Skip to main content

Nine Republican governors have the power to put Mitt Romney in the White House, even if Barack Obama wins the popular vote.

With their secretaries of state, they control the electronic vote count in nine key swing states: Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, New Mexico and Arizona. 

In tandem with the GOP's massive nation-wide disenfranchisement campaign, they could---in the dead of election night---flip their states' electronic votes to Romney and give him a victory in the Electoral College.

Gratefully, resistance has arisen to the GOP disenfranchisement strategy designed to deny millions of suspected Democrats the right to vote.  The intent to demand photo ID for voting could result in some ten million Americans being disenfranchised, according to the Brennan Center at New York University.  Other methods are being used to strip voter rolls---as in Ohio, where at least a million citizens have been purged from registration lists since 2009.  This alone could deny the ballot to a substantial percentage of the electorate in key swing states.  

The move has been characterized as a “new Jim Crow”.  It has evoked a strong reaction from voting rights activists, a number of lawsuits, major internet traffic and front page coverage in the New York Times.  

But there has been no parallel campaign to guarantee those votes are properly counted once cast.  Despite serious problems with electronic tabulations in the presidential elections of both 2000 and 2004, electronic voting machines have spread further throughout the country.  In Ohio, former Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell awarded a no-bid state contract to Diebold---a Republican-owned company which no longer exists---to spread electronic voting machines throughout the state.  In other states, federal money from the Help America Vote Act has helped move electronic voting machines into key swing states in substantial numbers that are not easy to track.

The machines can quickly tabulate a winner.  But their dark side is simple:  there is no way to monitor or double-check the final tally.  American courts have consistently ruled that the software installed in e-voting machines is proprietary.  [BOB---PLEASE INSERT DECISIONS HERE]  Even the election boards that buy them cannot access their tabulation codes.  The bulk of the major e-voting machine companies are owned by Republicans or by corporations whose roots are difficult to trace.  WHILE WE HAVE TIME by Sheila Parks of the Center for Hand Counted Ballots documents much of the problem.  

A Parks warns, we enter the 2012 vote count with no reliable means of guaranteeing any vote count emerging through electronic means is accurate.

In fact, whether they intend to do it or not, the Republican governors of the nine key swing states above do have the power to flip the election.  Except for exit polls, there is no established way to check how the official electronic vote count might square with the actual intent of the electorate.  And there is no legal method by which an electronic vote count can be effectively challenged.

There is unfortunate precedent.  In the heat of election night 2000, in Volusia County, Florida, 16,000 electronic votes for Al Gore mysteriously disappeared.  They were later re-instated.  But their temporary evaporation gave commentators at Fox---one of them George W. Bush’s first cousin---an opening to declare that the state was “in play” rather than in the Gore column, as had initially appeared certain.

In Ohio 2004, at 12:20 election night, the initial vote tabulation showed John Kerry handily defeating Bush by more than 4%.  This 200,000-plus margin appeared to guarantee Kerry’s ascent to the presidency.

But mysteriously, the vote count suddenly stopped.  When it resumed around 2am, Bush jumped ahead with a 2% lead, eventually winning with an official margin of more than 118,000 votes.  Such a shift of more than 6%, involving more than 300,000 votes, is a virtual statistical impossibility.

That night, Ohio’s vote count was being compiled in the basement of a bank building in Chattanooga, Tennessee.  The building also housed the servers for the Republican National Committee and thus the e-mail of Bush advisor Karl Rove. 

Secretary of State Blackwell was co-chair of the Ohio Committee to Re-Elect Bush and Cheney.  He met earlier that day in Columbus with Bush and Rove.  That night, he sent state workers home early.  The official tabulation was executed by an IT specialist named Michael Connoll, whose company was long associated with the Bush family.  In 2008 Connell died in a mysterious single-engine plane crash while under subpoena to testify in the federal King-Lincoln-Bronzeville voter rights lawsuit (by way of disclosure:  Bob is an attorney and Harvey a plaintiff in this lawsuit).

FreePress.org covered the vote shift in depth; the reportage appears in WILL THE GOP STEAL AMERICA’S 2012 ELECTION? (www.harveywasserman.com and www.freepress.org).  The King-Lincoln suit eventually resulted in a federal injunction ordering Ohio’s 88 counties to preserve all election records so a fair recount of the 2004 Ohio tabulation---which gave Bush a second term---could be effected.

But 54 of Ohio’s 88 counties ignored the injunction and destroyed their election records.    Thus no recount of Ohio 2004 has ever been done.  More than 90,000 provisional ballots went entirely uncounted, and have since been destroyed.

No way was ever found to verify the 2004 electronic vote count.  There are no definitive safeguards in place today.   

In 2008, swarms of election protection volunteers filled the polling stations in Ohio and other swing states.   They guaranteed the right to vote for many thousands of Americans who might otherwise have been denied it.

They had no means of guaranteeing the accuracy of the electronic vote count.  But Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan all had Democratic governors at the time.  Florida’s governor was the moderate Republican Charlie Crist, not likely to steal an election for a party he would soon leave.

This year Rick Scott is in Florida, Tom Corbett in Pennsylvania, John Kasich in Ohio, Rick Snyder in Michigan, Scott Walker in Wisconsin and Jan Brewer is in Arizona.  All are seen as hard-right Republicans unlikely to agonize over flipping a Barack Obama majority into a victory for Mitt Romney.

That doesn’t mean they would actually do such a thing.  But the stark reality is that they if they choose to, they can, and there would be no iron-clad way to prove they did.  

Another stark reality:  hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent to win this election by multi-billionaires Sheldon Adelson, Charles and David Koch, the Chamber of Commerce and other corporate interests.  For them, spending a few extra million to flip a key state's electoral votes would make perfect sense.

Would these swing state GOP governors do it?  We would actually never know for sure.

While Obama seems to be moving up in the polls, the huge reservoir of dollars raised to elect Mitt Romney will soon flood this campaign.  We might anticipate well-funded media reports of a “surge” for Romney in the last two weeks of the election.  Polls could well show a "close race" in the early hours of election day.  

And then those electronic voting machines could be just as easily flipped on election night 2012 as they were in 2004.

Would this batch of swing state Republicans do that for Romney.

We don’t know.

COULD they do it?

Absolutely.

Would you be able to find definitive, legally admissable proof that they did it?

No.

Would the courts overturn such a tainted victory?

Not likely.

What could ultimately be done about it?

In the short term: nothing.

In the long term:  a bottom-to-top remaking of our electoral system.
----------
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman have co-authored five books on election protection, including the newly published WILL THE GOP STEAL AMERICA’S 2012 ELECTION? (www.harveywasserman.com and www.freepress.org) 

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Well I won't sleep well tonight... (8+ / 0-)

    "Well, the problem here is that you're out of candy. You're gonna need more candy." Rachel Maddow on the Big Bailout

    by cishart on Sat Sep 22, 2012 at 11:02:02 PM PDT

  •  So what do we do with this information/warning? (11+ / 0-)

    IS there anything we can do to ensure this doesn't happen or are we as helpless as you imply?

    "Well, the problem here is that you're out of candy. You're gonna need more candy." Rachel Maddow on the Big Bailout

    by cishart on Sat Sep 22, 2012 at 11:04:11 PM PDT

    •  We could return to the methods used to count votes (7+ / 0-)

      in this country for over 200 years:

      Paper and Pencil ballots
      Voting at local precinct offices, mostly in public elementary schools (which exist everywhere homes and residences in this country exist, which is nearly everywhere that voters are).

      The local school site has Democratic and Republican representatives on site during the polling period, and during the count that takes place after the Polls close for the evening, circa 8:00 pm local time on Election Day.

      Those returns are entered on a hardcopy for recording keeping, signed off on by all present (always with someone from both major Parties present to prevent fraud claims from arising at a later date), and then phoned in to the County co-ordinator - who will do the same thing at their level; record the data and then phone the totals to the State level, where the totals are used to determine which Party Electors will have the right to cast their ballots in the Electoral College vote, which ultimately (and per the US Constitution) decide whom we choose for President.

      Modern voting fraud is mainly a Republican canard. The big problem with our modern Elections is Voter Suppression, and we all know which Party is all for that.

      "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.''
      -- SCOTUS Justice O.W. Holmes Jr
      "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization"
      -- Angie in WA State

      by Angie in WA State on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:27:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  In the 2008 election coverage Tom Brokaw gave (14+ / 0-)

    away something he did not intend on MSNBC.

    I wish I had a link or access to Lexis Nexus, but I don't. And I never saw anyone else other than my fiance pick up on it. However, I'll never forget it.

    It was election night 2008. Tom Brokaw was telling an anecdotal tale of how George W. Bush was much smarter and politically savvy than he is given credit for (Brokaw's opinion, not mine).

    The story was that Brokaw was interviewing Bush prior to the 2004 election. When the camera was cut and they were off air. Bush said "we're gonna win" and pointed to a map... put is finger on southern Ohio and  Bush said "that's where"

    Brokaw went on how smart Bush was... because in the end that's what put Bush over the top.

    I heard that as a confession of Bush and Rove rigging the system.

    Romney/Rove 2012: If you liked Bush's Brain... you'll love Romney's.

    by jethrock on Sat Sep 22, 2012 at 11:37:17 PM PDT

  •  Never forget when Republicans are (9+ / 0-)

    talking about voter fraud the real threat is election fraud.

    Where are the safeguards? The software owned by private corporations?

    We need to go back to verifiable elections methods.

    This better be good. Because it is not going away.

    by DerAmi on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:08:16 AM PDT

  •  Well, you take CT to a new level. You write books (7+ / 0-)

    based on it.

    •  CT... Really? Ask Howard Zinn (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rhauenstein, Cedwyn
      "A beautiful example of people's history"
        -- Howard Zinn
      And if you are denying that Gore won in 2008... or there weren't major "technical problems" in southern Ohio in 2004... or if Kathy Nickolaus' manipulation in Waukesha County Wisconson wasn't real.

      Um, whatever.

      Romney/Rove 2012: If you liked Bush's Brain... you'll love Romney's.

      by jethrock on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:30:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Gore won in 2008? We know what happened in (0+ / 0-)

        2000. It's out in the open and there is nothing to argue about. Supreme Court stopped the recount. 2004 is CT. They did deliberately put fewer machines in Dem precincts in Ohio but beyond that there is no proof of anything. And Bush did win the popular vote in 2004 (although it's not particularly important).

    •  Let me guess... you haven't actually read the (7+ / 0-)

      books you are mocking.

      Am I right?

      Romney/Rove 2012: If you liked Bush's Brain... you'll love Romney's.

      by jethrock on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:39:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't know if this rises to the level of CT. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dhonig, mdmslle, Smoh, HudsonValleyMark

      But I removed my rec when I visited the author's website and discovered that he had co-authored a book about how the Republicans were going to steal the 2008 election.

      I don't think this is CT because it's speculation about the outcome of a future event, and not about what happened to cause a past event.

      Nevertheless, I don't see why the diarist is more qualified than anyone else to make these observation and there are no insights he offers that aren't obvious anyone else.

      Smells like he's jerking our chain.

      Have you googled Romney today?

      by fou on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:40:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The only problem I have with Harvey's site is... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Cedwyn

        he needs a better graphic designer.

        Romney/Rove 2012: If you liked Bush's Brain... you'll love Romney's.

        by jethrock on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:48:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  it's CT, because of its flat assertions about 2004 (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        emelyn, FG, fou

        (IMO -- I'm not saying that you should have jumped to that conclusion.)

        And it's funny, because of this:

        American courts have consistently ruled that the software installed in e-voting machines is proprietary.  [BOB---PLEASE INSERT DECISIONS HERE]
        OK, not that funny. And proprietary software itself isn't funny, although the court decisions haven't been all bad.

        Election protection: there's an app for that!
        Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

        by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:36:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  CT BS (8+ / 0-)
    In 2008 Connell died in a mysterious single-engine plane crash while under subpoena to testify in the federal King-Lincoln-Bronzeville voter rights lawsuit
    Seriously? We all know electronic machines are an issue, but this is absurd Conspiracy Theory Bullshit. Doughnut time.

    Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

    by dhonig on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 12:47:54 AM PDT

  •  This is a ridiculous diary. (10+ / 0-)

    While I appreciate the fear of corruption in elections - hell, I wrote a diary about Diebold seven years ago - this diary is unsourced and poorly executed.  If you have a story to tell about this election with facts to back it up, please do so.  Otherwise, stop hawking your "books" at me.

    "A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future." - Leonard Bernstein

    by outragedinSF on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 01:27:33 AM PDT

  •  HOW could they do this? (8+ / 0-)

    "...they could---in the dead of election night---flip their states' electronic votes to Romney and give him a victory in the Electoral College."

    Because this:

    In Ohio 2004, at 12:20 election night, the initial vote tabulation showed John Kerry handily defeating Bush by more than 4%.  This 200,000-plus margin appeared to guarantee Kerry’s ascent to the presidency.

    But mysteriously, the vote count suddenly stopped.  When it resumed around 2am, Bush jumped ahead with a 2% lead, eventually winning with an official margin of more than 118,000 votes.  Such a shift of more than 6%, involving more than 300,000 votes, is a virtual statistical impossibility.

    IIRC, is a load of bull.

    Yes, your voting system is vulnerable to both error and malice, but malice isn't as easy as the diarist implies, and both malice and error can be minimised by vigilance and good auditing.  The idea that a governor could merely "flip" the vote "in the dead of election night" by some magical electronic means is as unfounded as it is disheartening.

    Be vigilant, but take heart.

    •  ohio 2004 stank to high heaven (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jethrock, Don midwest

      there were reports of people voting for kerry, but the screen indicated bush.  

      http://www.dailykos.com/...



      In Ohio 2004, at 12:20 election night, the initial vote tabulation showed John Kerry handily defeating Bush by more than 4%.  This 200,000-plus margin appeared to guarantee Kerry’s ascent to the presidency.

      But mysteriously, the vote count suddenly stopped.  When it resumed around 2am, Bush jumped ahead with a 2% lead, eventually winning with an official margin of more than 118,000 votes.  Such a shift of more than 6%, involving more than 300,000 votes, is a virtual statistical impossibility.

      if you don't think a programmer can make a voting machine do such things, i've got some oceanfront property in arizona that might interest you.

      Die with your boots on. If you're gonna try, well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

      by Cedwyn on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:04:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You are conflating two things (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        emelyn
        there were reports of people voting for kerry, but the screen indicated bush.  
        How many?  And how do you know?  That is a serious question.
        In Ohio 2004, at 12:20 election night, the initial vote tabulation showed John Kerry handily defeating Bush by more than 4%.  This 200,000-plus margin appeared to guarantee Kerry’s ascent to the presidency.

        But mysteriously, the vote count suddenly stopped.  When it resumed around 2am, Bush jumped ahead with a 2% lead, eventually winning with an official margin of more than 118,000 votes.  Such a shift of more than 6%, involving more than 300,000 votes, is a virtual statistical impossibility.

        Which "vote tabulation"?  What "vote count suddenly stopped"?  The media reporting stopped?  Or the precinct reporting stopped? stopped?  Or the county tabulators stopped?  

        What did happen is that the initial exit poll projections showed Kerry ahead.  Then, after reweighting in line with the incoming count, they showed Bush ahead.  That doesn't mean "the vote count stopped".  It means it started.

        •  how do i know? (0+ / 0-)

          that'd be the bit about "there were reports" -- note the plural.  how widespread? i'm not sure.  but those reports are just the instances where it was noticed.  

          What did happen is that the initial exit poll projections showed Kerry ahead.  Then, after reweighting in line with the incoming count, they showed Bush ahead.  That doesn't mean "the vote count stopped".  It means it started.
          you ask me to prove assertion...prove yours.  what do you mean by "reweighting"?

          Die with your boots on. If you're gonna try, well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

          by Cedwyn on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:35:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Right, that's why I'm asking (0+ / 0-)

            how many reports were there, and what proportion of those reports were of a flip to Bush?

            As for your second point, it seems as though you were  (or Harvey was) indeed talking about the exit poll, not the count.

            My answer to your question is in this diary.  

      •  did you watch Election Night 2004? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        emelyn, Febble, N in Seattle

        Do you remember John Kerry leading in Ohio by over 4 points at 12:20 that night?

        Can you find anyone who remembers John Kerry leading in Ohio by over 4 points at 12:20 that night?

        Where was this "200,000-plus margin"? Can you find evidence of it anywhere? Hasn't someone at least posted the smoking-gun screen shot of Kerry's 200,000-vote lead?

        I think we should leave the burden of proof where it belongs: not with you, not with Febble, but with the diarist. But if you can support the diarist's version of reality, I'd be very interested to know. That's certainly not what I saw that night.

        Election protection: there's an app for that!
        Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

        by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:43:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was wondering where Harvey got those (0+ / 0-)

          numbers from.

          •  from the exits, evidently (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            N in Seattle

            At least one version of Steve's paper has a screen shot of what appears to be the original Ohio exit poll results, with an "Updated: 12:21 a.m." time stamp. I doubt the time is coincidental.

            I really need to stop caring about other people's screwball claims more than they do. Not that I want to care about their claims as little as they do. Hmm. I guess I don't know what I want. :)

            Election protection: there's an app for that!
            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

            by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:35:34 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah, I just went back to the 2004 Edison-Mitofsky (0+ / 0-)

              evalution, and the "composite estimate" was 51.7% for Kerry, which would put him "4 points ahead".

              So I that  pro-rates about "200,000".

              But to imply that the exit poll estimate made at close-of-poll is the same as the number of votes by which Kerry was ahead, and that this was later "flipped" after the "vote count" was "stopped" is blatant misrepresentation.

              No wonder people are confused.

              blergghh

        •  I remember it being close (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          HudsonValleyMark

          on Election Night 2004, but I definitely do not remember Kerry LEADING Bush in Ohio at any time during the night at all, much less by 4 points.

          "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

          by TLS66 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:24:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  yes, it was painfully close (0+ / 0-)

            A lot of us were hoping that late votes from Cuyahoga County would close the gap.

            This is what I find so astonishing. I'm used to seeing election fraud FUD diaries making statements that are objectively false. I'm not used to seeing statements whose wrongness should be seared into the memories of most readers, not as a momentary impression, but for hour after hour.

            This helps us fix electronic voting how? I can't imagine.

            Election protection: there's an app for that!
            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

            by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:43:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I can't believe you wasted time writing this. (9+ / 0-)

    Or a whole book on the subject for that matter.

    No offense.

    Look, the bottom line is that if you believe something like this is in the works, we've got way bigger problems than Mitt Romney and I'm wondering why you'd waste time writing about it. If you actually believed this was possible, you wouldn't be talking about a bottom up change in the election system because at that point, if its gone as far as 9 states outright engaging in unprovable vote fixing, what makes you think there'd be any recourse anywhere within the government system? I'm serious. It's stupid and ridiculous. We would have no ability to change anything at that point because in effect we'd no longer be a democracy. But oh I get it! Vote fixers conspired successfully to literally steal tens of millions of votes surreptitiously in 9 states but suddenly the people rise up and successfully change the voting regulations.

    See how fucking stupid that sounds?

    The only solution to Saddam Hussein-style/ old Soviet-style ection procedures, I'm sorry to say, is a full out revolution. Why don't you write a book about that? Because it outrageous to think the problem could be fixed by....voting out the crooked people or wherever else you're imagining in this half baked scheme.

    No offense. Not that I care. I'm personally sick if these fucking types of diaries. If you really think the GOP could steal nine states this year, I hope you're planning something a bit more - substantial - than awaiting the next election to make changes. Like maybe seeking asylum elsewhere. Or making sure you have provisions for yourself and your family. What you're all tweaked up about is serious. You're talking living in a society where there's no such thing as voting. Think about THAT. And how that would get fixed. Hint: it ain't by voting.

    Fail.

    For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

    by mdmslle on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 02:45:37 AM PDT

    •  I think he thinks this is true (3+ / 0-)

      After 2004, there were widespread predictions in some quarters that Democrats could never win again.

      oops.

      •  of course he thinks it's true. that doesn't mean (3+ / 0-)

        it is or that he didn't waste his time writing this diary and a book about it.

        But more importantly, what I can't understand is that if someone actually believes this is going to happen, why one earth write a book about it? I mean honestly, if we've gone from democracy to Chinese elections in 4 years time, we've got  huge problems. And writing a book about it is not going to help a damned thing.

        I find it hilarious that people who suppose all this tripe propose that the answer is to replace crooked folks with honest ones.

        That. is. just. fucking. dumb.

        If 10's of millions of votes can be systematically discarded nationwide, democracy is lost and nothing short of a revolution is going to change that. I just find shit like this diary laughable.

        For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

        by mdmslle on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 04:33:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is 13 years now per your (0+ / 0-)

          "gone from democracy to Chinese elections in 4 years time..."

          And, for the speed of change in the world, look at 1990 and then go to 2003. The world moved in warp speed.

          The Berlin Wall fell, the Soviet Union crumbled, computers and the internet and technological advances, the numbnut zealot Bush and his neocon cronies ironfisted their way into the White House and the levers of power.

          While the PDBs were ignored by same numbnut Bush so that Bin Laden not only brought down two NYC towers, but he brought the US economy to its knees. And the bankers just laughed while good families were stripped of their livelihoods and their homes without remorse from those Titans of Bushdom.

          So, our democratic undergirdings are critical and too important to fly under the guise of "proprietary secrets" when it comes to our voting machines.  


          In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

          by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:19:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  And by the way, I don't want your stupid book. (5+ / 0-)

    If that was the reason you stopped by.

    300 pages of this diary? I can't think of a worse hell.

    if you really believe the USA is about to switch from a democracy to a dictatorship (or whatever system of government it is that just makes up vote counts and declares the winner to be whomever "they" wanted it to be), you'd be best off making sure you can get out of the country before November 6.

    Have a donut.

    For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

    by mdmslle on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 02:56:02 AM PDT

    •  "*about* to switch?" (0+ / 0-)

      That baby emerged for the world to see in 2000. And again in 2004.

      Harvey lives there in Ohio where the 2004 manipulations took place. He has spent a great of time and money in an attempt to alleviate the suppression of our institutional safeguards that ensure continuation of our democratic backbone.  

      Ken Blackwell worked diligently to suppress the vote of students, minorities, working people and women. His office used its power to implement the suppression and guaranteed continuity of the zealots' silent coup.  

      Harvey is simply providing examples of the methodology used by the conservative zealots who intend to continue with their silent coup. Four years of power installs a lot of zealots in our court, economic and legal systems.


      In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

      by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:04:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No he isn't "simply providing examples (0+ / 0-)

        of the methodology used by the conservative zealots who intend to continue with their silent coup".  He's making shit up.

        He has NO evidence that a governor can electronically flip a state undetectably at dead of night, because there isn't any.  It's scaremongering that distracts attention from the very real problems that Wasserman and his colleagues, to their credit, identified in Ohio in 2004.

        •  ALL 4 of the Election Commissioner seats are EMPTY (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Don midwest

          as of December 2011.

          So, we have no one in charge of watching the voting equipment in our henhouse while the foxes gather.

          And, you know that Harvey was not implying that the Guvs themselves would actually throw some kind of magical switch on election night to flip the state. He laid out the timeline and the weaknesses in our voting system and he theorized what could happen AGAIN and has RECENTLY occurred and is UNDER INVESTIGATION.


          In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

          by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:54:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So why does he say: (0+ / 0-)
            In tandem with the GOP's massive nation-wide disenfranchisement campaign, they could---in the dead of election night---flip their states' electronic votes to Romney and give him a victory in the Electoral College.
            if he doesn't really mean it?

            And why does he, either out of culpable ignorance or deliberate misdirection, imply that because the exit poll tabulations "flipped" between close of poll and later in the evening, that that has anything to do with the count either stopping or flipping?

            •  Because the word "flip" is not what you are (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Don midwest

              interpreting in all of its different points of usage.

              There seems to be a misunderstanding of the meaning and usage of the word and its application.


              In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

              by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:46:17 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Orly? (0+ / 0-)

                So he didn't really mean that 9 governors could put Romney in the White House by flipping " their states' electronic votes to Romney" in "the dead of election night"?

                Then why did he say so?

                To sell a book?

                (And I note that he posted the puff piece before his coauthor had supplied some missing text).

                This is the reality-based community, right?  Or did I knock on the wrong door?

  •  I don't know about other states... (6+ / 0-)

    ...but after all the problems with the purely electronic voting machines in 2000 & 2004, Charlie Crist ordered all FL counties to switch to optical scan voting machines (Marion County, which despite being overwhelmingly religious right Republican, has had a great and very honest supervisor of elections in Dee Brown, and used optical scan machines for years, including in 2000 & 2004).

    Not that the optical machines can't be rigged, but you DO have a paper ballot which you fill out in ink, so there IS a solid paper trail.

    There's a reason the Republicans have switched to throwing up legal roadblocks to voting.

    I vote we run Rick Scott out of Florida on a high-speed rail.

    by ObamOcala on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 03:28:28 AM PDT

  •  There IS "definitive, legally admissable proof" (3+ / 0-)

    its called eye witness testimony. If it happens then someone, almost certainly several someones, did it, saw it done, conspired to do it. If done, then although the machines themselves may have no record, the people who did it do, in their heads. Therefore, in principle this can be prosecuted. Whether it would be is a different question, but until memories can be erased and wagging tongues (and pens) forever silenced, there is in fact an admissible record.

    Just getting a handle on the knobs and dials.... Hey, don't touch that!

    by Old Lefty on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 03:48:09 AM PDT

    •  the idea is not exactly shocking (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Old Lefty

      because of the fraud-produced election results for gwb

      and it's not that we don't allow for the concupiscience of those nine politicians

      but without some catastrophic event, bho is going to have a second term, maybe even in a landslide, so the stink if "electronics" (=mystery to the masses) were to call his election into question, would throw this society into disarray

      and the gop/bluedogdems don't need it, if the people don't vote out their reps and senators that have refused to legislate in their interest

    •  Which is one of the many reasons why (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      librarisingnsf, emelyn, Old Lefty

      the idea that electronic vote-flipping on a result-flipping scale occurred in 2004 is so absurd.

      There is absolutely no evidence that it occurred on that scale, admissible or otherwise.

      Yet the number of people who would have had to have been involved would have been enormous (contra Wasserman's assertion that a few governers could do it in the dead of night and nobody notice).

      •  just stop (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bronte17, Old Lefty
        Yet the number of people who would have had to have been involved would have been enormous (contra Wasserman's assertion that a few governers could do it in the dead of night and nobody notice).
        all it takes is one programmer and his/her "boss."

        "hi.  your voting machines are due for an update.  run this disk."

        Die with your boots on. If you're gonna try, well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

        by Cedwyn on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:09:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not to mention that so many of the people (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cedwyn

          who work in our county clerk's offices are not exactly technological masters.


          In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

          by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:34:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Also, don't move the goal posts (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Old Lefty

            What evidence do you have that electronic vote-flipping on a result-flipping scale occurred in 2004?

            •  Sorry that was meant for Cedwyn (0+ / 0-)

              clicked the wrong reply link, sorry!

            •  i linked to a very exhaustive analysis above (0+ / 0-)

              http://www.dailykos.com/...

              did you even glance at it?

              Die with your boots on. If you're gonna try, well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

              by Cedwyn on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:45:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Glance at it? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                emelyn, Old Lefty

                I even contributed to its final form.

                And it does not conclude that there was electronic vote-flipping on an election-flipping scale in Ohio in 2004.

                It may be that Kerry lost a winning margin by a combination of voter suppression and actual vote altering shenanigans (particularly in punchcard precincts), although my own eventual conclusion was that he probably wouldn't have won even if the playing field had been level.

                But that election in Ohio definitely stank.

                Which is precisely why it annoys the heck out of me when people like Wasserman trivialise it (and misdirect, IMO) by suggesting that an election could be stolen by a single governer flipping a single electronic switch.

                It's far worse than that (because that would be easily detectable).  It's far worse because the voter suppression that went on in Ohio was, it was multi-headed, endemic, and racist.  And causes ranged from carelessness, disrespect for voters, and outright malice.

                If only it were as simple as a bad governor flipping a switch.  

                For which there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE.

        •  No, I will not stop. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          emelyn, Old Lefty

          Explain how one governor flips an entire state, undetected.

          With details, please.

  •  It would be nice if you would abstain from (0+ / 0-)

    letting the 9 governors appear as mighty doomsday machines and focus somewhat more on what can be done to block them from stealing the election.

    I would think OFA is aware of the problem, and may even have some advice how to counter.

    He who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.

    by Sophie Amrain on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 03:49:23 AM PDT

  •  This is why Harvey Wasserman's argument fails: (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Smoh, HudsonValleyMark, fou, dhonig

    There is some, mostly inconclusive, evidence of small-scale electronic vote theft.  There is considerably more evidence of electronic voting errors.  There is a vast amount of evidence of voter suppression.

    Voter suppression does not show up the gap between exit polls and the final count.

    In 2004 there was a vast gap between exit polls and the final count.

    Therefore, people like Wasserman argue, the small amount of inconclusive evidence for small scale electronic vote theft indicates the tip of a vast iceberg.

    BUT: some of the largest exit poll discrepancies were in places like New York, where lever machines, not electronic machines, were used.  And precinct level-totals matched county-level totals.

    Therefore electronic vote-flipping cannot account for the exit poll discrepancy in New York.

    Therefore something else must account for large exit poll discrepancies.

    Therefore large exit poll discrepancies do not indicate that small-scale electronic voting errors, deliberate or otherwise, were the tip of a vast iceberg.

    Therefore the argument that state-level votes can be flipped without detection by a governor has absolutely no evidence or reasoning to support it whatsoever.

    While the very real argument that voter suppression disproportionately affects Democrats is entirely valid, and is smeared by association with unfounded conspiracy theories about massive-scale electonic vote-flipping by an tiny right-wing cabal.

    •  That's making the same sort of logical leap (0+ / 0-)

      the author makes:

      The author basically argues that X could/did happen, therefore X will happen again.

      You're basically arguing that because X can't be an answer in this case, there's no evidence that X plays a role at all.

      We don't want our country back, we want our country FORWARD. --Eclectablog

      by Samer on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:00:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (0+ / 0-)

        The diarists headline is:

        Will 9 GOP Governors Put Romney in the White House?
        specifically by flipping the vote electronically in the dead of night.

        There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE  that such a thing has ever been done and NO EVIDENCE that it is remotely possible.  So far from

        arguing that because X can't be an answer in this case, there's no evidence that X plays a role at all.
        I am arguing that there is no evidence to extrapolate from the small amount of evidence that small-scale electronic vote theft happens (or the much larger amount of evidence that lots of small scale vote theft by all manner of means including the handling of provisional ballots and the destruction of punchcards) that a single person can surreptitiously flip an entire state.

        I repeat: there is NO EVIDENCE for electronic voting fraud on an election-flipping-scale in 2004, nor ANY evidence for any mechanism by which a state could be flipped by a single person, undetectably (or, for that matter, detectably).

        If you disagree, please provide that evidence.

        •  risible (0+ / 0-)

          from the diary:

          Nine Republican governors have the power to put Mitt Romney in the White House, even if Barack Obama wins the popular vote.

          With their secretaries of state, they control the electronic vote count in nine key swing states: Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, New Mexico and Arizona.

          There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that it is remotely possible.
          quite the contrary -- everything we know of hacking and plain old programming tells us it is absolutely possible.  

          there is no third-party review of the voting machine software.  some of the machines collect the voting data in flash drives, with the data to be aggregated elsewhere.  mack trucks could drive through the security loopholes in these crazy systems.

          also, too, the diarist isn't necessarily claiming that the governors in question are working together on anything.  it is true, though, that governors sign off on the certified election results.  i.e., they don't have to be involved directly -- they can further the "cause" by simply looking the other way and signing whatever is placed before them.

          Die with your boots on. If you're gonna try, well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

          by Cedwyn on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:20:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Laugh if you like, but frankly (0+ / 0-)

            until you can actually present a case, my own response is rather weary laughter.

            Give me evidence - any evidence - that votes can be hacked on an election-flipping scale by a single person (governor or whoever) on a single night, and how such a thing, even if possible, would not be detected.

            Remember that votes are tallied at the precinct, and at the county, and finally summed to give the state total.

  •  And regarding exit polls.... (0+ / 0-)

    Here is a diary I wrote in 2008, which might be helpful.

    Harvey, you might like to read it too.

  •  Diaries on this subject this close to an election (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf, cishart, N in Seattle

    bug the shit out of me. If the purpose for being posted at this point in time is to scare the leftwing base to death so they GOTV, I for one would appreciate it if diarists would pick a different scare tactic.

    If we are to believe that after having had 8 to 12 years to address election fraud nothing has been done to prevent the blatant stealing of the 2012 election and that it is as vulnerable to being stolen as ever then it requires us to also believe Obama and Dems have either been grossly negligant or complicit, neither of which seems likely.

    If we're supposed to believe this election can be stolen why shouldn't we then assume that it will be? If the GOP is capable of stealing it, what's to stop them at this late stage? This "Oh if we just GOTV it'll be OK" crap is just crap. If it can be stolen it will be stolen and that takes us to a place where Kossacks get queezy.

    If the election were stolen what are we prepared to do about it? Are we to just roll over and take it if that's what Dem leaders call for? Or do we take to the streets with torches and ptchforks and say "No, this will not stand."? If the latter count me among those willing to fight for justice. Otherwise I give up. It's over. US democracy is dead.

    My suggestion is that any diary claiming this election can or will be stolen via voting machine tampering should include what steps may, should, will be taken in response to such election theft. If it's stolen, what are we going to do about it? Without adding that to the diary, I think it's rather irresponsible to broach the subject at all.

    Ds see human suffering and wonder what they can do to relieve it. Rs see human suffering and wonder how they can profit from it.

    by JTinDC on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 06:17:19 AM PDT

    •  Formulating a problem is important -Reich (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JTinDC, Cedwyn

      The Dems will have thousands of attys monitoring the elections.

      Is there a full court press to ensure accuracy of voting counts?

      Here is Robert Reich:

      4. As they’ve displayed before, the Republican Party will do whatever it can to win — even if it means disenfranchising certain voters. To date, 11 states have enacted voter identification laws, all designed by Republican legislatures and governors to dampen Democratic turnout.
      The GOP is also encouraging what can only be termed “voter vigilante” groups to “monitor polling stations to prevent fraud” – which means intimidating minorities who have every right to vote. We can’t know at this point how successful these efforts may be but it’s a dangerous wildcard. And what about those Diebold voting machines?
      http://robertreich.org/...
  •  Wow! DK truthers out in full force (5+ / 0-)

    I live in Ohio. I was at the black polls in Columbus where people had to stand out in the rain for hours because there were not enough voting machines.

    Here is another book by a man who spent 3 years of his life on the 2004 election in Ohio.

    "Witness to A Crime: A Citizen's Audit of an American Election." by Richard Hays Phillips.

    Richard Hays Phillips worked day and night for three years compiling irrefutable evidence of how the Republicans stole the 2004 presidential race in Ohio. ...
    Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on the cover
    The post claims that there is no way in place to verify election counts by the computers. I didn't see any of the comments rejecting this.

    Where is the Democratic party going all out to make sure that vote counting is done accurately and truthfully and venerable?

    It pains me to see DK resort to these CT claims.

    •  Not sure of your point (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      librarisingnsf

      but I entirely agree that vigilance at the polls is important - and perfectly possible -  and Richard Hays Phillips certainly did a sterling job in doggedly documenting the numerous irregularities in Ohio, including those long lines, and also the scandal of provisional ballots.

      That's why these glib scaremongering assertions that a single person could flip an entire election electronically and unnoticed at dead of night annoy me so much.

  •  As I've said several times (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cedwyn

    something happened in Ohio in 2004 and the Republicans had something to do with it.  I fully believe that John Kasich and Husted will do anything in their power to bring Ohio in for RMoney.  I would not put much of anything past them. If Ohio is within MOE, expect Ohio to go for Romney, regardless of what polls say ahead of time.

  •  there are two things that still concern me (0+ / 0-)

    about this fall's elections. While President Obama and the Democrats have been doing pretty well lately, there's still a lot of time left. And Mittch-A-Sketch Romney and his co-conspirators, like Karl Rove, seem awfully self-satisfied of late.

    The two primary things that concern me are about recent events over the past couple of years.

    The first is the avalanche of money used by Republicans and their corporate co-conspirators to inundate the electorate with character smears against all Democrats in 2010. A few billionaires, using (or is that misusing?) their corporate moneys by secretly funneling it into Super PAC's were, literally, able to simply purchase themselves enough House seats in 2010 to buy themselves the House of Misrepresentatives.  (We here in New York's current 24th District (NY-25 in 2010), know, because our seat was stolen right out from under our eyes in 2010, with a last-minute tsunami of money that took a seat where the Democratic incumbent was comfortably ahead in mid-October to where the Tea Party jihadist (Ann Marie Buerkle) benefitted from Koch brothers and Crossroads money to steal her seat by about 600 votes after a recount.

    A lot of people are diminishing the importance of an avalanche of last-minute, secret, corporate money. But we here in NY-24 know what can happen.

    The second thing that still has me wondering is the recall election of Scott Walker, where the polls showed the race even and even the exit polls showed the race very close...and yet...the final tally wasn't all that close at all.
    Something seemed very odd to me about that, especially since everyone just sort of accepted the answer from the authorities that "there's nothing to see here, just keep moving along."

    •  the WI polls didn't show the race even (0+ / 0-)

      I think Walker led in every poll from late March on. Some polls were closer than others (WeAskAmerica was off in the stratosphere). PPP's last poll had Walker +3.

      Something seemed very odd to me about that, especially since everyone just sort of accepted the answer from the authorities that "there's nothing to see here, just keep moving along."
      I can't figure out what this could mean. Are you saying that you would be less suspicious if other people had seemed more suspicious?

      FWIW, I'm probably one of many people who downloaded the numbers, looked at the turnout pattern, and actually didn't find anything suspicious. Not much to do with accepting an answer from the authorities.

      (In contrast, when I downloaded the numbers from FL-13 in 2006, I freaked. It was immediately obvious, at least prima facie, that Jennings should have won.)

      Election protection: there's an app for that!
      Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

      by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:25:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  every major news organization (0+ / 0-)

        reported that their exit polls showed the race to be a nail-biter. Exit polls. These were polls of people having already just voted. And they were dramatically askew from the final result.

        •  there was only one exit poll (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dhonig

          It's no wonder that every major news organization reported the same thing about it. However, you wrote: "...the polls showed the race even and even the exit polls showed the race very close." The polls did not show the race even.

          As for the exit polls, I still haven't found anyone who will argue that Kerry won Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania all by 14-15 points, or at least very close, as estimated in the exit polls. Those were polls of people who just voted, too.

          Election protection: there's an app for that!
          Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

          by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 05:20:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

          they were.

          (Except that as HudsonValleyMark points out, they were all the same poll).

          Including in New York, by a far larger amount.

          Do you think that vast numbers of votes were electronically flipped in New York?

          •  yes...polls can sometimes be wrong (0+ / 0-)

            ...but exit polls aren't usually that wrong. In the case you've cited, there was not a statewide attempt by Republican officials to deliberately attempt to disenfranchise as many voters as possible.

            Perhaps you're right...Scott Walker, who vowed he would do everything possible to hold onto office, received massive amounts of secret corporate money to do so, in order to continue to do the bidding of the Koch brothers and their billionaire co-conspirators, was, according to most polls, in a very close race right up until election day; and then...on election day, the exit polls which showed the race to be nail-bitingly close...were dramatically off.

            Perhaps it was just a coincidence. Lets give Walker the benefit of the doubt. Because his actions of governor show him to be an honorable person above things like this.

  •  Totally discredited Conspiracy Theory (5+ / 0-)

    There were election shenanigans in 2000 and 2004, but the all-electronic voting machines are gone. California SOS Debra Bowen led the charge to decertify them. The remaining electronic voting machines record all votes on a roll of paper, which is quite auditable. It is no longer possible to rig the vote in the way it was.

    I have worked on this issue as a Founding Member of the Open Voting Consortium. We have a design for Free/Open Source Software for electronic ballot printers, so that we would have a publicly verifiable system, with the benefits of the electronic system (preventing overvoting and stray marks completely, and reducing undervoting) and also of the pure paper ballot, with additional security features. There is no interest in our system within the current political system, so we have suspended operations.

    America—We built that!

    by Mokurai on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:09:28 AM PDT

    •  wait a minute... how can you make accusations of (0+ / 0-)

      "totally discredited Conspiracy Theory" when you then immediately turn around and say "there were election 'shenanigans' in 2000 and 2004..."

      And using the word "shenanigans" to describe disenfranchisement and voter suppression and outright discarding of legitimate votes is whitewashing the actual words that should be used.

      As for your claim that "the all-electronic voting machines are gone" ... uh... you got proof of that?

      This nation went on a spending binge to buy new voting machines from Diebold and others. I'm not sure of the exact cost, but I can almost guaran-damn-tee that all of those new machines were NOT junked and replaced.

      This country has just went through an economic meltdown where we have 18%+ actual unemployment. I know the money isn't there for voting machines when we can't even fix our roads and our bridges are OUT.

      And what about the "proprietary software" that is one of the core underlying issues?


      In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

      by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:32:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Because the theory (well supported) that there (0+ / 0-)

        were election shenanigans in 2000 and 2004 is not the same as the theory that it is possible for a single governor to flip a state at dead of night, electronically and undetectably.

        The second is thing is "totally discredited Conspiracy Theory".  The first is all too well-attested.

        •  umm... you know that the Guvs don't just (0+ / 0-)

          snap their fingers at midnight on election night and turn our country into a pumpkin.

          And the "electronically and undetected" part is certainly true because of the "proprietary software" protections built into our voting machines.

          In fact, there are still "anomalies" in our voting machines and federal election commissions are monitoring it as best as one commission can do.


          In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

          by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:46:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, I do know that - it's my point. (0+ / 0-)

            Nor secretaries of state for elections.

            But you can't flip a switch on tens of thousands of voting machines at midnight.

            And you can also be vigilant and make sure the precinct tallies match the county tabulations, in case anyone tries any fancy footwork at county level.

            I entirely agree that electronic  voting machines are an abomination, and I am doing my best to discourage their adoption here in the UK.  I certainly think you need an auditable paper trail, and also a good mandatory random audit system.

            But that's not what Wasserman's post is about.  It's about a fantasy horror story that is IMO a complete distraction based on no evidence whatsoever.

            •  The SOS and Guv offices go hand-in-hand (0+ / 0-)

              As has been noted, the SOS can and does decertify, suppress, manipulate and jimmy-rig votes and the voters casting them.

              And, as the voting system relies on software that can be and has been proven to be remotely hacked, as well as the removable hardware vote storage components that are not secure and a lack of paper trails, it isn't a "Guv switch flip" that Harvey notes so much as built-in corruptive mechanisms.


              In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

              by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:39:23 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  nope, they aren't all gone (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Febble, N in Seattle
        This nation went on a spending binge to buy new voting machines from Diebold and others. I'm not sure of the exact cost, but I can almost guaran-damn-tee that all of those new machines were NOT junked and replaced.
        It varies from state to state; I can't tell where Mokurai had in mind.

        If we were going to have an intelligent discussion about voting systems, it wouldn't begin with the premise that 9 GOP governors can put Romney in the White House.

        As for the assertion that John Kerry had a 4-point lead in Ohio's "initial vote tabulation" at 12:20 on election night, that's just bizarre. I would think that well over half of Kossacks would know from personal experience that that is untrue -- unless they suppose that the "MSM" was reporting something other than the vote tabulations.

        But some states are voting partly or entirely on unauditable voting systems -- and some states with auditable paper trails have lousy audit and recount provisions.

        Election protection: there's an app for that!
        Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

        by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:17:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, since I closely followed the OH election (0+ / 0-)

          results that night... and watched as Pickaway County recorded more votes that there were voters... even IF every single person in that county were to go out and vote... and my son had to spend one week repairing his high school's newspaper website after it was hacked because he posted videos showing the voter suppressions of Ohio... I'd say the allegations of tampering with the vote tabulations has solid evidence behind it and is not bizarre conspiracy theory.

          As for the "9 Guvs" who can put Romney in the White House... Harvey categorically states that the Sec of States and their statewide apparatus is most certainly under the control of these radical Governors (who have proven themselves radicals).

          It is in the realm of possibilities.

          Furthermore, Diebold is NOT gone. Harvey is mistaken on that point. It was simply sold and its negative image rebranded with a new company and name.

          AND that new company that bought out Diebold, Election Systems Software, was under investigation just 9 months ago because of "operational anomalies" in their optical scanners.

          ES&S is a subsidiary of McCarthy Group, LLC, which is jointly held by the holding firm and the Omaha World-Herald Company, the publisher of Nebraska's largest newspaper. As of 2007 it was the largest manufacturer of voting machines in the United States, claiming customers in 1,700 localities. As of 2007 it had approximately 350 employees; 2005 revenues were $117 million.[1] In December 2011, the Election Assistance Commission issued a formal notice of investigation into the DS200 Precinct Count Optical Scanner because of three operational anomalies.[2]


          In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

          by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 09:42:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  then please present the solid evidence (0+ / 0-)

            Since you closely watched the results on election night, maybe you can help me fact-check whether Kerry was ahead by 200,000 votes at 12:20 on election night, as the diary claims.

            watched as Pickaway County recorded more votes that there were voters
            I have no way of knowing what you're referring to, but it isn't borne out in the official returns. Pickaway County's turnout wasn't even especially high.
            my son had to spend one week repairing his high school's newspaper website after it was hacked because he posted videos showing the voter suppressions of Ohio
            I regret that, but to be honest, citing it doesn't strengthen the case.
            Harvey categorically states
            I don't accept "Harvey's" categorical statements as evidence -- and, if you don't remember Kerry leading by 200,000 votes at 12:20 AM, neither should you.

            It's true that Diebold's equipment still is in use, and that it is as bad as ever (more or less), and that ES&S equipment is bad too. The screwball allegations of a SmarTech hack appear to have nothing to do with any of that.

            Election protection: there's an app for that!
            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

            by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:06:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Harvey is the one in the middle of the lawsuit (0+ / 0-)

              I don't have access to discovery and the documents.

              So, the "200,000 votes at 12:20 AM" evidence can't come from my end. Supposedly that is from "exit polls" information as far as I ascertain.

              And, considering that I don't work in this field and my supporting evidence of watching the Pickaway County HUGE discrepancies tally up (just like in Gahanna where 4,258 ballots were cast FOR BUSH when only 638 people voted), it happened across Ohio and there were many first-hand observers who watched it (me included).

              From Salon:

              "Ultimately, however, it is the GOP's computerized control of the vote count that may have been decisive. ....

              4,258 ballots for Bush in a precinct where just 638 people voted. Voting machines in Youngstown and Columbus lit up for Bush when Kerry's name was pushed. Rural Republican precincts registered more than 100% turnouts, while inner city Democratic ones went as low as 7%. Warren County declared a "Homeland Security" alert, removed the ballot count from public scrutiny, then recorded a huge, unlikely margin for Bush.

              --snip--

              ... It has now become widely known that the same web-hosting firm that served a range of GOP websites, including the one for the Republican National Committee, also hosted the official site that Blackwell used to report the Ohio vote count.

                 "There were four key phases to the GOP's election theft strategy:

                  "Prior to the election, the GOP focused on massive voter disenfranchisement, with a selective reduction of voter turnout in urban Democratic strongholds. Blackwell issued confusing and contradictory edicts on voter eligibility, registration requirements, and provisional ballots; on shifting precinct locations; on denial and misprinting of absentee ballots, and more. Among other things, election officials, including Bennett, stripped nearly 300,000 voters from registration rolls in heavily Democratic areas in Cleveland, Cincinnati and Toledo.

                  "On election day, the GOP focussed on voter intimidation, denial of voting rights to legally eligible ex-felons, denial of voting machines to inner city precincts, malfunctioning of those machines, destruction of provisional ballots and more.

                  "In Franklin, Cuyahoga and other urban counties, huge lines left mostly African-American voters waiting in the rain for three hours and more. A Democratic Party survey shows more than 100,000 voters failed to vote due to these lines, which plagued heavily Democratic inner city precincts (but not Republican suburban ones) throughout the state. The survey shows another 50,000 ballots may have been discarded at the polling stations. In addition, to this day, more than 100,000 machine-rejected and provisional ballots remain uncounted. The official Bush margin of victory was less than 119,000 votes.


              In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

              by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:26:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  But those quotations are from Wasserman and (0+ / 0-)

                Fitrakis!

                No-one is disputing that this is what Wasserman claims.  What we are disputing is whether he has any basis for his claim.

                I know of no evidence for the claim that "Ultimately, however, it is the GOP's computerized control of the vote count that may have been decisive", and it's not for want of looking.

                •  Diebold's and ES&S's corruption and manipulation (0+ / 0-)

                  are well documented. By people other than just Harvey.

                  Academics and computer wiz people have fully documented the ease of hacking the protected "proprietary" software upon which our democratic model rests.

                  This isn't just Harvey Wasserman claims.


                  In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

                  by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 10:49:29 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm not disputing that electronic machines are (0+ / 0-)

                    hackable.

                    What I'm disputing is the headline claim of this diary that a single person could flip an election at dead of night, electronically, and undetectably.

                    And that there is any evidence for result-flipping election fraud in 2004

                    •  And the diarist and all his previous work (0+ / 0-)

                      demonstrate the steps taken along the path to election night.

                      It's a figure of speech to say "the Guv flips the election." It's technically accurate, but there are many steps and peripheral components involved.


                      In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

                      by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 05:55:34 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  And Romney didn't really mean that 47% (0+ / 0-)

                        were moochers.

                        Sorry, but this diary is misleading to the point of dishonesty IMO, if he did mean what you say he means, and simply dishonest if you take his words as they are written.

              •  mmm (0+ / 0-)

                You don't have access to the lawsuit documents, no. But the question remains why you think "the allegations of tampering with the vote tabulations has solid evidence behind it." Where is this evidence? It is no more up to Wasserman to support your claims than it is up to you to support his.

                With respect to election night, I don't think you need access to documents. If you were watching on election night, you should have some idea what you saw. I'm not saying that you have to, but I'm genuinely curious. That aside, if the figure is "supposedly" from exit poll information, then isn't the diary dead wrong on that point?

                my supporting evidence of watching the Pickaway County HUGE discrepancies tally up
                But you haven't presented any evidence of watching discrepancies in Pickaway County. Assuming for the sake of argument that you saw some website display an impossible vote count, how would that even tend to discredit the official returns from Pickaway County, which show about 23,000 votes cast out of about 30,000 registered voters?

                The error in Gahanna was obvious -- and it was corrected. If Rove stole the election, he obviously didn't do it that way.

                Election protection: there's an app for that!
                Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 11:25:08 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  We're talking 10 years ago AND we're talking (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jethrock

                  on the internet not a court of law AND I don't always take the time anymore to spend on supporting argumentation that is easily found by researching this site alone.

                  Pickaway County was a glaring anomaly. That county in particular stuck in my mind because I'm from Columbus and know the area well... AND my brother lived in Pickaway County. Built both of his homes out there. And, my academic background is international relations and political economics. So, I'm not pulling shit out of my ass for the fun of it.

                  There are no "allegations" that votes were tampered with... Blackwell threw away absentee ballots. Blackwell manipulated voting machines and precinct boundaries such that people who stood in line for hours to get up to the sign-in book for voting were then told that their voting place was across the street. So, they would have to start all over again.

                  Those "allegations" of "voter tampering" are so blatant as to be shameful. And Blackwell is a disgraced man for lending his hand to this suppression.

                  And there's plenty more where those examples come from.


                  In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

                  by bronte17 on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 06:07:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  if only that were true (0+ / 0-)
                    supporting argumentation that is easily found by researching this site alone.
                    The truth is that people have been banned from Daily Kos for insisting that someone, somewhere, somehow proved that the Ohio election was stolen, but being unable to provide supporting evidence. (N.B.: Not supporting evidence that people were disenfranchised in Ohio -- as far as I know, everybody agrees about that.) If I thought supporting evidence had ever been supplied, here or anywhere else, I would present it myself. I'm not suggesting that anyone should be banned, but it is pretty frustrating, in 2012, that I have to point out to someone with a UID less than half of mine that you haven't exactly won the argument here, and that extraordinary claims still demand extraordinary evidence.

                    I don't question your motivation. I do point out that you haven't supported many of your claims. I've studied IR and political economy myself; the standards of argument aren't all that different.

                    You say that Pickaway County was a glaring anomaly; I cited evidence that it wasn't. It's possible that we are both right, but you haven't presented anything that could convince me of anything.

                    The things you say about Blackwell aren't pertinent to the claim under discussion. The topic at hand isn't that Blackwell misallocated voting machines, or moved precinct boundaries, or even threw out absentee ballots (whatever you have in mind by that), but that there was tampering with the vote tabulations. You haven't supported that claim, and neither has the diarist. On the contrary, you appear to concede that a central claim in the diary that purports to be about the "vote tabulation" actually is about the exit polls. That's the difference between "300,000 votes" and a bunch of interviews; it's the difference between strong evidence and terrible evidence. It's a real problem.

                    Election protection: there's an app for that!
                    Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                    by HudsonValleyMark on Sun Sep 23, 2012 at 08:36:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  we respectfully disagree... (0+ / 0-)

                      we've now written five books on this.  if you like, i'll send you a free copy of the new e-book WILL THE GOP STEAL AMERICA'S 2012 ELECTION.

                      you may not accept what we say as proof.  but we have hardly made this case lightly.  bob is a dr. of political science & a practicing licensed attorney.  i have an ma in us history and have authored or co-authored a dozen books, and have taught history extensively.

                      i grew up in ohio and bob has been here 20 years.  we saw this election stolen before our eyes.  if you want to dismiss our evidence, you are entitled to your opinion...but not your facts.  

                      so i'm happy to have you read our latest book and report back.

                      •  And nor are you entitled to your own facts, Harvey (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        dhonig

                        You've written some very interesting stuff on the 2004 Ohio election, which, as I think everyone here agrees, stank.

                        One of my own analyses (of voting machine provision in Franklin) made it into Greg Palast's book, IIRC.

                        Richard Hayes Phillips also wrote a fascinating account, and unearthed some truly shocking facts.

                        But being right about many things doesn't give you immunity from being wrong about others, and it certainly doesn't give you the right to headline your diary with sensationalist speculation based on no evidence whatsover.  You contaminate a good case for piecemeal, widespread corruption, fraud and suppression by trying to sell it with a case for which there is simply no support.

                        And you compound your error by deliberately (I cannot imagine that it is due to ignorance) conflating early estimates of the count derived from the exit polls with actual counts, and suggest, pretty mendaciously IMO, that the "vote count" stopped, then flipped.  The vote count stopped?  The vote count didn't stop - what "stopped" was the exit poll estimate, which was then re-posted after reweighting in line with the incoming polls.

                        As it was done everywhere, including New York.  If you don't think hundreds of thousands of votes were stolen in New York, then you need to explain the exit poll discrepancy there by other means.  And once you have done that, there is no reason to supposes that that explanation doesn't hold equally true in Ohio.

                        Elizabeth Liddle.

                      •  why don't you send me a copy? (0+ / 0-)

                        In the meantime, why don't you reply to my substantive rebuttal? Bob's Ph.D. doesn't give him or you carte blanche to confuse exit poll results with vote tabulations. This isn't rocket science.

                        Yes, you've been churning this stuff out for years, and some of it is OK, but overall, you've lost the debate, and that is because your arguments are weak. If you have better arguments, by all means present them.

                        Election protection: there's an app for that!
                        Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                        by HudsonValleyMark on Mon Sep 24, 2012 at 03:01:36 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  Condescension, smugness, snobbery. Ho hum. (0+ / 0-)

                      Hang in there, Bronte. As a neutral reader, I can see you're making solid points based on your own observations from Ohio at the time.

                      HudsonValleyMark writes:

                      "it is pretty frustrating, in 2012, that I have to point out to someone with a UID less than half of mine that you haven't exactly won the argument here"
                      This is his standard ploy when he feels he is losing an argument, to question his opponent's credentials. Followed closely by boasting about his own supposed expertise. Like so:
                      "I've studied IR and political economy myself"
                      I point this out only because it's so tedious to read his many condescending comments belittling anyone who dares to disagree with his self-made claims of expertise on election trickery. He's a troll who clearly spends hours and hours supposedly "debunking" every suspicion of election fraud, but actually highjacking the conversation into pointless side issues designed only to insult others and stir up anger.

                      Don't let yourself get sidetracked or upset. Don't take the troll bait. He's not convincing anyone with his condescension, smugness, and snobbery.

                      "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." - FDR

                      by itsnotbutter on Tue Sep 25, 2012 at 01:27:13 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Sweet georgia10 posted the definitive diary (0+ / 0-)

                      on this issue on this site.

                      Armando's Challenge or The Informed Citizen's Guide to the 2004 Election

                      It begins as thus:

                      A patient walks into his doctor's office.

                      "Doc, I'm really sick.  I have a tumor the size of an orange growing here, I'm constantly nauseated, tired, throwing up all the time, unexplained weight loss...My dad died of cancer...and I think I might have it too."

                      "How do you know you have cancer?"

                      "Well, I have all the symptoms...Something is seriously wrong with me, Doc.  Can you run a test or something?"

                      "Look, I'm not going to investigate your illness unless you prove to me you have cancer."

                      "But...that's what the test is for..."

                      "Do you think you have cancer?"

                      "Maybe.  Yeah."

                      "Can you prove it to me?"

                      "Well, no...but...that's why I came here, so you can test me..."

                      "Then you're out of luck.  Come back to me when you can prove to me you're dying."

                      --snip--

                       In a few days, Congress will likely approve the slate of Electors from Ohio.  For those of us who have been investigating the election in Ohio, that day will be a sad and tragic day for America.

                      For in approving those Electors without due consideration of all the "statistical oddities", coordinated voter suppression, abuse of power, and fraudulent activity, is to essentially proclaim "We, as Americans, are comfortable with a diseased democracy."


                      In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

                      by bronte17 on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 01:49:53 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

  •  Snyder's been "not awful" on voting issues (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Febble

    I wouldn't paint Michigan's Rethug governor with quite the same brush as some of the other odious "luminaries" listed.  He vetoed actions to curtail voting rights that were passed by the right wing legislature (who's harder-right than Snyder is).  The SoS has been playing some typical right-wing voter disenfranchisement games, but that's largely been independent of the governor.  

    Besides, I really doubt they could screw up enough votes to make Romney win Michigan.  There've been a lot of polls suggesting that Michigan is some kind of horse race, trying to stir up people, but it never really has been close.  Obama wins by MI by about 10 points.

Click here for the mobile view of the site