Ralph Nader goes for a recount in New Hampshire
 

[quote="Ralf Nader":dd776]
November 5, 2004

Via fax: 603-271-6316

To The Secretary of State of New Hampshire:

The Nader-Camejo campaign requests a hand recount of the ballots in the presidential election in New Hampshire. Numerous voting rights
activists have requested that we seek a recount of this vote.

We have received reports of irregularities in the vote reported on the AccuVote Diebold Machines in comparison to exit polls and trends in voting in New Hampshire. These irregularities favor President George W. Bush by 5% to 15% over what was expected. Problems in these electronic voting machines and optical scanners are being reported in machines in a variety of states.

We are requesting that the state undertake this recount or a statistically significant sample audit of these vote counts.

We would like to make sure every vote counts and is counted accurately.

Sincerely,

Ralph Nader

Paperless Electronic Voting

A bedrock of democracy is making sure that every vote counts. The counting of votes needs to be transparent so people can trust that their vote is counted as they cast it. Paperless electronic voting on touch screen machines does not provide confidence to ensure votes are counted the way voters intend. The software on which votes are counted is protected as a corporate trade secret and the software is so complex that if malicious code was embedded no analysis could discover it. Further, because there is no voter verified paper record, it is not possible to audit the electronic vote for accuracy, nor is it possible to conduct an independent recount. This Primary Day six million voters will be voting on paperless electronic voting machines. This is a grotesquely designed, over-complicated expensive system fraught with the potential for mistakes and undetected fraud.

On July 23, 2003 the Johns Hopkins Information Security Institute reviewed the electronic voting system in Maryland and found that it had security “far below even the most minimal security standards . . . .” Johns Hopkins computer security experts concluded: “If we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate.”

Computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment malfunction, and malicious tampering. If we are to ensure fair and honest elections, and retain voter confidence in our democratic process, we need to ensure that there are no such questions. Therefore, it is crucial that any computerized voting system provide a voter-verifiable paper audit trail and that random audits of electronic votes be conducted on Election Day. Paperless electronic voting machines make it impossible to safeguard the integrity of our vote thereby threatening the very foundation of our democracy.

The seller of the machines, the Diebold Corporation, is a supplier of money to one of the major party candidates, George W. Bush. The CEO and top officers of Diebold are major contributors to the Bush campaign. This does not pass the smell test. Voters should report immediately any suspected malfunctions and deficiencies at voting precincts around the country to their Board of Elections. And voters should urge their legislators to require a voter verified paper ballot trail for random audits and independent recounts.[/quote:dd776]

Hopefully Kerry/Edwards will grow some balls and follow suit. beer:

Did kerry not win New Hamsphire anyways ?

[quote="Short Hand":e1a7c]Did kerry not win New Hamsphire anyways ?[/quote:e1a7c]

That's not the point. He's the first one to step up to the plate and draw attention to the possibility of fraud. The mainstream media can't ignore it now.

I see what you mean., But of course most republican voters & supporters will just dismiss this as a desperate act, until we get more proof of things such as trhis thats how it will be sadly.:(

no comment...

oOo:

http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/internat ... 43,00.html


now tell me something couldn't have gone wrong for either side. extra votes on both sides don't just happen like that.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/ ... index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137790,00.html

I'll admit that I'm not a Kerry fan, but I went to vote. The problem is the poll workers (God bless them) all have one foot in the grave. Most of them probably don't have an ATM card much less know how to properly set up and troubleshoot voting machines. So yeah, there probably were a lot of fuck ups. However, most people agree that Bush and Kerry carried the states where they were expected to win. And just as predicted, Ohio would be close.

The reality is, there will always be some mistakes. This is a huge country and its a miracle in my mind that in the course of a day we (conspiracy theorists not with standing) pretty much know who won.

Don't you know ? The "Patriots" decide which puppet wins! MGS2 was right all along! oOo:

[img]http://www.groundforce1.com/forums/images/avatars/1540797204418c5c3fd80f7.jpg[/img]

[quote="Mr.Buttocks":3e753][quote="Short Hand":3e753]Did kerry not win New Hamsphire anyways ?[/quote:3e753]

That's not the point. He's the first one to step up to the plate and draw attention to the possibility of fraud. The mainstream media can't ignore it now.[/quote:3e753]

sleeping:

Kerry lost, thats all... -End

YES LETS BLAME OLD PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL OLD A FUCKING DUMB Q!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

[quote=Swill1496][quote="Mr.Buttocks":387fc]That's not the point. He's the first one to step up to the plate and draw attention to the possibility of fraud. The mainstream media can't ignore it now.[/quote:387fc]

sleeping:

Kerry lost, thats all... -End[/quote:387fc]


I don't care who wins, but I do care about corruption. If there's even the slightest hint of fraud - Republican or Democrat - it should be investigated, wouldn't you agree?

[quote="Mr.Buttocks":5f03a][quote=Swill1496][quote="Mr.Buttocks":5f03a]That's not the point. He's the first one to step up to the plate and draw attention to the possibility of fraud. The mainstream media can't ignore it now.[/quote:5f03a]

sleeping:

Kerry lost, thats all... -End[/quote:5f03a]


I don't care who wins, but I do care about corruption. If there's even the slightest hint of fraud - Republican or Democrat - it should be investigated, wouldn't you agree?[/quote:5f03a]

ditto.

+1 rock:

This movie is a "must see", very interesting/informative. Get it before the link dies.

[url=http://www.archive.org/download/VotergateTheMovie/votergatethemovie.mpg:0994d]Right-click>Save Target As[/url:0994d] (300MB)

[quote="Mr.Buttocks":fd0d9][quote=Swill1496][quote="Mr.Buttocks":fd0d9]That's not the point. He's the first one to step up to the plate and draw attention to the possibility of fraud. The mainstream media can't ignore it now.[/quote:fd0d9]

sleeping:

Kerry lost, thats all... -End[/quote:fd0d9]


I don't care who wins, but I do care about corruption. If there's even the slightest hint of fraud - Republican or Democrat - it should be investigated, wouldn't you agree?[/quote:fd0d9]

Of course...But when it becomes Official that it did, then carry on with your life rolleyes:

wtf oOo: ^

[quote=Swill1496][quote="Mr.Buttocks":bca2d][quote=Swill1496] sleeping:

Kerry lost, thats all... -End[/quote:bca2d]


I don't care who wins, but I do care about corruption. If there's even the slightest hint of fraud - Republican or Democrat - it should be investigated, wouldn't you agree?[/quote:bca2d]

Of course...But when it becomes Official that it did, then carry on with your life rolleyes:[/quote:bca2d]

ok so if it was official that you won a million dollars in the lottery, and then there was a mistake with the computers and they took your money away, im sure you wouldnt be saying the same thing

[quote="Mr.Buttocks":9f570]This movie is a "must see", very interesting/informative. Get it before the link dies.

[url=http://www.archive.org/download/VotergateTheMovie/votergatethemovie.mpg:9f570]Right-click>Save Target As[/url:9f570] (300MB)[/quote:9f570]

fucking awesome video buttocks WOW.

OMFG the United States of America is a conspiracy!!!!1

did u no its acutally teh JEWS (?!1!!?!!1) making up a HUMUNGUS cuntry juz to hold down teh innosent Palestinians?!!!11

Fecked voting machines couldn't account for 3.5 million votes. GG rock:

Radiohead - backdrifting

Michael Kamen - String quartet in c sharp minor (opus 131)

You are a fat douchebag. And your comments above about Jews etc, show just how much of a fat douchebag you really are.

The two companies that controlled 80% of the voting machines in Election 2004 have strong Republican ties. The code is proprietary, no-one knows what's going on in those machines. Just in case you missed it, here's one of the most interesting parts of the movie: [url=http://jmc7.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Files/Votergate.wmv:ec158]Right-click>Save Target As[/url:ec158] It's only 1.5MB, worth watching. We're not talking about "fecked voting machines", we're talking about fraud.

That seems pretty out of context. As I recall the coverage on this (read about it on MSNBC, I believe), he was saying that their machines would be the ones that would deliver votes for George Bush.

All that is saying is that when people vote for Bush (which they did), the votes would come through their machines.

While they shouldn't be expressing partisan views, the conspiratorial implications are stretched to be generous.

It's the same as Fed-Ex saying they'll be the ones to deliver the votes for Kerry because they'll be shipping the provisional ballots.

He's talking about the functionality of the machines, not programming them to vote for Bush.

[quote=TonyMontana][quote=Swill1496][quote="Mr.Buttocks":10c23]
I don't care who wins, but I do care about corruption. If there's even the slightest hint of fraud - Republican or Democrat - it should be investigated, wouldn't you agree?[/quote:10c23]

Of course...But when it becomes Official that it did, then carry on with your life rolleyes:[/quote:10c23]

ok so if it was official that you won a million dollars in the lottery, and then there was a mistake with the computers and they took your money away, im sure you wouldnt be saying the same thing[/quote:10c23]

Thats different because its actually is meaning full. biggrin:

answer the question hamster.

[Disjointed Rant]
I agree that it could be taken either way, and your Fed-Ex analogy is a good one. Of course we can’t expect everyone working at the companies in question to be impartial, that’d be unrealistic, but while the code that works the machines is unavailable to the people of the United States, and the programming community as a whole, to view and analyse, alarm bells should be ringing. Diebold have already been caught using uncertified software in California (2002 I think) and I for one wouldn’t trust them as far as I can piss into a gale force wind. I really can’t work out the logic behind giving 5 private companies complete control over a large section of the voting process, to me that seems foolish, if not reckless. It’s wide open to abuse. If I was American I’d be writing a letter to my current elected representative(s), urging him/her/them to look into this whole voting machine situation. In order to make the voting process over there more transparent and more secure, the proprietary code used within the machines of the 5 companies in question should be replaced with open source code. (Or just make the current code available for everyone to view.)

Whenever the topic of machine voting comes up online (elsewhere), it seems to descend into a Republican vs Democrat issue. Republicans shouldn’t have a problem with opening up the software’s code because if the code’s clean it’ll prove that wins in 2000, 2002 and 2004 were genuine. And if the code’s clean then the Democrats will have to stfu and take the results on the chin. The reason why people are starting to question the validity of results from the various different types of voting machines isn’t due to Democrat “sour grapes”, it’s because whenever “errors” or “computer glitches” are discovered 9/10* they go in favour of Republican candidates. For the sake of “Democracy” the people of the US of A should do their best to dump these machines for 2006 and go back to the simple pen and paper ballots, like we use here in the UK.
[/Disjointed Rant]


*No stats to back this up other than to say that the results of the elections for 2000, 2002, and 2004 are available online for anyone, Democrat or Republican, to analyse for “errors”. From what I’ve read online and seen/heard on the mainstream media the vast, vast majority of “glitches” go in favour of Republican candidates. And remember I'm impartial in all this, so that isn't an anti-Republican statement. eek:












ps: geRV calmdown:

marry me john

biggrin:

This election was such a fucking farce, how could it happen twice in a row? to have re-counts and poor voting systems where alot of people's votes aren't getting registered, etc... Can America not organise a fair and efficient voting system so that everyone has their say.


It doesn't exactly prove good reading for Bush when it comes down to a 50% - 50% count where every thousand votes matter. 50% of america doesn't want George Bush in power and Kerry almost won it, fucking corrupt as hell.

I hate George Bush and his dumb-ass old and hillbilly supporters. This was like Gore vs. Bush all over again, such a shame to see Americas so-called democracy is in fact only an illusion and that to get anywhere in American politics you need only money, lots of fucking money (from saudi oil barons) and no brain.

people who didn't vote don't have any right to whine about the results. If they wanted Kerry in office/Bush out of office they should have showed up to the booths. (this isn't said towards foreign people...canadians, britts, etc.)

While I don't think it would've changed the election results, I do prefer the ballots where you ink in your choice.

LOL

GG propaganda machine rock:

That's a hoax by the way ^

i know

but if you look at the names of the states it has the right idea