Who is your primary candidate for Governor?

[flaminbats]

Poll question: Who is your primary candidate for Governor?

The filing deadline for running in the Georgia primary was on April 28th. The four candidates in this poll will be on the Democratic primary ballot in July. http://www.politics1.com/ga.htm

[klook]

1. No way will I support Cathy Cox

unless she publicly reverses her support of unverifiable electronic voting.

[Janice325]

2. What klook said!

[Daylin Byak]

3. All right, but i need to tell you all

That Lt.Gov Mark Taylor is DLC, don't know how your going to react to this news and I hope this dosen't burst your bubble about him.

[Janice325]

4. Sorry if I surprise you, Daylin Byak, I have no bubble to burst

about Lt. Mark Taylor. I really don't feel strongly about him one way or another. I live in Georgia and voted early in person in the 2004 Presidential election. I waited in line for more than 3 1/2 hours to vote. I'm white, and the turnout at this particular precinct was about 60% white, 40% Afro American. I took my girlfriend's eighty nine year old father another day to a closer location where he was able to vote. The workers were kind and letting the elderly and handicapped go to the front of the line to vote. We were in and out in less than twenty minutes.We passed hundreds of predominantly Afro Americans, many of whom had stood in line TEN freaking hours to vote. (Not enough Diebold machines in predominantly Afro American areas, which I read about too many times after the 2004 election).
Cathy Cox was Secretary of State during this election. I have no love for Cathy Cox. I still agree with klook. Read the link.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-gumbel/americas-next-election-n_b_7940.html

[ecstatic]

17. Thanks for the well needed reminder

Mark Taylor it is. I'm still bitter over what happened in 2000 & 2004, under Cox's watch.

[wyldwolf]

5. So is Cathy Cox

[klook]

6. Cathy Cox let Diebold in

I oppose her because of that. I don't give a damn if Mark Taylor is DLC, I'll vote for him over Cox any day.

If there's a single issue that could prove a millstone around Cox's neck, it would be, paradoxically, the very thing that many folks consider her biggest triumph: making Georgia the proving ground for electronic voting.

...In early 2001, Cox launched a high-profile campaign to bring Georgia voting into the computer age with ATM-style voting machines.

...In April of that year, with only six full months to go, Cox's office selected Ohio-based Diebold Inc. over six other bidders to receive the $54 million contract to deliver more than 22,000 voting machines. The company had been selected in part because of its qualifications as a leader in ATM and security-system technology, Cox said.

Almost immediately, Cox had to contend with criticism of her choice. Diebold had not been the low bidder. And rumors swirled that the company had gotten the nod because its chief Georgia lobbyist was none other than Cox's former boss and benefactor, Lewis Massey. Cox denied being swayed by Massey's connection with Diebold.

--from Creative Loafing, Dec. 7, 2005
Georgia's next governor? Cathy Cox is a likeable administrator who's remained above the fray. But can she survive a brutal campaign?
by Scott Henry

[Janice325]

7. Thanks for posting that info, klook.

:hi:

[Cookie wookie]

8. mark taylor NOT cathy cox

I'm anti-Cox because of her support for Diebold and because she appears to have placed her own ambitions over democracy. Cox has continually mislead the public and legislators about paperless electronic voting, and worked hard to defeat any legislation that attempts to bring a voter verified paper ballot (vvpb) to Ga's paperless Diebold Election System.

I guess in the beginning she may have thought what she was doing was right, she'd overhaul voting and become a big star, which would be okay if the voting system actually was an improvement. But unlike other SOS's, for instance Kevin Shelley in CA, when there were problems with the technology, problems with Diebold (for instance, they were supposed to help train election workers for the 2002 election, but somehow the job didn't get done, so Diebold technicians basically ran that election), and now evidence that shows clearly that the machines are not secure, she has continued to back the paperless system and been an advocate for Diebold (even allowing them to use her photo and a quote in their marketing materials and for a while allowing them to use the Ga state seal on their website) rather than standing up for the voters in Georgia.

There are so many times she could have made the right choice. When it was discovered that we voted on uncertified software in 2002, she could have thrown Diebold out of the state and gotten our money out. Or she could have made a big deal of it and held Diebold to their contract. Instead, she said that the software was checked AFTER the election and everything was fine.

She claims that the various levels of certification and testing are so rigorous that the system is secure. She claims that GA elections people know more than IT security professionals about running elections. Yet just for one example: the software, GEMS 1.18.15, that has been used in the 2002 and 2004 elections was never issued a NASED certification number nor is there any paper evidence that state certification was done, although that's the law. It's all too complicated to go into here, which works to her advantage over and over again. And after all, the whole system of federal and state certification, ITAs "independent testing authorities", the EAC, NASED, is nothing but a shell game. Plenty has been written about this on websites like VoteTrustUSA and VotersUnite among many others.

A couple of good articles:
Huffington Post, America's Election Nightmare (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-gumbel/americas-next-election-n_b_7940.html) . Unfortunately, there's a problem with the links now off the countthevote.org website.

Georgians for Verified Voting (http://www.gaforverifiedvoting.org/docs/106,000_dems_passed.htm), "One in Six Democratic Voters Couldn't Take the U.S. Senate Candidates Seriously," that has a link to a "Punch List" that reveals problems with the Diebold Election System (DES) in 2002 that were not made public, all the while Cox claims everything is wonderful with the system, and the AJC acts as her propaganda mill.

There is a call for action on that website for the decertification of the DES (http://www.gaforverifiedvoting.org/action.htm) that makes the statement that even though the Georgia Technical Authority found that the DES was not secure and could not be made secure in time for the 2004 election, that Cox did nothing and left Georgians unaware and voting on the system in 2004. There is law on the books that says that the state can offer us an alternative to vote on paper ballots if the machines can't be used.

Cox's latest work, with Bill Stephens (Republican candidate for SOS and former majority leader in the GA Senate), was to do what Diebold tried to do in Maryland and failed. Those two cooked up legislation this session which passed with flying colors, which sets up a bogus "pilot test" of Diebold's voting stations that have the poorly designed "toilet paper roll" printers in 3 precincts of 3 counties for the 2006 election. Not only is the anonymity of the voter lost using this technology, but it is darn near impossible to conduct an audit on the thing because all the ballots are on these giant rolls and have to be cut apart. Designed for deliberate failure. The state is paying $50,000 to Diebold for the honor of testing that technology and then will take a month behind closed doors to "audit" the touchscreen totals against the paper. Since the test is not random, and the technology not something that would give the state what it needs -- a viable way to independently audit the voting system -- this legislation was used to mislead voters into thinking that both cox and stephens want to do something about our failed election system. If that were true, then Cox had the power in the 2004 General Assembly when Dems had control of the house and senate and she worked to defeat the then vvpb bill, SB500, or in 2005 and 2006 sessions, when Stephens had the power.

Cox has corporatized our voting, moved it behind closed doors so that the system is not transparent, kept it unauditable, and deliberately misled the public about the security of the system.

[Cookie wookie]

9. Examples of members of the SOS’s elections division, or Cox in person,

giving misleading information to the Georgia State Assembly members and the public at SLOGO committee meetings on 2/26/04, 3/4/04, and 3/11/04.]

1) That there is currently no technology to produce VVPT (SLOGO committee meeting on 2/26/04).

Activists at this meeting had to inform the committee that this technology not only exists but is certified by NASED. Two vendors with the technology, TruVote and Avante, demonstrated their technology for the SLOGO committee meeting on 3/4/04 at which time, the SOS remembered that she had known of TruVote technology since the SOS was conducting the RFP before they purchased the Diebold systems;

2) Long lines at the polls “associated with poll workers addressing toner and paper jams and refills on printers,” spoiled ballots that don’t corresponding to the GEMS digital record. (SLOGO committee meeting on 2/26/04 and the SOS document “Security Features of Georgia’s Electronic Voting System”);

The SOS indicated that she was aware of TruVote technology (3/4/04), yet her elections’ officials did not know that the technology available, thermal printing, which is used extensively throughout banking and commerce worldwide, has no problems that would create poll delays (it doesn’t use toner, rolls can be ordered to the size of the ballots and expected numbers of voters, and the paper doesn’t jam according to spokespeople at Walmart who use the technology to print millions of sales receipts annually). Available printing technology also includes an auditing system for “spoiled ballots”.

3) The technology to produce VVPT is not: a) certified by NASED; and/or b) not qualified to ‘02 VSS (SLOGO committee meetings on 3/4/04 and 3/11/04).

a) TruVote and Avante voting systems were qualified at the time to ’90 VSS by NASED;

b) SOS has repeatedly failed to produce documentation, under the Georgia Open Records Act, that the Diebold voting systems in Georgia are qualified to ‘02 VSS, or that the hardware, which includes the printing technology, is qualified to ‘90 or ’02 VSS. Staff at the FEC stated on 3/12/04 that Diebold is in the process of qualifying their voting system to ’02 VSS.

4) That VVPT would disenfranchise disabled voters (SLOGO committee meetings on 2/27/04, 3/4/04 and 3/11/04).

The technology to produce VVPT in no way disenfranchises disabled voters. Voters who are blind can use the earphones and special touch key pad provided with the current Diebold system which includes an audio program that takes voters all the way through their selections, including “reading” what appears on the paper copy of their ballot (the VVPT).

[Janice325]

10. Thanks for all tha info, Cookie wookie.

It's too bad more people aren't paying attention to all this about Cox. That, or they just don't understand or just don't care.

[Cookie wookie]

11. It's a complex issue and Cox is smart, articulate,

a Democrat!, and impressive. However, she's become entangled in this voting integrity issue and somewhere down the line made a decision to play on the wrong side of the street.

We went to her early on and presented the information we had as early as 2003, asking her to investigate and do the right thing. She refused, always saying the same thing, that the machines are secure, that Ga's systems and processes to secure them are flawless (not her words but the implication), and blah de blah.

I wish it had been otherwise. It's a great shame to see someone with so much talent, so many gifts, take this kind of moral and ethical detour.

If we ever get proof that elections in Georgia have been rigged, well, then we're talking about possible conspiracy to commit very serious crimes. I doubt seriously that Cox would ever leave any evidence if she did collaborate to commit election fraud (which we have no hard evidence of whatsoever at this point), but the flaws in the Diebold election system are now well known, so who knows what the future might bring in terms of truth and justice.

[bunkerbuster1]

12. Learning toward Taylor, but torn.

A few months ago I was leaning toward Cox, thinking she had the best shot at winning and, setting aside her Diebold connection, seemed to be the more capable leader.

She badly mishandled stating her position on Sonny's disgusting plans to hold a special session, though. and I've more recently had a chance to hear Taylor speak in person. So at the moment I'm learning toward Taylor, but damn, I may need to flip a coin...

[flaminbats]

15. in a runoff I would vote for Mark Taylor in a heartbeat..

I have met both candidates personally. Mark Taylor is friendly and he always listens. When I met Cathy Cox a few years ago, and explained that I would vote for her if she ran, she was both rude and insulting. But why?

Currently I am planning to vote for Bill Bolton in the primary, mainly because he is the most open about his positions on the issues! http://www.billboltongovernor.org/

[Rosemary2205]

13. IMHO Cathy Cox is a closet R.

I live in a poorer 76% black precinct - and a poll worker. We have BEGGED for more machines and our county WANTS paper verification - Cathy Cox basically told us all to go get stuffed. We opened with a 5 hr line in 04 and it just got worse from there.

That woman does not want the predominantly black D vote to be counted. Period.

[napi21]

14. I don't know if Cathy or Mark can beat the pudge boy, but I want HIM

GONE! All the polls indicate Cathy has the support far ahead of Mark. I don't really like either of the Dem candidates, but either is better than Purdy.

Sorry if this sounds too mcuh like the 04 Prez campaign, but that's the way I feel.

I think we have to face it. It doesn't matter who is elected Gov., electronic voting machines aren't going anywhere any time soon. The best we can hope for is some kind of verification, but from what I understand, the machines we have aren't adaptable to that, or at least not easily!

[flaminbats]

16. Remember to watch tonight's primary debate..

11 pm, channel 5.