate has to raise money (WTF?), then it's not you as a citizen who's vote counts, it's the Electors vote that goes to the candidate. Then if the Media doesn't like you, you can forget about any coverage on your behalf. And only one candidate for the Presidency for each party will be in the final round - if you like him or not. And third parties are pretty much ignored. And then there is the voting machines issue. Sorry - this is no election-procedure, it's the stupidest thing I ever heard of. No wonder that idiots get elected all the time. Nothing from the above has something to do with democracy. But hey, let's just name it Democrazy. This way the whole thing makes sense... ETA: I take that back. Creationism is the stupidest thing I ever heard of...
	Last edited by Oliver; 25th November 2007 at 09:18 PM.

25th November 2007, 09:47 PM	#137
1337m4n Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 3,510	Originally Posted by Oliver I would say that the American election system is ******* straightway stupid. One big smokescreen. Completely undemocratic with all the dimwitted rules like having to register to a party like in some states. Then there is this stupid Idea that you need Delegates for a candidate to get nominated, then the candidate has to raise money (WTF?), then it's not you as a citizen who's vote counts, it's the Electors vote that goes to the candidate. Then if the Media doesn't like you, you can forget about any coverage on your behalf. And only one candidate for the Presidency for each party will be in the final round - if you like him or not. And third parties are pretty much ignored. And then there is the voting machines issue. Sorry - this is no election-procedure, it's the stupidest thing I ever heard of. No wonder that idiots get elected all the time. Nothing from the above has something to do with democracy. But hey, let's just name it Democrazy. This way the whole thing makes sense... So, basically, there's no conspiracy to deliberately rig the election, just a poorly designed mechanism for electing people. In which case this thread belongs in Politics not Conspiracy Theories. "The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual.

25th November 2007, 10:14 PM	#138
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 34,458	Originally Posted by 1337m4n So, basically, there's no conspiracy to deliberately rig the election, just a poorly designed mechanism for electing people. In which case this thread belongs in Politics not Conspiracy Theories. "The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual. They are true though
	__________________ i loves the little birdies they goes tweet tweet tweet hee hee i loves them they sings to each other tweet twet tweet hee hee i loves them they is so cute i love yje little birdies little birdies in the room when birfies sings ther is no gloom i lobes the little birdies they goess tweet tweet tweet hee hee hee i loves them they sings me to sleep sing me to slrrp now little birdies - The wisdom of Shemp.

25th November 2007, 10:17 PM	#139
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 59,856	Originally Posted by Redtail But... You have Fat Tire in Chicago. Fat Tire <<<<<< Sierra Nevada And as a further insult to Colorado, the Bears made a spectacular comeback against the Broncos today! eta: full disclosure, I'm on my 6th 2006 Celebration Ale (left over from last year) as I type this...
	__________________ Vive la liberté! Last edited by WildCat; 25th November 2007 at 10:18 PM.

25th November 2007, 11:55 PM	#140
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	There are enouigh anomolies to cast doubt on whether or not the electronic devices work, or can be trusted. Like precincts where nearly everyone voted for things like Port Commisioners, but as many as ten percent did not vote for a congressman or president. Take the machines that recorded those votes apart and decompilel and forenscily examine their software, and proprietory secrets be damned. The machines that recorded our vote were always owned by the people, not by a corporation when I was young. TRhere is no reason for that not to be so now. Nor did the corporations who made the machines have the sole right to know how they worked, and the sole right to calibrate them and record the data. There is no excuse for that now. Corporations have no right to own our voting system. This is an affront to all that it means to live in a free society. Should a coprporation decide that they will, by hook or crook, decide who will be the next president, there is no way to stop them if their software cannot be examined. The gubenatorial election in Washington in 2004 was almost given to a snivelling little Republican punk who fought tooth and nail to prevent a hand recount. Seems a lot of ballots double-fed going through the counting machine. Additionally, a few ballots got shoved aside without being counted the first time through. A machine does not care whether there is a discrepancy. A human does.

26th November 2007, 12:15 AM	#141
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396	Originally Posted by 1337m4n So, basically, there's no conspiracy to deliberately rig the election, just a poorly designed mechanism for electing people. In which case this thread belongs in Politics not Conspiracy Theories. "The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual. You should watch the HBO Documentary: http://video.google.de/videoplay?doc...76866669054201 In the 2000 elections there was a case in Florida that showed that Al Gores Votes were counted backwards. Al Gore had MINUS 16,000 votes. And that's just the harmless introduction of the documentary which reveals a whole series of shocking details about what's going on behind the scenes - especially on technical side where nobody has oversight about what's going on within the machines ... until someone stumbled over the Diebold FTP-Server and downloaded the software... ETA: And yes - it's a political issue, that's why I started the thread in politics. I have no Idea for what reason it was moved here - or by whom....
	Last edited by Oliver; 26th November 2007 at 12:16 AM.

26th November 2007, 12:53 AM	#142
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	During the 2004 gubenatorily flap in Washington State, the GOP was whining constantly about Dems committing voter fraud and that dead people and felons were being counted to give Gregoire the lead. The Tacoma News Tribune did a little digging and tracked down three illegal voters. Two cast votes on behalf of their deceased spouses, for Dino Rossi. One, a convicted felon, voted Libertarian.

26th November 2007, 02:05 AM	#143
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 34,458	Originally Posted by leftysergeant During the 2004 gubenatorily flap in Washington State, the GOP was whining constantly about Dems committing voter fraud and that dead people and felons were being counted to give Gregoire the lead. The Tacoma News Tribune did a little digging and tracked down three illegal voters. Two cast votes on behalf of their deceased spouses, for Dino Rossi. One, a convicted felon, voted Libertarian.
	__________________ i loves the little birdies they goes tweet tweet tweet hee hee i loves them they sings to each other tweet twet tweet hee hee i loves them they is so cute i love yje little birdies little birdies in the room when birfies sings ther is no gloom i lobes the little birdies they goess tweet tweet tweet hee hee hee i loves them they sings me to sleep sing me to slrrp now little birdies - The wisdom of Shemp.

26th November 2007, 05:33 AM	#144
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by 1337m4n "The system is screwed up" and "people are incompetent" are not conspiracies, not suspicious, and not unusual. and even then i dont the problem is with the election system itself, just witht he current 2 party political system but then oliver has some funny ideas about how democracy should work, i recall a few months him saying the US wasnt a real democracy because we elect the president directly (as opposed to one being appointed by congress)
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

26th November 2007, 05:36 AM	#145
technoextreme Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,785	Originally Posted by Oliver You should watch the HBO Documentary: http://video.google.de/videoplay?doc...76866669054201 In the 2000 elections there was a case in Florida that showed that Al Gores Votes were counted backwards. Al Gore had MINUS 16,000 votes. And that's just the harmless introduction of the documentary which reveals a whole series of shocking details about what's going on behind the scenes - especially on technical side where nobody has oversight about what's going on within the machines ... until someone stumbled over the Diebold FTP-Server and downloaded the software... ETA: And yes - it's a political issue, that's why I started the thread in politics. I have no Idea for what reason it was moved here - or by whom.... No. You created a CT in your first post. Quote: A machine does not care whether there is a discrepancy. A human does. Once again something that is only true in woo woo land. Humans screw up worst than a properly designed machine.
	Last edited by technoextreme; 26th November 2007 at 05:38 AM.

26th November 2007, 06:30 AM	#146
Father Dagon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,193	Originally Posted by technoextreme True but as Jerome inadvertently pointed they can screw up. Recounts of multiple counties showed that Nixon actually received too many votes in some counties. Yeah, but if you have a system of analouge counting and where some 240-260 lost votes is frontpage news, I'll say it's a pretty good system.

26th November 2007, 11:22 AM	#147
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396	Originally Posted by technoextreme No. You created a CT in your first post. Huh? How so?

26th November 2007, 11:28 AM	#148
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by Oliver Huh? How so? Quote: Will they be rigged again since Diebold and Friends are still running the party? sounds like a conspiracy to me
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

26th November 2007, 01:38 PM	#149
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe sounds like a conspiracy to me Well, okay - I'll grant you that - I should've said "discrepancies" to be more picky about the wording instead using a sarcastic undertone. Nevertheless - I started the thread in politics since the "discrepancies" aren't woo, they're factual.

26th November 2007, 06:36 PM	#150
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396	For those who are interested in this issue - here's the Wikipedia entry about "Premier Election Solutions, formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc." - explaining all the problems with those systems and points out the problems in the last elections : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...ecurity_issues

26th November 2007, 07:05 PM	#151
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 20,287	Hillary for Pres, Obama for VP, Bill for First Lady!!!!!
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

26th November 2007, 07:39 PM	#152
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 18,311	Originally Posted by Oliver For those who are interested in this issue - here's the Wikipedia entry about "Premier Election Solutions, formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc." - explaining all the problems with those systems and points out the problems in the last elections : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...ecurity_issues Um, Oliver, you're not seriously linking a Wikipedia entry to prove your case, are you? In a skeptics' forum?
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

26th November 2007, 07:42 PM	#153
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396	Originally Posted by Brainster Um, Oliver, you're not seriously linking a Wikipedia entry to prove your case, are you? In a skeptics' forum? Well, I could post a the summary about this issue from Alberto Gonzales or Alex Jones Website - but both refuse to provide valid sources, in contrast to Wikipedia... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...olutions#Notes
	Last edited by Oliver; 26th November 2007 at 07:43 PM.

26th November 2007, 07:46 PM	#154
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by Oliver Well, I could post a the summary about this issue from Alberto Gonzales or Alex Jones Website - but both refuse to provide valid sources, in contrast to Wikipedia... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier...olutions#Notes then why not link to the relevant sources?
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

26th November 2007, 07:53 PM	#155
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 18,311	Let me add here that those who point to Cook County, Illinois in 1960 need to look a little harder at the election. Kennedy won the electoral college by a count of 303-219. Take away Kennedy's 27 electoral votes from Illinois and add them to Nixon's total and Kennedy still wins, 276-246.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.