Vote Flipping

[Oliver]

I was just reading the DailyKos and it seems as if there are
voting machines that flip the vote, namely a machine named
ES&S Touch-Screen (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/26/112912/81/554/642200).

Anyone in here who voted on such a machine yet - or is likely
to vote on such a machine on Nov. 4?

And for the DailyKos haters - other Media is reporting the same
thing:

http://news.google.com/news?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=ES%26S%20iVotronic&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn

Let me guess: The ES&S machines also don't provide any
vouchers, right? :(

[Oliver]

Additional sources:
Salon: http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2008/10/27/early_voting/ (http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2008/10/27/early_voting/)
NYT: The Electronic Voting Machine Glitches Begin (http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/the-electronic-voting-machine-glitches-begin/)
NYT: Electronic Voting: The Possibility of a Hack (http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/electronic-voting-the-possibility-of-a-hack/)

[BenBurch]

Of course.

This is why Obama needs to win by a huge margin; The fix is in and we need to win by much, much more than can be fixed.

[Oliver]

Of course.

This is why Obama needs to win by a huge margin; The fix is in and we need to win by much, much more than can be fixed.


Of course what? There are no vouchers?

[Kaylee]

Not all machines have a paper trail. That's just one of the many, many problems.

Here are some links:

http://www.blackboxvoting.org
http://www.verifiedvoting.org

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/news.html
(scroll down for section under Fraud and also furthur down for problems listed by year and state.

Or watch a movie:
http://www.stealingamericathemovie.org/
(can be downloaded and watched for free)

[Oliver]

Not all machines have a paper trail. That's just one of the many, many problems.

Here are some links:

http://www.blackboxvoting.org
http://www.verifiedvoting.org

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/news.html
(scroll down for section under Fraud and also furthur down for problems listed by year and state.

Or watch a movie:
http://www.stealingamericathemovie.org/
(can be downloaded and watched for free)


I saw HBO's "Hacking Democracy", which was quite hair-raising,
but I guess that "stealing America" is new to me. But why in the
world would anyone allow any voting machine that doesn't provide
paper trails? [I guess "vouchers" is a wrong translation]

[GStan]

I was just reading the DailyKos and it seems as if there are
voting machines that flip the vote, namely a machine named
ES&S Touch-Screen (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/26/112912/81/554/642200).

Anyone in here who voted on such a machine yet - or is likely
to vote on such a machine on Nov. 4?

And for the DailyKos haters - other Media is reporting the same
thing:

http://news.google.com/news?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=ES%26S%20iVotronic&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn

Let me guess: The ES&S machines also don't provide any
vouchers, right? :(

They have to do something to neutralize all that ACORN fraud, don't they?;)

[BenBurch]

The reason it is allowed, Oliver, the WHOLE reason, was to allow the GOP to steal elections. The "Help America Vote" act the GOP pushed through after they needed the Supreme Court to steal the 2000 election made their win in 2004 possible and is going to be used to steal this one if they can.

See http://www.bradblog.com/ for the up-to-the-minute news on this issue from an objective source. (He is not a Democrat or a Liberal! And he is proof that I can get along with non-Democrats as he is a good friend of mine.)

[GStan]

The reason it is allowed, Oliver, the WHOLE reason, was to allow the GOP to steal elections. The "Help America Vote" act the GOP pushed through after they needed the Supreme Court to steal the 2000 election made their win in 2004 possible and is going to be used to steal this one if they can.

See http://www.bradblog.com/ for the up-to-the-minute news on this issue from an objective source. (He is not a Democrat or a Liberal! And he is proof that I can get along with non-Democrats as he is a good friend of mine.)

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

[Oliver]

The reason it is allowed, Oliver, the WHOLE reason, was to allow the GOP to steal elections. The "Help America Vote" act the GOP pushed through after they needed the Supreme Court to steal the 2000 election made their win in 2004 possible and is going to be used to steal this one if they can.

See http://www.bradblog.com/ for the up-to-the-minute news on this issue from an objective source. (He is not a Democrat or a Liberal! And he is proof that I can get along with non-Democrats as he is a good friend of mine.)


I honestly don't see how the "Help America Vote Act" improves anything.
But to say that House and Senate were conspiring against "we the people"
sounds absurd as well - to be honest.

And I also thought that the counties decide about what kind of voting
machines they will use in elections - or at least that the state decides.
Does HAVA overwrite State-regulation? :confused:

[Oliver]

Anyone having experience with voting machines yet in early voting states?

[BenBurch]

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

http://www.daveross.com/marklevine.html

Oh, yes, and the recounting under the standard of the FL Supreme Court has Gore winning. So nice try.

[Elizabeth I]

The reason it is allowed, Oliver, the WHOLE reason, was to allow the GOP to steal elections. The "Help America Vote" act the GOP pushed through after they needed the Supreme Court to steal the 2000 election made their win in 2004 possible and is going to be used to steal this one if they can.

See http://www.bradblog.com/ for the up-to-the-minute news on this issue from an objective source. (He is not a Democrat or a Liberal! And he is proof that I can get along with non-Democrats as he is a good friend of mine.)

:rolleyes:

Unless you were being funny, which I hope you were, because I think of you as much smarter than that.

[dudalb]

:rolleyes:

Unless you were being funny, which I hope you were, because I think of you as much smarter than that.

It is sad to see Ben stray into CT territory based on his hatred of the GOP.

[David Wong]

:rolleyes:

Unless you were being funny, which I hope you were, because I think of you as much smarter than that.

He may be, but at election time his brain vanishes and leaves a cloud of dust behind. Bizarre and sad to watch.

[dudalb]

He may be, but at election time his brain vanishes and leaves a cloud of dust behind. Bizarre and sad to watch.

There is a lot of that going around. And Ben is not the worst case.

[BenBurch]

I'll be happy to find out I am wrong.

[R.Mackey]

Hypothetical, but honest, question: If vote theft is so widespread and easy, why do we only hear about the Republicans doing it? Do they just cheat better?

Are Democrats too busy trying to save the world? Thought never occurred to them?

Seriously, if this is real, why not cheat back? Or are they already doing so?

[BenBurch]

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -Mahatma Gandhi, (attributed)

[KoihimeNakamura]

Ah, another vote CT

[Sasha]

Anyone having experience with voting machines yet in early voting states?


I voted last weekend (I live a few miles north of Austin in Georgetown). They had a touch-screen voting thing but I have no idea what model or make it was. Every previous election I've voted in here had paper ballots. What kind of "experience" are you talking about?

[Oliver]

I voted last weekend (I live a few miles north of Austin in Georgetown). They had a touch-screen voting thing but I have no idea what model or make it was. Every previous election I've voted in here had paper ballots. What kind of "experience" are you talking about?


Well, something like this, for example:

s08d9oYeyvU

[WildCat]

Seriously, if this is real, why not cheat back? Or are they already doing so?
If this were real, it would be a simple thing to prove. After all, the machines can be tested and we even know who has acess to them.

This thread belongs in Conspiracy Theories.

[Sasha]

Well, something like this, for example:

s08d9oYeyvU

No, I'm pretty sure Bush or Kerry weren't on my screen.

[BenBurch]

If this were real, it would be a simple thing to prove. After all, the machines can be tested and we even know who has acess to them.

This thread belongs in Conspiracy Theories.

Except that people have tried to get the machines tested in the past and found that since the election companies own all the machines, they could not get their hands on them. Also there is no way to verify what program loads were in place in the event. Also not only the machines themselves but the tabulators were in question. Also not only the machines but the NUMBER of machines (as they slow down the process) has been used to suppress turnout. Also, as we saw in Ohio (http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2503) in 2004 (and there were successful criminal prosecutions) recounts using the machines are trivially rigged.

[WildCat]

Except that people have tried to get the machines tested in the past and found that since the election companies own all the machines, they could not get their hands on them. Also there is no way to verify what program loads were in place in the event. Also not only the machines themselves but the tabulators were in question. Also not only the machines but the NUMBER of machines (as they slow down the process) has been used to suppress turnout. Also, as we saw in Ohio (http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2503) in 2004 (and there were successful criminal prosecutions) recounts using the machines are trivially rigged.
Oh, BS. The machines are still there and can be tested. And if this was a vote-stealing scheme by the GOP and the company it's the worst scheme ever - it would have to be 100% successful to work, and it was found out the first day of early voting.

It's either operator error or a flaky touch screen. It's certainly not some elaborate but incredibly stupid vote-stealing scheme.

[dudalb]

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -Mahatma Gandhi, (attributed)

Nice cop out, Ben.
Of course being an Illnois Democrat I can undestand why you don't want to discuss Democratic hanky panky.

[dudalb]

Oh, BS. The machines are still there and can be tested. And if this was a vote-stealing scheme by the GOP and the company it's the worst scheme ever - it would have to be 100% successful to work, and it was found out the first day of early voting.

It's either operator error or a flaky touch screen. It's certainly not some elaborate but incredibly stupid vote-stealing scheme.


It's the "Diebold and the other companies are in on it" part that sends this into woo territory.
To be fair, I think the Dems have a lot of legit complaints about Florida in 2000..I do think some GOP electiion officials acted in a very biased manner in the aftermath....and we will probably never know what really happened.
But I have seen no convincing proof that the 2004 election was stolen.
And , beleive me, if I though the GOP was stealing every electiion, I would be the first to want some people hung.
I think it might be a good idea for states and counties to actually BUY the machines rather then rent them...it might be cheaper in the long run...but still, if there was an investigation I presume that the companies would have to turn over the machines if supeonaed.

[ktesibios]

Rigging a voting machine to change votes visibly, right in the voter's face, has got to be the stupidest possible way to attempt rigging an election. That's like a pickpocket using a flashing neon sign reading "SOMEONE IS PICKING YOUR POCKET" to distract the mark.

NWO Kitty's son is going to wish he'd kept that street-sweeping job.

[Oliver]

Rigging a voting machine to change votes visibly, right in the voter's face, has got to be the stupidest possible way


Yes. But Wildcat will tell you it's a conspiracy. :rolleyes:

0Q9NSVUu8nk
By the way - why was the thread moved?

[dudalb]

Look, both parties are going to try to get away with crap. I don't see anybody (outside a few fanatic partisans who think their pary is made of angels and the other party of devils incarnate) denying that.
I just find the whole "The Machines are fixed at the factory, and electronic voting is part of conspiracy to steal elections" routine to be silly and ridiculous, and driven more by partisan fury then anything else.

[LightinDarkness]

Its part of the media/DNC propaganda campaign to make people believe that somehow the GOP can only "steal" elections and never win. The truth is that both parties are engaged in voter fraud, it just so happens that the DNC is far better at spinning the media to make itself look innocent.

But, because most American voters are dumb (see some of the people in this thread), they will believe it. Of course if you actually do some thinking it becomes clear this was a simple glitch: If the GOP was out to steal elections, why would they make it obvious that votes were being switched ON THE SCREEN SO THAT YOU CAN SEE IT? Smart enough to steal the elections of the most powerful country in the world, but not smart enough to make sure it isn't obvious?

Please. This is was a technology glitch, and the DNC propaganda artists went wild and the dumb voters ate it up.

[DavidS]

But why in the world would anyone allow any voting machine that doesn't provide paper trails?
I don't know what you mean by "paper trails" (nor am I yet convinced that you've settled on that, either), but "receipt-freeness" is an important property of election protocols.

The "secret" part of "secret ballot" is more important than many folks realize. Any election protocol that provides means to determine how any specific voter voted is more exposed to corruption by votes "bought" by giving the voter money or letting him keep his legs intact. Paying Bob for his vote is less attractive if you can't be sure Bob kept his end of the deal. Threatening Bob for his vote is less effective if he can tell you what you want to hear and you can't prove otherwise. If he can't be sure who they are and aren't, it's harder for the winner to use his new official powers to punish those who voted against him.

Be careful what you wish for.

[Rasmus]

I don't know what you mean by "paper trails" (nor am I yet convinced that you've settled on that, either), but "receipt-freeness" is an important property of election protocols.

The "secret" part of "secret ballot" is more important than many folks realize. Any election protocol that provides means to determine how any specific voter voted is more exposed to corruption by votes "bought" by giving the voter money or letting him keep his legs intact. Paying Bob for his vote is less attractive if you can't be sure Bob kept his end of the deal. Threatening Bob for his vote is less effective if he can tell you what you want to hear and you can't prove otherwise. If he can't be sure who they are and aren't, it's harder for the winner to use his new official powers to punish those who voted against him.

Be careful what you wish for.


Paper trails are physical documentation on what has been voted, not on who voted. It is fairly easy to manipulate a database that records votes: All I have to do is change a couple of values.

If there are pieces of paper that how what has been voted these are a lot harder to manipulate.

There are concepts for electrical voting machines that will only register a vote if the voter has reviewed and approved a print-out of their vote.

In that case, you can easily look at the electronic records to decide who won, and whoever challenges that result (or the quality of the machines, or the integrity of those handling the machines) can simply count the prints.

At no time is there a connection of who actually voted what.

[fezzic]

I don't know how paper trails are supposed to help out or prove. Even if the machine printed a receipt that showed how I 'voted' how the heck can I be sure that the machine isn't lying to me.

I just went and voted early at City Hall. I chose the paper ballot which requires you to fill in a block with a ballpoint pen for each race. After filling it out, I am directed to insert the completed ballot into the slot of a machine and if it don't spit it back out the vote is 'valid' and accepted -- I don't think it scans and tallys at this point.

I walk out of City Hall with a piece of paper that identifies what Congressional and Representative district I can vote in that the ballot was for and a serial number of the ballot -- which gets tallied to my name (I had to fill out a simple application and produce picture ID, that is cross checked against the voter rolls, to get a ballot). I have no objective way of PROVING that my vote was or will be tallied faithfully. I have to take that on faith and trust.

If you have no faith or trust in the 'system' then there is NO manner of voting, paper trails, etc. that will suffice.

[thaiboxerken]

This must be a conspiracy theory, because only crackpot papers are reporting on it...you know, NPR, CNN, New York Times....Fox News.

[PhantomWolf]

Well the machine in the video that Oliver posted was keeping a paper track of what was being voted for. The moral of the story is exactly the same as if you are doing a paper ballot, make sure that it's completed correctly and as you want it before confirming your vote. If you screw up, or the machine screws up, make sure it's fixed. If you don't bother checking, then it's your own fault.

[gnome]

Every electronic voting system I've seen described, even paperless ones, show a final confirmation. If it has recorded the wrong vote, why would you confirm it? At that point you have the ability to demand another machine or a different method of voting...

It's not one-click shopping here...

I'm far more worried about manipulation after the fact.

[defaultdotxbe]

This must be a conspiracy theory, because only crackpot papers are reporting on it...you know, NPR, CNN, New York Times....Fox News.
the flaws in the systems are not the conspiracy theory, the conspiracy theory is the notion that they were designed that way with the intention of giving the election to the republicans

[KoihimeNakamura]

There are two ways this could be stupidity rather than malice:

1) Calibration error.
2) Pushing on the edges such that one then the next triggers.

I just don't see enough evidence that it's neither of the above.

[technoextreme]

Of course.

This is why Obama needs to win by a huge margin; The fix is in and we need to win by much, much more than can be fixed.
Actually, no. I just realized that it's because a lot of people don't necessarily know how to use a touch screen. I have to dredge up the article that I found but apparently some touch screens do not work in any intuitive manner which was the article I was reading warning voters about. It only registers the vote once you lift your finger off the screen. Hence if you drag your thumb across it the screen will not register the correct vote. I wouldn't say it's stupidity because no one thinks that touch screens work that way.

[Elizabeth I]

Actually, no. I just realized that it's because a lot of people don't necessarily know how to use a touch screen. I have to dredge up the article that I found but apparently some touch screens do not work in any intuitive manner which was the article I was reading warning voters about. It only registers the vote once you lift your finger off the screen. Hence if you drag your thumb across it the screen will not register the correct vote. I wouldn't say it's stupidity because no one thinks that touch screens work that way.

Well, no...that's why it's called a touch screen, not a drag screen. That, and there are just too many possibilities for confusion if the phrase drag screen were to be misunderstood. :p

[Euromutt]

I don't know how paper trails are supposed to help out or prove. Even if the machine printed a receipt that showed how I 'voted' how the heck can I be sure that the machine isn't lying to me.
I used an electronic voting machine in the state primaries. It doesn't actually give the voter a piece of paper, but rather, there's a roll of paper (similar to a supermarket checkout printout) contained within it. One you've confirmed the votes you want to cast, the printed paper scrolls past a (sealed) window, showing you what votes you've cast. But the paper stays with the machine.

[thaiboxerken]

the flaws in the systems are not the conspiracy theory, the conspiracy theory is the notion that they were designed that way with the intention of giving the election to the republicans

I guess it's just coincidence that the flaws favor the GOP.

[tomwaits]

I guess it's just coincidence that the flaws favor the GOP.

Well, I'd say there's a 50% chance that, given that there are flaws, the flaws would favor the GOP.


ETA: Also, Affirming the Consequent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent).

[JihadJane]

Hypothetical, but honest, question: If vote theft is so widespread and easy, why do we only hear about the Republicans doing it?

I think http://www.bradblog.com/ talked about the Hillary Clinton gang doing it.

[Travis]

Back in 2000 everyone was complaining that we were still using old fashioned paper ballots and not something hi-tech. Now that is happening and everyone is complaining about a lack of a paper trail?:boggled:

Make up your mind people!

[Donal]

I'll be happy to find out I am wrong.

What are the odds that means you'll only stop whining when your candidate wins?

[dudalb]

Back in 2000 everyone was complaining that we were still using old fashioned paper ballots and not something hi-tech. Now that is happening and everyone is complaining about a lack of a paper trail?:boggled:

Make up your mind people!

Oh, it gets better then that...and as a Californian you should remember.
Back in 2003,during the Gray Davis recall election ..the one that resulted in Ahrnuld becoming the Guvanator...the ACLU sued to have the election postponed six months so that all paper ballots in Cal could be replaced by a more modern system. They actualy got a lower court ruling in their favor but it was overturned by a upper court after a huge public outcry.
But NOW the ACLU seems to be screaming about how easy corrupted the same system they sued to have put in place is.
Look, all instances of voting irregularties should be investigated. But some Dems seem to be totally paranois and are buying into Wack CTs.
Not to mention the Dems are not without sin in this department.

[Donal]

The other thing that gets is that if it is so obvious 2000 and 2004 were stolen, why did the DNC itself give up the fight? I mean in 2000, they simply sued over which way to count the votes. And some of the Dems on the Supreme Court sided with Bush. The Democratic party itself never made any real accusations of fraud.

2004, they simply accepted getting robbed.

Does that seem odd to anyone else?

[dudalb]

To be fair, I think that A LOT was questionable about what happened in Florida in 2000...and I think the Dems should have pursued it to the end just to see what really happened.
But 2004 in Ohio...not so much. I find the evidence there for a plot very thin. I am not denying that irregulaties occured and they should be investigated, but I don't see them as enough to decide a election, as what happened in Florida in 2000.

[CurtC]

It only registers the vote once you lift your finger off the screen. Hence if you drag your thumb across it the screen will not register the correct vote. I wouldn't say it's stupidity because no one thinks that touch screens work that way.

I would expect touch screens to work the same way that windows-based operating systems work. Pushing a button doesn't activate it, it only activates when you release the push on the same button you pushed in the first place.

Is that what was going on here?

[gnome]

To be fair, I think that A LOT was questionable about what happened in Florida in 2000...and I think the Dems should have pursued it to the end just to see what really happened.
But 2004 in Ohio...not so much. I find the evidence there for a plot very thin. I am not denying that irregulaties occured and they should be investigated, but I don't see them as enough to decide a election, as what happened in Florida in 2000.

I followed this very closely in 2004--the one that got me off thinking electronic voting was a problem was a report that showed that the biggest discrepancies in the exit polls happened in counties that DIDN'T have the machines in question. There were no particular polling anomalies in the touch-screen voting counties.

[Minadin]

I decided to use paper ballot instead of touch-screen. There wasn't a line for the paper ballot booths.

[1337m4n]

Hey conspiranuts, guess what?

[catbasket]

Obama stole the election? ;)

[defaultdotxbe]

I would expect touch screens to work the same way that windows-based operating systems work. Pushing a button doesn't activate it, it only activates when you release the push on the same button you pushed in the first place.

Is that what was going on here?
the touchscreen i used activated on first touch, dragging had no effect

i actually found it surprisingly responsive, and very accurate, there wasnt a line behind me so i actually played with it for a 5 minutes, trying to produce "vote flipping" results and wasnt able to get anything

this was a kind i used http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/10/29/us/29ballot.650.jpg apparently made by a company called Sequoia

[technoextreme]

Well, no...that's why it's called a touch screen, not a drag screen. That, and there are just too many possibilities for confusion if the phrase drag screen were to be misunderstood. :p
Ummm.... No. Read better. Some touch screens only register you lifting your finger off the screen. It's backwards and unintuitive.

[defaultdotxbe]

Ummm.... No. Read better. Some touch screens only register you lifting your finger off the screen. It's backwards and unintuitive.
i think that may be more the software behind it than the screen itself, on my windows mobile pda touching and holding the screen works similarly to a right-click, so because of that it doesnt register a normal tap until you remove your finger

as i said previously though, the touch screen i used registered on first touch

[Brainster]

Nice to see that not all conspiracy theorizing is dead around here; the black box voting stuff is every bit as retarded as 9-11 Troof. Bev Harris and Brad Friedman are sophisticated versions of Sofia Shafquat and Steven Jones.

[TexasJack]

To be fair, I think that A LOT was questionable about what happened in Florida in 2000...and I think the Dems should have pursued it to the end just to see what really happened.

I've brought this up before, but if Gore had won his own home state, this would have never been an issue.