Why doesn't Democratic Party make a statement on the CA Diebold hearing

[papau]

Reposted from:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=402426&mesg_id=402426

CEPN's CA Diebold Hearing Report (11/21/05)
CALIFORNIA ELECTION PROTECTION NETWORK
A non-partisan organization of over 25 groups across California
coming together to achieve their mutual election integrity goals


Diebold in CA: Machinations Behind Closed Doors

November 21, 2005.

Sacramento. Today was an exhilarating day in Sacramento. Deja vu of the last Diebold hearing, this new attempt to certify Diebold wares once again raised the near-unanimous ire of concerned citizens. The passion and dedication of the people attending was palpable. To witness more than 125 citizens, journeying great distances--on short notice and on a short holiday week--who all came together to defend the integrity of our democratic processes, was to witness the real "Patriot Act."

Without the dedication and vigilance of these activists, other concerned citizens would never have known that behind closed doors, the machinery of the Secretary of State’s office was in high gear ready to certify Diebold.

Testing Diebold

Diebold suffered some setbacks earlier this year trying to meet the new state requirement for a voter verified paper audit trail. In its initial test this summer, the AccuView printer attachment to the TSx model touch screen voting machine had a staggering 30% performance failure rate. Diebold made adjustments, resubmitted, and reportedly passed a second test in September, clearing the way for rectifying the Tsp machines in four counties where they've been suspended since spring 2004.

Test Results: Passing With a Weak Thumb’s Up

California's official voting equipment certification tester, Steve Freeman, issued a slightly qualified "thumbs up" for Diebold. Freeman applied his stamp of approval despite the fact that he did not run tests on the specific security holes revealed by computer security experts Avi Rubin, Herbert Thompson and Harry Hursti, which Blackboxvoting.org later applied in demonstrations of undetected vote-switching conducted under simulated election conditions. As one election official (who asked not to be identified) said of the State’s passing grade on the testing results, “Isn’t it like examining a patient for small pox and proudly announcing that their teeth are clean?”

Aces Up Sleeves?

Jim March of Blackboxvoting.org provided the most riveting and colorful overview of the various new ways recording and tabulation can be hacked on Diebold equipment. His gift for explaining technical intricacies kept the audience on the edge of their seats. After detailing uncorrected software and hardware defects in Diebold voting systems that remain standing invitations to vote fraud, March noted Diebold continued refusal to release its source code for testing, or to identify the authors responsible March concluded his remarks with this advice to public officials promoting the use of Diebold voting machines, "If you don't want to be accused of cheating at cards, don't let aces fall out of your sleeves at every step."

The Seven Reason NOT to Certify Diebold

Numerous members of the California Election Protection Network (CEPN) delivered spoken testimony. The CEPN also entered into the record their press advisory titled “Seven Reason NOT to Certify Diebold.” .


SB370: Cart Before the Horse

Michelle Gabriel of the Voting Rights Task Force and CEPN, raised an excellent point about the recent passage of SB370. (SB370 will allow voters to read their hard earned and soon to be required accessible voter verified paper trail upon the event an audit.) Yet to satisfy the impending SB370 Gabriel something to the effect of, No one has yet bothered to test under real life conditions, whether its practical, or even possible to do an audit using Diebold's AccuView printer and its roller-fed, thermal-paper tape. Let’s test this equipment for all its required tasks BEFORE certifying it, because the Secretary of State’s Office has NO right to risk the security of our next election with untested election machines.

Diebold Groups Surprising About-Face

In a surprise about-face, all of the disabled groups represented at Monday's hearing went on record against certifying the Diebold equipment, stating that it simply does not meet their specific needs. Over the past two years many disabled groups have lobbied and litigated forcefully for the adoption of Diebold-type voting systems. There has been much speculation about the motives behind such pro-Diebold efforts, considering that the Diebold campaigning began AFTER Diebold made a six-figure contribution to the largest national association of the blind.

Disabled Groups & HAVA

The reversal by disability groups at Monday's hearing is very significant, because the most forceful influence driving county elections officials to the purchase of DRE (touch screen) voting machines like the Diebold TsX has been the threat of lawsuits brought by the disabled against election officials resisting the switch to DRE voting systems. There is a pervasive misconception, actively promoted by DRE vendors and supporters, that the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires touch screen (DRE) voting systems as the only suitable means to address disabled voting needs. HAVA merely requires that voting systems enable disabled persons to vote independently, and there are non-computerized voting solutions that meet this condition. http://www.votersunite.org/info/accessibility.asp > Further, last year a federal court decision clearly stated that the rights of the disabled cannot come at the expense of the majority of voters. < See http://evotingcase.notlong.com >

HAVA: “Use it or Lose it”

The major threat driving voting system purchasing decisions has been the HAVA funds’ “Use it or Lose it” deadline, set for the stroke of midnight at the end of this year. County elections officials who have found the voting equipment options offered them unacceptable, given the confusion about which federal standards may eventually be required, wish to avoid hasty purchases they may later regret. Many would prefer to forego the one-time federal funding bonanza and wait for better voting systems to be developed under clear federal standards.

HAVA & DOJ Enforcement

But now a new pressure is being applied to force purchase decisions for DRE equipment. At the time of last summer’s second Carter-Baker Commission, which addressed the public's eroding confidence in our voting systems, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a statement announcing that state election departments that failed to make arrangements for equipment upgrades effective by Jan. 1, 2006 would be visited by Department of Justice (DOJ) investigators. Marin County election official Madelyn DeJusto recently said, “And when you get a visit from them they don’t go away.”

Hold on HAVA

Megan Matson of Mainstreet Moms Operation Blue (MOB) < http://www.themmob.com > eloquently presented her organization’s idea for a “Hold on HAVA” campaign, in solidarity with the National Alliance of County Officials (NACO). This national elections official organization seeks to extend the HAVA deadline for two years. In a recent impassioned plea to members of Congress, NACO explained that they have no “crystal ball” to see what equipment will be certified. Further, the Election Assistance Commission--the four-person panel charged with supervising the enactment of HAVA--is months behind its own deadlines for setting these standards.

The “No Hearing Hearing”

Much has already been written about the peculiar nature of today's certification hearing http://tinyurl.com/c6g4v > The hastily assembled delegation of Election Division officials before whom the citizens spoke on Monday has no decision-making role. Those officers do not even have an advisory role in this certification decision. Under former Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, there had been a Voting Systems and Procedures Panel expressly charged with advising the Secretary of State. No longer. Those sitting in chairs on stage Monday were props in a show of minimal compliance with the certification procedure's hearing requirement. Our good citizens who pleaded for election integrity can only hope that perhaps Secretary McPherson or someone he designates may possibly read and consider any of their remarks before issuing a decision on Diebold certification. California Sen. Koretz (Dem) is the first legislator to question this break with previously established protocol for seriously considering citizen comment.

Media Coverage of Today’s Events?

Given the nearly total blackout in the mainstream press on questions raised by recent elections, citizen activists were heartened to see an unprecedented turnout by the news media for Monday's voting system certification hearing. Longtime Sacramento media consultant Cress Vellucci exclaimed, “I’ve never seen this much media show up for this kind of event.” TV camera crews were dispatched by two local NPR television affiliates and Sacramento's Channel 3. Radio reporters from KQED, KPFA, KPFK and a CNN affiliate recorded and conducted interviews during the demonstration. Writers were assigned by the AP wire, Stockton Press, Oakland Tribune, Sacramento Bee, and Sacramento Reporter.

Where’s the Media on Election Integrity?

Curiously, to date, not a single news agency of national stature has even mentioned the highly critical 117-page report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) of October 12, 2005, which catalogs widespread electronic voting failures and warns of continuing, unattended security risks in the nation's voting systems. http://tinyurl.com/bv6f6 >

New Opportunities for Coverage

The first articles breaking the events of earlier today have ssidestepped the issues of Diebold voting systems' insufficiencies and the company's history of election law violations, choosing instead to feature the State's contention that the systems have the passed the requisite tests.

Where in the World is Bruce?

The integrity of California elections is now in the lap of Governor Schwarzenegger's appointed Secretary of State Bruce McPherson (Rep). He did not bother to descend from his upstairs office to hear the testimony of citizens in the auditorium. But two others interested in his job--State Sen. Debra Bowen (Dem) and Forrest Hill (Grn) were both present and keenly attentive to the Diebold hearing issues.

What’s Next Behind Closed Doors? “Good Night and Good Luck”

What’s Next will take place Behind Closed Doors: There is a closed meeting next week in Sacramento, to be held at the Hyatt Regency on November 27-28. < See, http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_vst_summit.htm > Its stated agenda is to discuss the conditions of certification and “best practices." Some of the invited officials are known to be those who have openly flouted election code and zealously supported relaxed election integrity standards. Yet, on balance, no one was invited from our steering committee, despite the fact that we are a non-partisan organization of over 25 groups across California dedicated to election integrity. We have been tipped off by an election insider that we will are blacklisted from participating in this summit. While we would like to believe that it is a misunderstanding only time will tell. In the meantime, we do have rejection letters from Bruce McDannold of McPherson's office stating that we cannot attend, but that we may rest assured that our views will be represented. We wonder how Bruce McDannold can make that assurance? After reviewing the summit's agenda, we know that there are three attendees, computer scientists, who share our concerns. But they speak from a computer expert perspective--not ours.

We Can Do It Right!

If the Secretary of State is indeed blacklisting the CEPN, an organization who has demonstrated its desire, ability and knowledge in the discussion voting integrity, we respectfully ask for reconsideration. Democracy is at a critical juncture: At the November 27-28 Summit California will determine its future election practices for years to come, and attendance by our informed citizens is not only desirable, but necessary.

__________________________________________




Seven Reasons NOT to Certify Diebold

1. The GEMS Defect
Reported by BOE Harris and Dr. Herbert Thompson, and independently confirmed by the security consultant firm Compuware on commission from the state of Ohio, the GEMS Defect concerns the central vote tabulating database that accumulates all the precinct and absentee votes for all Diebold optical scan and touch-screen voting systems. Despite assurances by Diebold, records obtained by Black Box Voting show that this issue has not been resolved in either California or Ohio, or apparently any of the other 1,200 jurisdictions that use Diebold. A critical set of Compuware documents confirming this was suppressed by Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.

Votergate the Movie available for free download < http://www.votergate.tv > contains footage from a national TV broadcast of Bev Harris instructing Howard Dean how to hack GEMS and untraceably alter vote tallies in under two minutes. Additional vulnerabilities have since been found and publicized at http://www.blackboxvoting.org .

"By successfully directing Canvas at the GEMS modem interface, the team was able to remotely upload, download and execute files with full system administrator privileges. All that was required was a valid phone number for the GEMS server."
--Trusted Agent Report, Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting System,January 20, 2004
Prepared for the Maryland General Assembly by: RABA Innovative Solution Cell (RiSC)

2. Stuffing the Electronic Ballot Box with Diebold Memory Cards
Finnish computer expert Harry Hursti, in cooperation with the elections administration of Leon County, Florida, has demonstrated in real-world voting conditions that executable code on the memory cards integral to the operation of Diebold optical scanners and touchscreens can be quickly manipulated to change vote counts without detection.
Brief account:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/5921.html...
Full report: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf

California's voting systems testing consultant Steve Freeman has confirmed that Diebold's proprietary programming language AccuBasic writes "report files used to configure AccuVote-OS and AccuVote-TS report contents and printing in precinct count mode. They are actually loaded into the memory cards for the AV-OS and AV-TS where their logic is executed.
. . . The risk occurs in the opportunity to replace the verified file with some other .abo file . . . or by replacing the current code with rewritten code performing other operations."
Commenting on Freeman's report, Black Box Voting notes that it is possible to insert fraudulent code onto the memory cards that is date-specific, so that it will pass Logic & Accuracy testing pre- or post-election but trigger pre-planned manipulations on election day.
Invoking California Election Code 19202, Black Box Voting formally requested Secretary of State McPherson to conduct a replication of the Hursti memory card exploits for the Diebold touchscreen and optical scan systems. Six months later, California still has not performed this test.

3. Inauditable Absentee Ballots on Diebold Optical Scanners
Just prior to the recent statewide election, technical experts assigned by the Libertarian Party to inspect Diebold systems in San Joaquin, Marin, and Alameda counties found that in the Diebold "central count" optical scanners, "a critical paper audit component is missing for all absentee and mail-in ballots, and also for recounts."
Diebold's central count scanners are unable to write backup data to memory storage, instead passing all vote counting directly to the notoriously insecure GEMS tabulator. No "poll tapes" or secondary source of data is retained, and there is no way to check whether the GEMS security defect was exploited without obtaining the GEMS vote data files. Diebold refuses to release these files.

4. The Secretary of State's Own Tech Advisors Are Warning Against Diebold
Below are excerpts from a technical review commissioned by Secretary McPherson concerning the AVVPAT printer module added to the TSx machines. The report, titled "Analysis of Volume Testing of the AccuVote TSx/AccuView" is available at http://ss.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems / vstaab_volume_test_report.pdf

p. 7: "... It is possible that these failures are a sign of a large number of other latent software defects."
"... this issue warrants further investigation before any modified versions of the TSx are certified."
"The fundamental barrier to analysis of these software errors is the lack of access to source code ... we have no way to perform such an independent evaluation. This is a very unsatisfying position to be in."
p. 8: "We believe these failures constitute one of the strongest arguments for the State of California to take possession of, or otherwise arrange for unfettered access to, the full source code and binary executables for all electronic voting machines." ... there is no way to know whether the defects have been fixed satisfactorily (as opposed to just hidden), or whether they represent symptoms of more serious architectural flaws, without access to the source."

5. The Federal and State Voting System Certification Process is Broken
Two testing labs in Huntsville, Alabama --Ciber Labs, run by Shawn Southworth, and a Wyle Labs office supervised by Jim Dearman--are responsible for repeatedly certifying defective voting machines that violate Federal Election Commission (FEC) standards.

The limited functionality testing performed by these federally contracted "independent testing authorities" (that derive at least a third of their funding directly from the voting system vendors they are inspecting) and by California's consultant Steve Freeman, does not test for the known security vulnerabilities of the Diebold voting systems, including Dr. Herbert Thompson's VBA script attack, and Hursti's electronic ballot box stuffing and memory card swapping techniques.

Diebold Software Comes with a Criminal Pedigree

6. Convicted Computer Embezzler Authored GEMS Software
Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of Global Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold in 2002. Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0312/S00191.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf

Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf

DIEBOLD CONTINUES TO PERJURE AND VIOLATE ELECTION LAWS

7. Records obtained by Black Box Voting show that Diebold executives lied to the Arizona Secretary of State, the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections, and to hundreds of elections officials throughout the U.S. about the existence of specific defects. Most famously of all, Diebold lied to the State of California in 2003 about illegally installing uncertified voting software in all 17 counties in which Diebold had contracts.
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/ks_dre_papers/diebold_re...

CALIFORNIA ELECTION PROTECTION NETWORK
a non partisan organization of over 25 groups across California
coming together to achieve their mutual election integrity goals
http://www.califelectprotect.net
Portions of this paper reprinted with acknowledegment and links to http://www.blackboxvoting.org
__________________________________________



Noveneber 21, 2005

The Honorable Bruce McPherson
California Secretary of State
1500 11th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

FAX[phone]

Dear Secretary McPherson:

I am writing to express my concern about the hearing to determine whether Diebold should be recertified. I believe that the voters of California are entitled to be able to choose their representatives with the confidence that their votes are recorded and counted accurately. It is the duty of the Secretary, as the chief elections officer of the state, to make sure that voting systems are approved in the interests of California, not the voting system

It has been brought to my attention that you have disbanded the Voting Systems Panel (VSP) a panel of advisors, which has historically conducted hearings on voting systems used in the state. It is of great concern that the VSP has been disbanded without hearings about what will replace it and without any type of due process.

I am respectfully requesting that you reverse your decision to abandon established procedures and to allow people to provide meaningful input on the voting systems approve for use in the state.

In light of this concern I also respectfully request you postpone any decisions to re-certify Diebold for use in the state. Without adequate public input as to whether Diebold has met all the requirements to be certified for use in the state, I believe that it is premature to move forward at this time with the re-certification.

There as still many reasons to have reservation about making such a hasty decision without proper input from all interested parties.
.
It is my understanding that Diebold failed to comply with the April 30, 2004 decertification orders and cannot permit a meaningful recount. The proprietary closed source code complexity, secrecy and protection status of the software of the Diebold system precludes and prevents any meaningful legal thorough forensic analysis and recount of any election run on Diebold equipment. There have been many numerous litigation filings against Diebold, and the discovery process for forensic examination of Diebold software is nothing but an extension of the basic recount procedure.

It is for these reasons that I request that you delay recertifying Diebold at this time.

Sincerely,

PaulKoretz

______________________________________




To: McDannold, Bruce

Subject: Request for Invitation to Voting Systems Testing Summit

Dear Mr. McPherson and Mr. McDannold,

I am writing to request an invitation to the November
28-29 Voting Systems Testing Summit.

I am a member of the Steering Committee of the
California Election Protection Network and have been
working on Election Protecion issues since March of
2004.

I believe the Summit you are holding is a much needed
event and will be invaluable toward better informing
people of the concerns/vision/solutions regarding our
voting systems in California and most likely the
nation.

Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to
hearing back from you soon.

Sincerely,

XXXXXXX
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


California Election Protection Network

E: Request for Invitation to Voting Systems Testing Summit

Date:
Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:30:21 -0800

From:
"McDannold, Bruce" <[e-mail] >

To:
<XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX>


Thank you for your interest in the Summit on voting system testing. We invited elections
officials from across the country to participate, since this is a Summit designed specifically
to discuss state-level testing of voting machines and to develop a best practices document
on that specific subject. We've had a very good response; registrations are filling up fast
so we are having to limit attendance to those already invited. The panels and panelists
reflect the widest array of credible views, from outright skeptics to industry. Interested
parties are encouraged to contribute written documents to the Summit to be reviewed as
part of the final recommendations for testing to the states. They should send their written
input to [e-mail] .




_______________________________________________________

For more information: http://www.califelectprotect.net

[blm]

1. I contact the DNC regularly asking that they jump in to the voting machine

issue.

It's their DUTY to assure all Dem candidates an honest vote.

[shance]

2. In particular, where is Art Torres and the California Democratic party?

He has done nothing to address this issue.

Perhaps that would make sense, being that Elections Systems and Software, a Republican owned company was at the states Democratic national convention months back.

[Peace Patriot]

3. The info in this post is vital to DUers and all citizens and needs to be..

re-posted with a more eye-catching title.

"The Latest on Election Theft Machines in California"?

"Bush Cartel Voting Firm Makes Its Move on California"?

"California thwarts law, precedent for Diebold"?

"'Good night and good luck! Diebold in California"?

"Secret vote counts in California: the Movie"?

"Secret 'Summit' on Election Theft Machines: Public Excluded"?


------------------------

What you have revealed to us here is OUTRAGEOUS! Disbanding the public oversight panel AFTER MASSIVE CITIZEN ATTENDANCE AT THEIR LAST MEETING TO OPPOSE DIEBOLD! Excluding a large public voting rights group from a PRIVATE SUMMIT ON ELECTION THEFT MACHINES! The Secretary of State HIDING OUT IN HIS OFFICE to AVOID BIG PUBLIC INPUT AGAINST DIEBOLD!

I can hardly believe what I'm reading--and it's too understated and polite. It needs to be red-flagged, and shouted from rooftops.

The Dem Party's silence on this matter is UNBELIEVABLE! Are they insane? Are they cowering in fear of these election theft machines and their bought and paid for county officials, secretaries of state, and Bush Cartel backers?

WHAT is going on with these people?

I am still open-mouthed with astonishment at what they did to Kevin Shelley. I try to dismiss it as maybe the misstepS of brand new CA Dem leadership, maybe afraid of Bush Cartel black dossiers and Schwarzenegger--but I really can't explain it to myself, and when you look at the national picture--UTTER SILENCE BY ALL DEM LEADERS ON BUSHITE COMPANIES COUNTING OUR VOTES IN SECRET--it seems dictated from the top, and smells of pervasive corruption.

The DNC solicited our money on election night to insure that 'EVERY VOTE WILL BE COUNTED.' I contributed! And yet they knew about this! They KNEW *who* was counting our votes and *how*! And they didn't tell us. They didn't warn us. They didn't give voters a clue. Nothing--not one word over the two-year HAVA coup!

People need to realize how nuts this is! When I tell people that convicted felons are writing the software for vote tabulation, and that a company headed by a Bush campaign chairman is counting our votes with SECRET, PROPRIETARY software, they say, "Well, why haven't the Democrats said anything? If something was so amiss, surely the Democrats would object."

It's like people who won't believe that something is real unless they see it in the war profiteering corporate monopoly news. They don't realize what an un-reality we are living in, with corruption that is so profound, so pervasive, we can't even see it any more.

The capper for me was the corporate news monopolies acting in concert, on election night, and ALTERING their own exit polls (Kerry won) to FIT the results of Diebold's and ES&S's secret formulae (Bush won). Fiddled the numbers. Gave us FALSIFIED data. Denied the American people major evidence of election fraud, and thereby squelched all protests and calls for investigation.

What the hell is going on with the Dems and Diebold and ES&S?

And how can a Ca Sec of State act this way and get away with it? Skulking around. Disbanding public bodies. Sneaking off to TEXAS to do voting machine tests.

I feel like we're back in the lead-up to the Iraq invasion, with utter lunacy at large in our government , our news organizations, and our country. I feel like....

...HOW-OW-OW OWLING!!!!!!!!!

[papau]

4. But how do you really feel? :-) I agree with almost all of your post

except for the exit polling comment.

The "true up" to actual is done with every exit poll - there was no "Fiddled the numbers" - But the exit polling folks are not off the hook, because the changes in the weightings of the various sub-groups (this is called stratified sampling) in order to true up was well beyond reasonable -

and the polling company did not tell us that it was an unusual stretch to get the numbers that showed up as final election totals.

They thereby let folks think the election was not stolen - and for that fraud the God Lord has a spot for them I suspect - and not in Heaven.

But the numbers were not Fiddled with - a true up is done every time - and this was just standard procedure. But Not telling us how far from normal or reasonable they had to go to get the true up should have been a crime.

[Stevepol]

6. Warren Mitofsky himself admits that his exit polls and the actual results

couldn't have happened together by chance. In other words, one of them is wrong.

Either the exit polls

Or the actual results.

The site that explains all this is www.uscountvotes.org

which is the same as the Election Archive web site.

Nobody is arguing that exit polls don't have to re-calibrate their results on the basis of population and democraphic factors, but if they re-calibrate on the basis of the supposed actual results after the exit polling is essentially over, assuming the voting machine results to be correct, what's the purpose of having exit polls?

Just something to play around with like crossword puzzles?

[papau]

7. If the adjustment is small, it is likely the subpopulation data will be

quite useful.

But separate Hispanic only exit polls and indeed voted numbers were at 35% to 30% Bush - the same as in prior years. Crank out the Hispanic results for Mitofsky's poll and you get Bush near 50%.

Can be we say proof of bullshit?

The shy voter is a real problem - but unless it is a new problem there was no need to adjust for this - and no one says it is a new problem. But we got fed the shy GOP voter as the reason.

Can we say bullshit??

God, I am tired of folks pretending statistics can not be used to point to a problem. The tobacco companies screamed correlation is not causation for years (a true fact), but then pretended they did not have a problem.

Our media pretends our elections as not stolen because it is just too hard to follow up on such a scandal - and besides it is just math!

[Peace Patriot]

10. An excellent explanation of the exit poll scam, Papua! Thank you!

But the upshot is they fiddled the numbers.

[applegrove]

5. Democrats take on the issue of transparency. They admit there

are all types of shenanigans. There are in every election. It was really, really bad this time. And in 2000.

You cannot expect the Dems to start talking about speculation as if it were true. They have to err on the side of caution.

[papau]

8. This shenanigan has statistical proof and we've shown BBV holes - is a

confession the only way we start talking about it?

[applegrove]

12. The exit polls were off. 35% of people don't bother to vote. Fix those

issues and accept that you do not have statistical proof of vote stealing - it is speculation. You cannot get proof without a good basis for stats. Exit polls were off in ridings where there were no machines.

The proof is not there. The Dems should be talking about only what they know.

[papau]

16. We know exit polls worked - and then didn't work - but still worked

overseas.

You say "you do not have statistical proof of vote stealing - it is speculation" and you are wrong.

I agree that voting machines were not the only problem - as you note "Exit polls were off in ridings where there were no machines."

But I do know my math, and I do know the process, and what we have is proof of theft - even if we can not say for certain that the causation was the same nationwide, and even if it is more likely that there were different causes in different areas.

EVERY ERROR WENT IN THE GOP'S FAVOR. DO WE NEED TO KNOCK SOME HEADS WITH A 2 by 4 to get folks thinking rationally?

Dems - and the watchdog media - should be screaming.

[applegrove]

19. Yes - exit polls are mysteriously off these days. Even in polls where

there were no machines and there were hand counts.

Exit polls are off.

[papau]

24. and a new wave of shyness for GOPers not previously there would explain

this.

And Fraud would explain this.

You choose a new wave of shyness in the last 10 years for what reason? And why GOPers more than Dems?

I have seen GOP fraud since the 60 election in Illinois (when they tried to pretend it was Chicago/Dem fraud - and were told by the Ill GOP party to back off of any investigation because the GOP fraud was twice that of the dead voting in Chicago).

I've seen GOP fraud excused for 50 years because WE KNOW there is Dem and minority wrong doing -

To which may I say - BULL

Indeed there is fraud everywhere because a certain percentage of folks in both parties have no problem with cheating. But only in the GOP has it been institutionalized and indeed funded by the National party.

Exit polls are not off - unless you have a reason why they work in the EU - where they have 2 or more being done for each election, but do not work in the US where we have a consolidated service doing one poll.

Fraud examples are known, and they are of many types. To pretend Dems can not say the GOP are crooks - because it would hurt the media owners and their advertisers feelings - despite the odds of it not only be true but being decisive are 99 to 1 at a min - is nuts.

But then that is just my opinion. I am sure there is a greater good served by saying only "exit polls are wrong" - and moving on to the next "election".

[applegrove]

26. Well - there were a few elections a week or two ago. There were no

exit polls and .... we won! So it can happen. Don't loose hope!

[Stevepol]

29. Perhaps you can tell me where the machines aren't used.

Even where all kinds of other ways of voting were used, i.e., lever, paper, etc., the final tabulations were done on central tabulators provided by nifty coroporations, sometimes even new players (that is, not ES&S or Diebold or Sequoia) like TRIAD in OH. So to say that the machines aren't used just because the actual voting machines weren't electronic is to miss the point: the central tabulators were doing the dirty work it seems to me, and there were a myriad of other scams and cons not directly related to the voting machines to bring about results where the tabulators couldn't do their work.

And how can these latest results in the OH initiatives not be pretty muc proof positive of fraud? Maybe I understood them wrong, but the pre-election polling, which had been accurate for decades in every one of these type of elections, had the results like 65% for and 35% against, yet when the actual results come out it's 65% against and 35% for. Am I missing something?

DUH????????????

[Peace Patriot]

11. "They have to err on the side of caution" about Bushite corporations...

...tabulating our votes with SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code, and, in a third of the country, no paper trail--no recount, no audit possible--and in the rest of the country, wholly inadequate audit/recount procedures--with every external poll--not some polls--EVERY poll before and after the election pointing to a Bush loss?

Caution? Or corruption and collusion? Or is it fear? Whatever it is, to appearances, it is insane. Wally O'Dell counting our votes with secret formulae. I mean, come on...

--------------

See Amaryllis' post about the event at the Beverly Hilton this August--a week of fun, sun and high end shopping for election officials from around the country, sponsored by Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x380340

The Dem silence on this matter smells to high heaven!

[applegrove]

14. Anyone who says votes were stolen by machine is speculating.

The fear of the machine is creating lovely wedges & apathy for the Repukes.

Don't let it mess you up. You say yourself there is no way to know.

[papau]

17. WE KNOW BECAUSE THE MATH SAYS WHAT WE SAY IS EXTREMELY

LIKELY -

I grant you not knowing exact causation.

But one can not say we do not know there was a theft.

[applegrove]

18. I don't believe it at all. Specifically vote stealing by machine. Yes -

there were instances I guess of improper defaults and some machines broke down.

I just don't. And that is my right because there is no proof.

There isn't. You can belive what you want to. There is nothing wrong with that - but it is speculation. Anything proof that leads you to think votes were stolen is vague. And when something is vague - we can read things into to. I don't like neocons. I have no doubt & much evidence they have stolen hearts and minds. Elections need to be transparent. There were bad things done to voters of various groups like intimidation or not vetting for felons equally. Some hotel employees overheard some political types calling the homes of people in trouble with the law and scaring them off polls. Lines were too long. Exit polls were wrong and falsely stated that Kerry had it wrapped up by 2PM (which is illegal for polls to be published - but then the internet was invented). Phone banks were jammed. Lots and lots of bad stuff. No doubt the GOP politicos encourage all manner of breaking of the intent of voting laws if not the letter. No doubt they are evil.

But there is no proof that votes were stolen by machine in any massive way.

If there is some day - I will join you. But I am on the other side because I wait for the facts.

[papau]

25. And you would have agreed with the Tobacco companies when they

said it was just speculation.

Vote theft was by voter roll purge, registration difficulty (the GOP claim poor folk registration that has only "shelters" as an address and is given the address of city hall or a local building is fraud - when that is the way it is required to be done by law. So our media repeats and believes the Dem fraud crap - they never check the GOP handout - and we get the media saying "move on") but that was pre-vote.

The exit poll relationship is affected by lost votes, magic votes, and a legitimate and real, but sad, random machine recording error.

The lost votes and magic votes are controlled by exit polls. Even when paper only we need exit polls else we get the Nixon in Illinois effect of lost ballot boxes turning up in the spring floods (See the Waukegan NewsSun Archives spring 61 and note the stories about the floods and ballot boxes floating by - always from Dem areas, always from union areas, always from minority areas - and then note how those stories were pulled from later editions of the paper. If the police blotters are still available you can verify the ballot box discoveries in Spring 61 - check the blotter for Libertyville - love the name of the town!) Indeed the 60 election led to the Ill Sup. Ct ruling in 63 than ended the GOP election Judge pencil rulings - the tossing of a Dem ballot because the election Judge could point to a random pencil line on the ballot and claim "confused voter" because of multiple markings on ballot - as the Election Judge sat there with a pencil in his hand, and the counters - in GOP controlled "downstate" all owing their day job in Gov to the GOP apparatus in that county - all with pencil's in their hand. It was a joke).

[applegrove]

27. Oh there is crap out there. That is for sure. The laws need to be

tightened up. And exit polls need to be made illegal. They estimate the 2 to 3% of people didn't vote because of long lines. What if 2 to 3% didn't vote because they were told early in the day that DEMS HAD WON ALREADY. That would swing many polls.

With 35% of Americans regularly not voting - it doesn't take much to get people to follow old habits.

We need receipts and verifiable ballots. We need a whole bunch of things to make sure elections go right. Don't pick one thing to the cost of all the other things that matter in an election.

Transparency now!

[Peace Patriot]

9. On another note, check out the expert, professional gobble-de-gook...

...esoterica of electronic voting that we've all started to talk:

"...California's voting systems testing consultant Steve Freeman has confirmed that Diebold's proprietary programming language AccuBasic writes 'report files used to configure AccuVote-OS and AccuVote-TS report contents and printing in precinct count mode. They are actually loaded into the memory cards for the AV-OS and AV-TS where their logic is executed..."

Tell that to Martin Luther King! Tell Martin Luther King how rightwing fascists are counting our votes with secret formulae! Tell him that his life was a waste, and his death was in vain.

Ordinary voters should be able to UNDERSTAND HOW THEIR VOTES ARE COUNTED!

I read where Connie McCormack said of Kim Alexander: "She's not a professional!"

That sneer. That corrupt snort of contempt. That diamond-studded foot squeezing down on the necks of the peons and the slaves.

Rosa Parks: "She's not a professional!"

Mahatma Gandhi: "He's not a professional!"

Mother Teresa: "She's not a professional!"

The black kids getting hosed and beaten by the Alabama state police on the Selma bridge: "They're not professionals!"

My old 90 year old aunt, who did more good for this country in her long and benevolent life than all the "professionals" in Sacramento and Washington DC put together: "She's not a professional, and therefore cannot possibly understand HOW WE COUNT VOTES THESE DAYS!"

Pull back! Study this scam in its broad outline! Is it any different than a poll tax? Is it any different, in essence, that requiring people to recite the Constitution from memory, in order to register to vote? Is it not a bar to voting that you have to be a computer programmer, and understand AccuBasic, and an alphabet soup of acronyms, and a learn new language, in order to follow the tabulation of your vote? And even then--even if you become an "expert"--critical parts of that tabulation are hidden from you. How is this any different than "Bull" Connor standing at the door at the Courthouse and barring your entry?

We're all "niggers" to Connie McCormack and Bruce McPherson--and to Diebold and ES&S! We have no right to KNOW what they do with our vote. They can toss it in the Courthouse trash bin, for all we know, and we have no right to be there, and watch them, and record what they do, and object to it. "She's not a professional" means that "she's not a full citizen, a full and equal human being, with the right to transparent procedures regarding her fundamental civic duty, voting."

Let us 'professionals' do it for your. Trust us. Just make your mark here, on this electronic screen, and shut up! WE will make sure that your vote is counted, because WE know how it's done, and you don't!

Patronizing, arrogant, and corrupt--and, by its very nature, fraudulent.

[Peace Patriot]

13. Kudos to Senator Debra Bowen for being there! I have to say this after

my dissing of the Democrats. At least one of them is paying attention! I will send my thanks to Senator Bowen.

And to Senator Paul Koretz, for his interest in this matter.

And also to the Sec of State candidate Forrest Hill, running as a Green.

Our elected officials seem to have so little interest in our right to vote, and in how our votes are counted, we need to praise and thank those who do become involved.

In a better world, CA legislators would have been crawling all over this hearing on Diebold, and on McPherson's case 24/7.

[Peace Patriot]

15. Keep this kicked! Deadline for public comment is Nov. 30 for this...

...Diebold certification.

Call or write TODAY
Secretary Bruce A. McPherson
1500 11th Street 5th floor
Sacramento, CA95814
[e-mail]
916-653-6814 (main menu, press 6, then 3)
FAX [phone]

For more info., see

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5420010

and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5410364

[Amaryllis]

20. kick

[Helga Scow Stern]

21. Kick. I have been watching this with dismay.

It is no surprise though after Kevin Shelley was run out. The Dems did nothing then.

Dem SoS Bill Richardson of New Mexico cleared the voting machines intentionally before a recount could be done.

I have been wondering a lot these days just what is going on with this complicit behavior.

[Festivito]

22. I guess, NO LEADER. So, who do we suggest?????

Kerry, Gore, Edwards, too nice, too smiley. Edwards would be best. Need a lawyerly get-it-done on the spot guy.

Kerry and Gore together would be cool. But, not cool enough.

Clinton, Bill, too smiley, too easily ignored for this.

Carter, too smiley again, wrong background for this fight. And, he's my #1 choice so far.

Dr. Dean has the right bulldog smarts I want, but, he's busy raising money and a party. Unless we find someone else for that job. (If he did switch, he could drop Dem Chair and possibly trade back his promise then of not to run.)(Just thinking) But, he's a doctor, not a bulldog lawyer.

I want someone high profile and no nonsense.

I'd take Ross Perot if he were still spry enough.
A team of business leaders would be cool. Provided they could be trusted. I bet some of them could be trusted. They also might be turning on Bush.

A civi sounds good.

Who would you like to take the reigns quickly and run run run with it?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

23. Didn't know that auto-castration affects the vocal cords.

WHERE IS THE DNC?
WHERE IS THE CAL-DEMS?
WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

Good Night,
and
Good luck.

[nicknameless]

28. K & R

*SIGH*