Here's one for you geeks,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...king+democracy

From the video (1h 21 min):

• Altering Diebold voting systems - no hacking skills required.
  
• Diebold executives on camera lying.
  
• Electon results compared and found fraudulent.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit.html

Yeah, that's a good documentary. What happened in Ohio is pretty scary.

It goes well beyond Ohio. We had some "irregularities" here in Texas-- like 2 different counties defying the odds and posting the exact same election results.

Irritates me that Americans are letting this go. When it first arose I raised hell and encountered more people that didn't care or believe than did.

We get the government we deserve.

same fubar unverified results when Arnie was being "elected".....
48.2-51.8 spread against Bustamonte and they called it for the governator...

The only reason my elected representatives say nothing about it even though I and thousands of other concerned Americans are screaming about it at the top of our lungs is either because they are in on it, they are getting blackmailed / paid, or they actually believe that electronic votes are verifiable....

They might have even been convinced that optical scanners are better (even though they get fed into the same old Diebold, ESS, & Sequoya "black box".

THIS is what came out of the staged chaos of Florida 2000.
The HAVA (Help America Vote Act) earmarked millions for states that adopted technology to replace the "butterfly ballot" (and all other functional voting methods involving PAPER and PEN).......States that opted out didn't get the money......

It has been since 2002 (Georgia electronic voting fraud) that I have been screaming about this, and NOBODY CARES.

Why???

/rant
dcarter

I'd say that Arnie's election was legitimate. He seems to be the most popular governor the state has had for many years.

Is that conjecture?
I was part of a group studying the results as they emerged
during the California recall.
What verification did we have on election night
when less than 1/2 of the vote was counted,
and the bulk of what was "counted"
were the die-bold voting machines
with their early totals,
and the election, with a 3.6 pt. spread was called for him?

Or better yet, WHY would the powers that be want
Cruz Bustemonte NOT to be California's governor?

Would it have anything to do with Enron, Ken Ley, or
any particular lawsuit that Cruz was part of which Arnie had promised to settle for Kenny Boy on pennies for the dollar?

and...and...and...who cares if he is "popular"?
What metric do we have for that? Polls? Individual opinions?


pardon my uncontrollable energetic rage.....
dcarter

His win was consistent with polling data. If he had lost, that would have needed explaining. Bustemonte was not popular. It is obvious that Arnie had a big edge Even my friends in Russia were thrilled that he was governor. I forgot to ask them about Bustamonte.

Omega's 2 cents...

Politics = Political Science = The Science of Deception!

...nuff said!

One of the motivating factors seems to be laziness, another ignorance of dangers.

A paper-ballot count can still be fudged, but since it involves many people the fudging should be harder to achieve at a large scale.

I'm curious about the possibilities that public key crypto open-up for verifiable, anonymous voting.

From what i can tell, it should be possible for people to generate a public/private key, and sign their vote. There would be no central authentification authority. But all signed votes would be published in the individual districts, and any citizens group could verify a random sample of votes by calling a subset of voters and asking them to check (with their key) whether their vote as published online was counted correctly.

I can set up a demo of this if you like. I can't believe i'm the only person to have invented it.