Real Election Reform

Discussion in 'Recumbent bicycles' started by D Flint, Jan 7, 2005.

  1. D Flint

    D Flint Guest

    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
     
    Tags:


  2. Rocketman

    Rocketman Guest

    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 protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > 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 protected]> 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.
     
  4. Rocketman

    Rocketman Guest

    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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
     
  5. Mark Leuck

    Mark Leuck Guest

    "Rocketman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]_s53...
    >
    > "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    > > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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
     
  6. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

    Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of indefinite pronouns and end
    punctuation when he wrote:

    > He won, get over it already
     
  7. Mark Leuck

    Mark Leuck Guest

    Making up for Edward Dolan Tom?

    "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of indefinite pronouns and end
    > punctuation when he wrote:
    >
    > > He won, get over it already

    >
     
  8. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

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

    > Making up for Edward Dolan Tom?
     
  9. skip

    skip Guest

    "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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.
    >

    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" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    > "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    > > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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.
    > >

    > 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. Edward Dolan

    Edward Dolan Guest

    "Mark Leuck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Making up for Edward Dolan Tom?
    >
    > "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> Mark Leuck demonstrated poor use of indefinite pronouns and end
    >> punctuation when he wrote:
    >>
    >> > 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. Mark Leuck

    Mark Leuck Guest

    No Rocketman needs some time off at this place

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

    Tom Sherman claims it worked wonders

    "skip" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    > > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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.
    > >

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

    Edward Dolan Guest

    "Rocketman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]_s02...
    > 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 protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> 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. Rocketman

    Rocketman Guest

    "Mark Leuck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]_s53...
    >>
    >> "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >> > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    >> > "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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. Freewheeling

    Freewheeling Guest

    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 protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "Eric Jorgensen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:52:33 GMT
    >> "Rocketman" <[email protected]> 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.
    >>

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

    skip Guest

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

    Tom Sherman Guest

    skip wrote:
    > ...
    > 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. skip

    skip Guest

    "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > skip wrote:
    >> ...
    >> 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. Freewheeling

    Freewheeling Guest

    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 protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > skip wrote:
    >> ...
    >> 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

    Edward Dolan Guest

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


    Yes, it is indeed tricky. No comma is needed after however.

    No matter how Iraq turns out, anything is better than having Sadaam remain
    in power. It wouldn't particularly bother me if Iraq were to break up into
    three sections, a Kurdish north, a Sunni central and a Shia south. The worst
    possible scenario was for Sadaam to continue in power. Only Bush II had the
    brains and the courage to take the bastard out. The g.d. French, always a
    nation of whores, were in bed with Sadaam. Anyone here still think the
    French are on our side?

    --
    Regards,

    Ed Dolan - Minnesota
     
Loading...
Loading...