Recumbent bicycles · Public discussion

Real Election Reform

Started by D Flint · · Last activity · 157 posts · 6,315 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Recumbent bicycles
Published
8 January 2005
Last activity
2 February 2005
Original author
D Flint
Posts
157
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
6,315
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 157
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. What do you think about this and have you seen this popular site before?

    This was taken from a web site
    http://www.afvr.org

    How can we safeguard the integrity of each vote?
    Today we have technology that protects our financial systems, military
    weapon systems and national intelligent organizations. These proven systems
    can be combined in a way to issue serialized equipment to authorize
    personnel for the dates and hours needed. Each would have their own level of
    clearance to perform the tasks they are responsible for. Each action would
    be recorded and verified with a higher levels of network authority and
    again, only available during the hours and dates needed. Ballots would only
    be printed after the voter has cast their vote but before they leave the
    booth. If the voter made a mistake he could put the printed ballot into the
    booth's scanner for correction. All ballots scanned at the booth would go
    into a shredder and the voter could then correct his ballot on the screen
    and reprint his ballots. Once the voter accepts the printed ballot he
    submits his vote on the screen and takes the two ballots to the depository.
    So two computer generated, serialized and scanner perfect receipts of the
    completed ballot are printed.* One for the voter and one for the public
    record. This would eliminate all the extra ballots that could be used for
    unauthorized voting as well as any question of voter intent. Each piece of
    equipment involved in the issuing of the receipt would be linked to the
    serial# of that ballot and an electronic document would be generated that
    exactly matched the two printed receipts. So the voter themselves has
    validate the printed ballots, keeping one for themselves, while the other
    electronic time-stamped document is deposited into an optical scanner used
    as a secure depository. This second scanned count which should always match
    the electronic count. This paper ballot could also be used for recounts if
    needed. The voter could use the receipt to inquire about their vote in the
    future. The stuffing of the ballot box or "finding ballots" would be
    eliminated. With this system, if you find a ballot, you have to find the
    voter that cast that ballot too. This is not so in any of the current
    systems in place today nor have we ever heard such a system ever proposed.
    http://www.afvr.org

  2. Absolutely! The fact that the US doesn't have *any* secure balloting
    systems proves that our voting system is corrupt. It's not a matter of *if*
    the vote will be corrupted, but *when* and *by whom*. You can take that to
    mean "real democracy is dead." If the vote can be stolen, you might as well
    let a corrupt dictatorial junta take power by judicial coup and steal two
    consecutive elections. Oh yeah...that has already happened.

    Our voting systems are *designed* to be corrupted by any unscrupulous person
    who wishes to do so, with little or no recourse offered. Poll workers have
    always been at liberty to toss out ballots they didn't want to count,
    calling them "spoiled." Electronic machines have no security whatsoever, as
    has been proven repeatedly. A chimpanzee was able to sucessfully hack a
    Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    "D Flint" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What do you think about this and have you seen this popular site before?

    This was taken from a web site
    http://www.afvr.org

    How can we safeguard the integrity of each vote?
    Today we have technology that protects our financial systems, military
    weapon systems and national intelligent organizations. These proven
    systems
    can be combined in a way to issue serialized equipment to authorize
    personnel for the dates and hours needed. Each would have their own level
    of
    clearance to perform the tasks they are responsible for. Each action would
    be recorded and verified with a higher levels of network authority and
    again, only available during the hours and dates needed. Ballots would
    only
    be printed after the voter has cast their vote but before they leave the
    booth. If the voter made a mistake he could put the printed ballot into
    the
    booth's scanner for correction. All ballots scanned at the booth would go
    into a shredder and the voter could then correct his ballot on the screen
    and reprint his ballots. Once the voter accepts the printed ballot he
    submits his vote on the screen and takes the two ballots to the
    depository.
    So two computer generated, serialized and scanner perfect receipts of the
    completed ballot are printed.* One for the voter and one for the public
    record. This would eliminate all the extra ballots that could be used for
    unauthorized voting as well as any question of voter intent. Each piece
    of
    equipment involved in the issuing of the receipt would be linked to the
    serial# of that ballot and an electronic document would be generated that
    exactly matched the two printed receipts. So the voter themselves has
    validate the printed ballots, keeping one for themselves, while the other
    electronic time-stamped document is deposited into an optical scanner used
    as a secure depository. This second scanned count which should always
    match
    the electronic count. This paper ballot could also be used for recounts if
    needed. The voter could use the receipt to inquire about their vote in the
    future. The stuffing of the ballot box or "finding ballots" would be
    eliminated. With this system, if you find a ballot, you have to find the
    voter that cast that ballot too. This is not so in any of the current
    systems in place today nor have we ever heard such a system ever proposed.
    http://www.afvr.org

  3. On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.

  4. "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.

    I keep telling myself "there's only so much damage that a president can do
    in four years." That was *before* Bush got re-selected.

    Arrrgh.

    Rocketman

  5. "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:ac3Fd.2129$EG1.864@attbi_s53...

    Quoted message said:


    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.

    I keep telling myself "there's only so much damage that a president can do
    in four years." That was *before* Bush got re-selected.

    Arrrgh.

    Rocketman

    He won, get over it already

  6. Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of indefinite pronouns and end

    punctuation when he said:

    He won, get over it already

  7. Making up for Edward Dolan Tom?

    "Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of indefinite pronouns and end

    punctuation when he said:

    He won, get over it already


  8. Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of commas (the lack thereof) when he
    top posted:

    Quoted message said:

    Making up for Edward Dolan Tom?

  9. "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.


    Right. All Rocketman needs is a liberal minded
    chimpanzee to handle this little voting problem he seems to have.

  10. On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:34:12 -0600

    skip said:


    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.


    Right. All Rocketman needs is a liberal minded
    chimpanzee to handle this little voting problem he seems to have.

    I'm sorry, i botched my elton john reference.

    We got problems, but usenet isn't the place to solve 'em.

  11. "Mark Leuck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Making up for Edward Dolan Tom?

    "Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of indefinite pronouns and end

    punctuation when he said:

    He won, get over it already

    Mr. Sherman can never make up for me because he is polite and a gentleman. I
    am neither.

    I can't be bothered anymore with idiots like you who do not post correctly.
    The main problem is that your manners are as screwed up as your writing.
    Politeness and gentlemanly behavior is wasted on you. That is because you
    are a barbarian. You know better but still you persist in your abominations.
    You are beneath contempt. I disdain you, you unmitigated ignorant slob!

    --
    Regards,

    Ed Dolan - Minnesota

  12. No Rocketman needs some time off at this place

    http://www.bocanews.com/index.php?src=news&prid=10127&category=Local%20News%20%20

    Tom Sherman claims it worked wonders

    "skip" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.


    Right. All Rocketman needs is a liberal minded
    chimpanzee to handle this little voting problem he seems to have.

  13. "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:5a1Fd.1709$yY6.171@attbi_s02...

    Quoted message said:

    Absolutely! The fact that the US doesn't have *any* secure balloting
    systems proves that our voting system is corrupt. It's not a matter of
    *if* the vote will be corrupted, but *when* and *by whom*. You can take
    that to mean "real democracy is dead." If the vote can be stolen, you
    might as well let a corrupt dictatorial junta take power by judicial coup
    and steal two consecutive elections. Oh yeah...that has already happened.

    Our voting systems are *designed* to be corrupted by any unscrupulous
    person who wishes to do so, with little or no recourse offered. Poll
    workers have always been at liberty to toss out ballots they didn't want
    to count, calling them "spoiled." Electronic machines have no security
    whatsoever, as has been proven repeatedly. A chimpanzee was able to
    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    "D Flint" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What do you think about this and have you seen this popular site before?

    This was taken from a web site
    http://www.afvr.org

    How can we safeguard the integrity of each vote?
    Today we have technology that protects our financial systems, military
    weapon systems and national intelligent organizations. These proven
    systems
    can be combined in a way to issue serialized equipment to authorize
    personnel for the dates and hours needed. Each would have their own level
    of
    clearance to perform the tasks they are responsible for. Each action
    would
    be recorded and verified with a higher levels of network authority and
    again, only available during the hours and dates needed. Ballots would
    only
    be printed after the voter has cast their vote but before they leave the
    booth. If the voter made a mistake he could put the printed ballot into
    the
    booth's scanner for correction. All ballots scanned at the booth would go
    into a shredder and the voter could then correct his ballot on the screen
    and reprint his ballots. Once the voter accepts the printed ballot he
    submits his vote on the screen and takes the two ballots to the
    depository.
    So two computer generated, serialized and scanner perfect receipts of the
    completed ballot are printed.* One for the voter and one for the public
    record. This would eliminate all the extra ballots that could be used for
    unauthorized voting as well as any question of voter intent. Each piece
    of
    equipment involved in the issuing of the receipt would be linked to the
    serial# of that ballot and an electronic document would be generated that
    exactly matched the two printed receipts. So the voter themselves has
    validate the printed ballots, keeping one for themselves, while the other
    electronic time-stamped document is deposited into an optical scanner
    used
    as a secure depository. This second scanned count which should always
    match
    the electronic count. This paper ballot could also be used for recounts
    if
    needed. The voter could use the receipt to inquire about their vote in
    the
    future. The stuffing of the ballot box or "finding ballots" would be
    eliminated. With this system, if you find a ballot, you have to find the
    voter that cast that ballot too. This is not so in any of the current
    systems in place today nor have we ever heard such a system ever
    proposed.
    http://www.afvr.org

    All of the above was posted no doubt for the delectation of Mr. Tom Sherman
    who continues to believe that elections are stolen in this country. Without
    getting into the nuts and bolts of this post, let me say that those who
    cannot figure out how to vote correctly are too stupid to be voting in the
    first place. Unfortunately for liberals like Mr. Sherman and Rocketman most
    of these type voters just happen to be Democrats. Too bad for them, but that
    is what comes of being ignorant and stupid. Why should the rest of us bend
    over backwards to accommodate the most stupid among us.

    Frankly, I am relieved whenever I hear that almost 50% of the electorate
    does not vote. Thank God for that! The only folks I want voting are those
    who have bothered to inform themselves on the issues and have at least
    enough brains to figure out how to cast a vote correctly.

    --
    Regards,

    Ed Dolan - Minnesota

  14. "Mark Leuck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:ac3Fd.2129$EG1.864@attbi_s53...

    Quoted message said:


    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to
    > sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.
    >
    > Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.

    I keep telling myself "there's only so much damage that a president can
    do
    in four years." That was *before* Bush got re-selected.

    Arrrgh.

    Rocketman

    He won, get over it already

    Mission Accomplished.

    R

  15. Skip:

    Good comeback. I may be really naive, but it's my impression that VPNs or
    dedicated networks aren't very vulnerable to hacking no mater how vulnerable
    the software happens to be. That said, a 12-year-old could probably come up
    with a better election system. But it turns out that the only really
    irrefutable evidence of fraud took place in King County, WA where there were
    a few thousand more votes than registered voters in the most heavily
    Democratic county in the state, and where the Democratic candidate won by
    under 200 votes statewide. I don't care what your party happens to be, if
    you care about valid elections this would be the first case study you'd
    bring up. Nasty, nasty, nasty. (Did I say "nasty?"😉 And it appears that
    there's more than enough evidence to hold another election, so it's not over
    yet....

    Me, I'm getting ready to support my HS marching contingent in the Inaugural
    next week. They've been in nearly every Inaugural since Kennedy's, and a
    lot of them before that. I doubt that many of those kids care very much who
    the heck they're inaugurating. I sure didn't when I marched in LBJ's parade
    in 1964. The thing is, to BE THERE. When you're not there, when you've
    taken a powder, you're not even a footnote in history. You're an
    afterthought.

    And here's a little wisdom from Victor Davis Hanson about short term versus
    long term perspective:

    " But never mind all this: The long-term prospects are still as bright as
    things seem gloomy in the short-term — but only if we emulate our
    grandfathers and press on with the third Middle East election in the last
    six months. "

    Let's see, that's three more than zero isn't it?

    --
    --Scott
    "skip" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050111212758.4e256529@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    "Rocketman" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    A chimpanzee was able to

    Quoted message said:

    sucessfully hack a Diebold voting machine. That's how bad it is.

    Rocketman

    But, you know, it's gonna be alright.


    Right. All Rocketman needs is a liberal minded
    chimpanzee to handle this little voting problem he seems to have.

  16. "Freewheeling" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Skip:

    Good comeback. I may be really naive, but it's my impression that VPNs or
    dedicated networks aren't very vulnerable to hacking no mater how
    vulnerable the software happens to be. That said, a 12-year-old could
    probably come up with a better election system. But it turns out that the
    only really irrefutable evidence of fraud took place in King County, WA
    where there were a few thousand more votes than registered voters in the
    most heavily Democratic county in the state, and where the Democratic
    candidate won by under 200 votes statewide. I don't care what your party
    happens to be, if you care about valid elections this would be the first
    case study you'd bring up. Nasty, nasty, nasty. (Did I say "nasty?"😉
    And it appears that there's more than enough evidence to hold another
    election, so it's not over yet....

    Me, I'm getting ready to support my HS marching contingent in the
    Inaugural next week. They've been in nearly every Inaugural since
    Kennedy's, and a lot of them before that. I doubt that many of those kids
    care very much who the heck they're inaugurating. I sure didn't when I
    marched in LBJ's parade in 1964. The thing is, to BE THERE. When you're
    not there, when you've taken a powder, you're not even a footnote in
    history. You're an afterthought.

    And here's a little wisdom from Victor Davis Hanson about short term
    versus long term perspective:

    " But never mind all this: The long-term prospects are still as bright as
    things seem gloomy in the short-term - but only if we emulate our
    grandfathers and press on with the third Middle East election in the last
    six months. "

    Let's see, that's three more than zero isn't it?

    --
    --Scott

    Over the years I've lost interest in Super Bowls and especially in those
    half-time freak shows they put on. I yearn for the days when the half-time
    shows featured marching bands such as the Florida A&M Rattlers Marching 100.
    Man could those guys put on a show.

    If anyone is interested in a super bowl they might want to look towards
    Foxboro this weekend.

    The ultimate voter intimidation has to be voter assassination. Tremendous
    courage is required just to show up at the polls. Voting under the threat
    of death is beyond my imagination. It is truly "pressing on" in the
    defiance of terror. I salute every voter and every vote cast in the Middle
    East along with every person who provides security to protect those voters.

    It's discouraging to say the least, but unlike some others I know, I'm
    hoping for the best.

    skip

  17. skip said:

    ...
    It's discouraging to say the least, but unlike some others I know, I'm
    hoping for the best.

    Everyone is hoping for the best. There is however, severe disagreement
    over what the "best" is.

    The English language can be a tricky thing.

    --
    Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island

  18. "Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    skip said:

    ...
    It's discouraging to say the least, but unlike some others I know, I'm
    hoping for the best.

    Everyone is hoping for the best. There is however, severe disagreement
    over what the "best" is.

    The English language can be a tricky thing.

    --
    Tom Sherman

    I suppose it could be said that in the minds of some the indiscriminate,
    merciless large scale slaughter of those attempting to vote would be "for
    the best".

    skip

  19. The American election bearing the strongest resemblance to 2004 was the one
    that pitted George B. McClellan, a man with military credentials but
    questionable resolve, who was backed by the peace wing of the Democratic
    Party called, at the time, "Copperheads," against Abe Lincoln and the newly
    formed Republican Party. There are a couple of provocative ironies
    suggested by this comparison:

    1. The main copperhead counties in Ohio that, in 1864, voter for George B.
    McClellan voted for George W. Bush in 2004.

    2. The election would almost certainly have been won by McClellan had it not
    been for the intervention of a fellow with the surname "Sherman" who managed
    a total war demonstration project in Atlanta that convinced people the war
    was closer to conclusion than they thought.

    The strategy employed by the South, to sap the will of the North to fight,
    is exactly the same as the strategy employed by the "insurgents" in Iraq.
    Otherwise the North was, and the US is now, pretty much invincable. What
    was "best" for the Copperheads was a truce with the South and a continuation
    of slavery. I think history demonstrates that even with the horror of the
    Reconstruction that would not have been best in any realistic sense.

    As I recall there were only two Democratic Presidents elected to office
    between Lincoln and FDR, which is to say that there's a price for being on
    the wrong side of history.

    --
    --Scott
    "Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    skip said:

    ...
    It's discouraging to say the least, but unlike some others I know, I'm
    hoping for the best.

    Everyone is hoping for the best. There is however, severe disagreement
    over what the "best" is.

    The English language can be a tricky thing.

    --
    Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island

  20. Edward Dolan said:

    ... The g.d. French, always a nation of [censored], were in bed with Sadaam. Anyone here
    still think the French are on our side?

    Here is a useful article for dealing with things French:
    <http://snipurl.com/c1x9>.

    --
    Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.