Question: Do you believe Ohio's judges have kept the 2004 machines intact?

[blm]

I do not. I believe they were obliterated as needed long ago.

Could it possibly be that neither Dean or Kerry believe the DNC report or trust the Ohio judicial system and THAT is why Dean is urging people to run for Sec of State all over the country, and why Cam Kerry is running for Sec of State in Massachusattes?

Logic would dictate that they want to be able to physically examine the machines PROFESSIONALLY and THOROUGHLY. They want the ability to examine the owners, the operators and the programmers with all the LEGAL BACKING and AUTHORITY necessary.

[mod mom]

1. I thought John Boniface was running for SOS in Mass. The SOS (especially

in states rich with electoral votes) is one of the most powerful positions in our country. They choose the machines, as well as control the outcome of elections. I think Dean and Kerry had the ability to review the info that John Conyers and the House Judiciary put in their report. The DNC Report was a sham compliments of the DLC. I can't figure out why Dean allowed the report to go out with the DNC name on it.

[blm]

2. (I heard Bonifaz was only considering it) I don't think Dean and Kerry

believe the DNC report is accurate and they are taking another route - one with a greater chance of providing them with the PROOF they need to make the case.

I think they DON'T believe in the accuracy of the machines and are planning to use the Sec of State positions to unmask the machines.

[Kip Humphrey]

3. More probably fueled by a desire to CONTROL the machines rather than

expose them!

[Bill Bored]

4. The first thing they should do if elected, is take this power away

form the SoS and give it to a truly bipartisan board of elections, or similar committee.

After that, rip those fucking machines apart chip by chip until you find out what makes 'em tick (not to mention the software).

Also, get some fucking LAWS on the books that can't be changed by the SoS or the bi-partisan BoE at the drop of a hat every time someone doesn't like the results of a particular election. And these must include manual random auditing and manual recounting of voter-verified paper ballots (or audit trails in the case of the DREaded DREs) whenever there is a possibility that the outcome is wrong.

We have some pretty good laws in NY even though we haven't banned DREs. I think they can be improved, but in general, with the exception of allowing DREs in the first place, I think we're moving in the right direction. I hope I'm not proven wrong in '06 or '07 when we actually have to start e-voting and we try to turn the state a bit bluer.

Never give up!