Working On The Theory That Only CLOSE Elections Can Be Diebolded...

[WillyT]

Is there any way this election could be flipped without it being obvious at this point?

And are there Republicans that are willing to go to prison for John McCain?

With almost every pundit, pollster, and news organization predicting well over 300 electoral votes for Obama, it seems that any happy hackers just might want to think twice before fucking with this election.

Or is there some scenario that I'm missing here?

:shrug:

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. Maybe

You would have to have the ability to "flip" a couple of electoral-vote-rich states. It's all about the math.

[Hutzpa]

2. Nope

you are actually spot on with them programmers...

but the reThuglicans has to smear and scare people

into thinking the unthinkingable, also, ot puts us

on our GAURD to eagle eye these m$^$@f@*k@s.


:evilgrin:

[slackmaster]

3. It would take such a large conspiracy as to be impossible to conceal

It's never going to happen.

[azmouse]

4. *sigh* Just chill.

This election won't be stolen. Not gonna happen.

All the evil Reps have left is to make this 'seem' like a close election and I don't think they can even do that much.

[WillyT]

5. Hey... I'm Chillin...

Just wondering aloud, and asking for input.

:shrug:

[justiceischeap]

6. If you really want to know if or how it can be stolen

then read the book by the guy was convicted of doing it for the Repukes.

How to Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative

Republican campaign advisor Raymond achieved some notoriety when he plead guilty in federal court to jamming Connecticut phone lines in a 2002 Democratic get-out-the-vote effort-small potatoes compared to what he had gotten away with for more than a decade, vividly and hilariously chronicled in this outrageous career retrospective. For 13 years, Raymond worked his way up the ranks of GOP operatives by smearing opponents and worse in campaigns across the country, including the aborted presidential bid of Steve Forbes. Besides documenting such ingenious strategies as arranging for phone calls during the Super Bowl touting his candidate's opponent, Raymond witnesses the Republican party's rise to power in the 1990s, and the effects of that power, in both professional and personal terms. ("Bill Martini's screaming fits were reaching exciting new heights all the time.") Though Raymond appreciates the depravity of his former enterprise ("if you could find two of us Republican operatives who could still tell the difference between politics and crime, you could probably have rubbed us together for fire as well"), his confession often sounds a lot like boasting; naturally, Raymond is charming enough to get away with it, taking a deliciously cynical view of everyone involved (voters especially). For those who care about the electoral system, this look inside the sausage factory of contemporary campaigning is compelling, arguably essential, reading.

[HuskiesHowls]

7. Why else would the McSame campaign be talking so much about how "close" it is?

They want people to think they're actually closer than the polls show, so that it will look like a valid win for them. Also, as I read elsewhere, this year, exit polls won't be worth as much, due to all the early voting.

Can a new, huge double-hulled passenger liner sink, especially on its maiden voyage across the North Atlantic?

Just playing devil's advocate

[stillcool]

8. This is one of the best studies..

I have read regarding flipping a state election. It is written for the most part in very understandable language. It explains the different ways, when the attacks occur, and how many people are needed for each type of attack, and the likelihood of detection.

http://brennan.3cdn.net/a56eba8edf74e9e12e_r2m6b86s2.pdf

LIMITS ON ATTACKER
We have assumed that our attacker would prefer that her actions not raise undue
suspicion. Accordingly, we have placed some limits on the type of actions our
attacker could take. As just demonstrated by looking at the ballot stuffing attack,
these limits can further help us determine how difficult a particular attack would
be (i.e., how many informed participants the attacker would need to involve).
Perhaps most importantly, we have assumed our attacker would not want to add
or subtract more than 10% of the votes for a candidate in any one county (or
switch more than 5% from one candidate to another), for fear that a greater
change would attract suspicion.We believe that this is a conservative estimate, but
the reason for creating some kind of cap should be obvious: if enough votes are
switched in a specific location, it would eventually become apparent that something
has gone wrong (whether through fraud or error).
We can see this by looking at a specific example from an actual

[progressivebydesign]

9. They chip away at it... little by little.. like an embezzler does.

Anyone who's read about embezzlers, know that often they take for years before they quit. It's easier to siphon votes off here and there for a cumulative effect in an important state. All it takes is some vote switching, misinformation flyers in different neighborhoods, fake phone calls, etc. They use a variety of methods to that it's not easy to see a major trend.

the MSM and McCain's narrative this week that it's CLOSE, scares the fuck out of me. Because they believe that their tactics may work.. Look for these things in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida, becasue that is where McPalin is spending their time -- so that if it is stolen, they can credit it to their huge last minute efforts in those places.

[WillyT]

10. Thank You !!!

That's what I was thinking.

:hi:

[TheManagement]

11. I bet that's the plan for PA

Make it close, blame ACORN, have recounts, lawsuits, cheat.