Skip to main content

View Diary: Why Prosser needed EXACTLY +7500 votes.... (430 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This Could be the "Squirrel". Even if This Issue (7+ / 0-)

    is not fraud, doesn't mean there is not fraud or error out there that could turn this around.

    The obvious looking fruad that turns out to be a totally valid correction gets an awful lot of attention and sort of acts to poison the well for other investigations, allegations or even recounts.

    Just because this particular incredibly obvious incident, that just coincidentally has all the elements (including historical precedent in the Frankin election) to attract Dem outrage and attention (and elicit the predictable cries of voter fraud), may turn out to be nothing, does not prove there is nothing to find.

    And before anyone HRs me for "CT" (of either the Conspiracy or Coincidence Theory variety), think of this: WWHBGD?

    What Would HBGary Do?.

    “create a false document, perhaps highlighting periodical financial information… Afterward, present explicit evidence proving that such transactions never occurred. Also, create a fake insider persona and generate communications with (Change to Win labor coalition). Afterward, release the actual documents at a specified time and explain the activity as a CtW contrived operation. Both instances will prove that US Chamber Watch cannot be trusted with information and or tell the truth."

    Or what would people do who are capable of staging a Mubarak-style Support-Protest Against a Recount

    We cannot view events through the prism of what we might do.

    We need not even view events through the prism of what we might imagine they might do.

    We need only view events through the prism of what they have proposed to do and what we know they have already done and then envision how such people might approach an election that they felt they could not afford to lose.

    We'd rather dream the American Dream than fight to live it or to give it to our kids. What a shame. What an awful, awful shame.

    by Into The Woods on Thu Apr 07, 2011 at 08:27:07 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Precisely- Thank you. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Into The Woods, Zinman, jlb1972
      We need only view events through the prism of what they have proposed to do and what we know they have already done and then envision how such people might approach an election that they felt they could not afford to lose.

       

    •  What if there is election fraud elsewhere? (0+ / 0-)

      The optical scan machines have to be programmed to read the marks on the ballot and assign them to the various candidates. This is done by inserting a "prom" card into the machine before the election.

      Who programs these cards? Could they build in a certain percentage of flipping votes from one candidate to another? Could they do this in some way that would evade detection when the machines are tested before the election?

      What if their measures proved insufficient to create a margin well beyond the recount threshold? Would they be afraid that adjustments made during the canvass might bring the opponent's total within that range?

      Could they then create an issue that they knew would ultimately be resolved in their favor upon investigation? By the time the dispute was settled, would it be too late to ask for a recount within the statutory time limit (three business days following the last canvass result)?  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site