Will voting equipment be tested during the recount?

[PaulaGem]

I haven't seen this addressed.

[Us vs Them]

1. It would be so easy.

Use the same machines in question. Have a number of volunteers simply re-inact the vote, designating a certain predetermined percentage of people to vote for a specific candidate. All votes to be supervised by officials as to prevent tampering. Compare results to control. Problem solved.

[claudiajean]

2. Which recount? n/t

[berniew1]

3. It should be but likely won't; even though its the most important issue

The current electoral process is totally unreliable and there is no way to know who was actually elected in most cases. There appears to be a lot of people in office already who weren't really 'elected'.
They are chosen by those who control the vote count system, which can be trivially manipulated to produce the desired results.
But most of the public doesn't understand the implications of the changes brought by Evoting and computer compilation of votes. That means that those with access to the vote equipment and computer that compiles the votes can choose any results they like, with little chance of being caught- since the public does not understand the current situation and has not demanded proper monitoring and safeguarding of the electoral process.

[emcguffie]

8. no kidding

I'm terrified about it.

But isn't there some way to look at some record in an e-voting machine -- some kind of log, of everything that happens to it? Please say it's so.

[Alizaryn]

4. I would HOPE.

Good question, I've heard it asked but not heard the answer yet.

[PaulaGem]

6. How about an email question to Mr. Arnebeck?

My email isn't set up right on this machine so I can't do it right now. His addy is [e-mail].

Also, it would be cool if the congresspeople subpoened a few machines for the hearing.

[chrisclub]

11. I volunteer

Based on what I know of the accuracy of exit polls and how easy it is to modify software in the vote counting machines to produce the statistically unfathomabile outcome we saw, I firmly believe the software was rigged, and that I possibly have the skills to uncover it if given the chance.

Also, my engineering job was outsourced in 2002, so I have plenty of spare time.

I sent this email:

"Hi Mr. Arnebeck,

I believe obtaining the machines and source code will be the most important effort of any legal challenge.

Testing and examining the machines and the software that was in the machines on election day could prove that the machines were rigged.

I have almost 30 years experience writing and reverse-engineering software almost identical to the software in these machines and I volunteer my services to examine the machines and the software that was in them if either or both can be obtained by a court order."

[Alizaryn]

12. Good plan , Hopefully many others will join in.

Here is what I sent, hope I covered enough bases.



Dear Mr Arnebeck,

Are you going to have the opportunity to examine the voting machines and their software to any degree during the recount? I am not a computer person but have heard recommendations from those that are that the phone records also be looked into, to document any communication between the tabulators/modems and the outside world. If there was an irregularity I would think both the examination of the machines/software and any communications would help to increase the chances of finding any reasons for integrity issues.

You have been a wonderful spokesperson for the voting issue and we admire and greatly appreciate your work.

Sincerely,

[jamboi]

5. In a sense, going through the process may give some kind of test

at any rate. If there are lots more glitches or discrepencies or simply breakdowns that will catch people's attention.

[emcguffie]

7. THE MACHINES

If they don't look at the machines that did the counting, it's all a waste of time, seems to me.

[truehawk]

9. I think that to a seperate suit needs to be filed to look at the Machines

[read the law first]

13. Truehawk is correct n/t

[newyawker99]

24. Hi read the law first!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[chrisclub]

10. Test the voting and vote counting machines

This is the number one most important effort of any legal challenge.

Testing and examining the machines and the software that was in the machines on election day will prove that the machines were rigged.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

14. Yes, it would (under certain conditions). But...

...how would we know that whatever was delivered to us for inspection would be the genuine article? It would be pretty easy to have alternate software versions (clean vs. hacked) and get rid of all evidence that the latter kind ever existed.

That is one of the most outrageous aspects of this whole thing to me: that the source code of the machines that count our votes is proprietary and "off-limits". Fine, if you've got some great software that you don't want anybody else to steal, but if you're being paid with my tax dollars to develop this s/w, I have the right to see it, read, compile it, and do whatever I want to with it.

[wrate]

15. Exactly. The virtual criminal may have evaporated already.

Or you may have a different version of the software or even if you have a rigged version, will you disassemble the machine language code? It's not an easy job. Even testing the machines is not 100% certain because the culprit code (if one exists) may only be triggered under certain circumstances (like a specific date or time).

Those are only a few of the obstacles ahead because all transparency is lost once ballots enter the machine.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

16. Yes, I agree...

The technology offers so many opportunities to cheat, divert, deceive... But I still have a lot of hope. I think that the chances of this being "the perfect crime" are actually quite small. And any imperfect crime with this many investigators is bound to be uncovered eventually.

I loved Olbermann's invocation of "the Baker Street Irregulars" in his blog the other day. That's what DU'ers are. That's why the truth will be found.

[shraby]

22. There were machines not in use on that day,

it might be a good idea to look at a couple of those too.

[snot]

17. Kick

[JunkYardDogg]

18. Impounding the Machines

It is very difficult to impound the machines, but that seems to be the goal of the lawyers. I have an E-mail response on this which I will post as soon as DU lets me-I am new to this site
Keep your eyes open, it is a very interesting message

[Alizaryn]

19. Great I can't wait to read it!

[PaulaGem]

20. Kicking my own thread...

still want more answers.

[warbly]

21. i think

the way it is done in Ohio is a small percentage from each precinct is hand counted and then run through the machines. if the machine gives the same numbers for the sample as the hand count then the rest of the ballots are just run through the machine. This is 2nd hand info from a poster over at dkos.

[libmeayer]

23. I do not think

there will be a recount in Ohio.

[newyawker99]

25. Hi libmeayer!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast: