OHIO: Analysis points to election corruption

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • FORD
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    • Jan 2004
    • 59558

    OHIO: Analysis points to election corruption

    Analysis points to election corruption

    Group says chance of exit polls being so wrong in '04 vote is one-in-959,000

    By Stephen Dyer
    Beacon Journal staff writer

    There's a one-in-959,000 chance that exit polls could have been so wrong in predicting the outcome of the 2004 presidential election, according to a statistical analysis released Thursday.

    Exit polls in the November election showed Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., winning by 3 percent, but President George W. Bush won the vote count by 2.5 percent.

    The explanation for the discrepancy that was offered by the exit polling firm -- that Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polling -- is an ``implausible theory,'' according to the report issued Thursday by US Count Votes, a group that claims it's made up of about two dozen statisticians.

    Twelve -- including a Case Western Reserve University mathematics instructor -- signed the report.

    Instead, the data support the idea that ``corruption of the vote count occurred more freely in districts that were overwhelmingly Bush strongholds.''

    The report dismisses chance and inaccurate exit polling as the reasons for their discrepancy with the results.

    They found that the one hypothesis that can't be ruled out is inaccurate election results.

    ``The hypothesis that the voters' intent was not accurately recorded or counted... needs further investigation,'' it said.

    The conclusion drew a yawn from Ohio election officials, who repeated that the discrepancy issue was settled when the polling firms Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International disavowed its polls because Kerry voters were more likely to answer exit polls -- the theory Thursday's report deemed ``implausible.''

    Ohio has been at the center of a voter disenfranchisement debate since the election.

    ``What are you going to do except laugh at it?'' said Carlo LoParo, spokesman for Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, who's responsible for administering Ohio's elections and is a Republican candidate for governor. ``We're not particularly interested in (the report's findings). We wish them luck, but hope they find something more interesting to do.''

    Yeah, you know giving a shit about legal elections is so boring. We'd rather be fascists. Yawn......

    The statistical analysis, though, shows that the discrepancy between polls and results was especially high in precincts that voted for Bush -- as high as a 10 percent difference.

    The report says if the official explanation -- that Bush voters were more shy about filling out exit polls in precincts with more Kerry voters -- is true, then the precincts with large Bush votes should be more accurate, not less accurate as the data indicate.

    The report also called into question new voting machine technologies.

    ``All voting equipment technologies except paper ballots were associated with large unexplained exit poll discrepancies all favoring the same party, (which) certainly warrants further inquiry,'' the report concludes.

    However, LoParo remained unimpressed.

    ``These (Bush) voters have been much maligned by outside political forces who didn't like the way they voted,'' he said. ``The weather's turning nice. There are more interesting things to do than beat a dead horse.''

    Yeah, how dare you people object to us stealing the election. Now go play in the sun.... God what an arrogant fascist asshole. Hmmm.... LaPore..... LoParo.... funny how these election fixing Republican shitbags always have similar names

    Stephen Dyer can be reached at 330-996-3523 or sdyer@thebeaconjournal.com
    Eat Us And Smile

    Cenk For America 2024!!

    Justice Democrats


    "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992
  • BigBadBrian
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    • Jan 2004
    • 10625

    #2
    “If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush

    Comment

    • Big Train
      Full Member Status

      • Apr 2004
      • 4013

      #3
      Ford,

      For the MILLIONETH time...WHAT is SOOO hard about demonstrating with a voting machine?

      I'm sure they are all great with stats, but stats can be skewed as any student would tell you.

      Show me with a machine or let it go...

      Comment

      • Nickdfresh
        SUPER MODERATOR

        • Oct 2004
        • 49563

        #4
        Originally posted by BigBadBrian
        Very mature BigBadBlunder! But IF this is true, you SHOULD BE FUCKING CRYING, as a Republican! Crying for the death of your democracy and the threat to the Republic!

        Simply put, EVERYBODY GETS A RECEIPT NEXT TIME AFTER VOTING IN EACH ELECTION USING AN ELECTRONIC BALLOT MACHINE!

        Comment

        • BigBadBrian
          TOASTMASTER GENERAL
          • Jan 2004
          • 10625

          #5
          Originally posted by Nickdfresh
          Very mature BigBadBlunder! But IF this is true, you SHOULD BE FUCKING CRYING, as a Republican! Crying for the death of your democracy and the threat to the Republic!

          Simply put, EVERYBODY GETS A RECEIPT NEXT TIME AFTER VOTING IN EACH ELECTION USING AN ELECTRONIC BALLOT MACHINE!
          You're easy.
          “If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush

          Comment

          • Nickdfresh
            SUPER MODERATOR

            • Oct 2004
            • 49563

            #6
            Originally posted by BigBadBrian
            You're easy.
            Iwas going to make a joke there, but I'll take the high road.

            Comment

            • BigBadBrian
              TOASTMASTER GENERAL
              • Jan 2004
              • 10625

              #7
              Originally posted by Nickdfresh
              Iwas going to make a joke there, but I'll take the high road.
              I doubt it. Your brain isn't that quick.
              “If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush

              Comment

              • Big Train
                Full Member Status

                • Apr 2004
                • 4013

                #8
                Here is an article you'd like Ford...



                September 28, 2003

                Diebold Machines

                Agonist Exclusive
                Diebold Machines and Your Vote


                by creativelcro and quietBill

                With the emergence of paperless billing and online banking, many of us save considerable effort, time and money every month. The transition to digital information has gone well beyond paying bills or taxes, and booking airline flights. Virtually all aspects of our lives are affected. Not surprisingly, the same technological shift has been occurring in the field of voting machines, accelerated by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) passed by Congress at the end of 2002.

                No paper trail.

                While differing in implementation, these systems share a crucial feature: all information about the votes is stored exclusively in digital format. The crucial difference from more traditional voting systems (e.g., punch card and optical scan machines) is that those systems keep the original vote in a physical form (usually paper) that can be directly verified by the voter. This "paper trail" can later be used during a recount, if the need were to arise.

                A recount is generally possible with Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines, but what is recounted is simply what the machine recorded in the first place and this can be quite different from the intended vote.

                Discrepancies arise through a number of factors, ranging from machine malfunction to malicious tampering with its software. Without the hard-copy redundancy offered by traditional voting systems, performing an independent audit is virtually impossible.

                Not just theory

                The importance of having such audits has been demonstrated in real life cases where problems with voting and counting machines were suspected. In a primary election in Clay County Kansas (August 2002), Roy Jennings defeated the incumbent, Jerry Mayo, by 22 votes. However, a hand recount, which was possible because of the use of optical scan machines, revealed that Mayo was the winner by a landslide: 540 votes to 175. In one ward, which Mayo carried 242-78, the computer had reversed the totals.

                Although this County used optical scan machines, the problem becomes even more serious and insidious when voting systems are less transparent and more complex. With DRE voting systems there is no possibility of a meaningful recount.
                Significant effect.

                In the upcoming California recall election, on October 7, about 10% of the votes in the area are expected to be acquired by means of Touch screen (DRE) voting machines. They are manufactured by the 3 main companies in the election business: Sequoia Edge Touchscreen (4.8%), Diebold Accu-Vote-TS Touchscreen (4.4%), and ES&S iVotronic Touchscreen (.6%).

                The percentage of DRE machines is likely to rise in the near future. With many elections being close calls and falling within the statistical margin of error (Florida is a painful reminder), a 10% deviation can make an enormous difference.

                Who can test?

                In the absence of independent verification, it is essential that all aspects of the inner workings of these machines be thoroughly tested, even more so than with more traditional machines. Unfortunately, there is strong reason to believe that such testing is not carried out in a thorough manner, as will be demonstrated below.

                Since the software and hardware in these DRE machines is proprietary, only certification labs, Independent Test Authorities (ITAs) specified by the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED), can examine them to ensure that they satisfy the Federal Voting Systems Standards (FVSS) formulated by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

                Currently, the only ITA qualified to test hardware and firmware is the Wyle Laboratories, whereas ITAs qualified to test software are Ciber Inc. and SysTest Labs, LLC. Like the source code, the results of the tests by the ITAs are not available to the public. Essentially, the system is set up to be based on trust: the public is supposed to trust that a DRE system will record their vote faithfully. This is unacceptable and completely unverifiable.

                The Johns Hopkins Test.

                Recent events gave an independent team the unique opportunity to actually examine and test the source code of one of these DRE machines, the AccuVote-TS voting system, made by Diebold Election Systems Inc. A system certified to comply with FEC/NASED voting system standards. Indeed, in January 2003 a copy of Diebold’s source code was found on a publicly available FTP site owned by Diebold, The discovery was announced, much to Diebold’s chagrin, on Bev Harris’ site: http://www.blackboxvoting.org. On July 24th, a team of computer scientists from Johns Hopkins and Rice Universities, led by Dr. Avi Rubin at Johns Hopkins, completed and released a report on their analysis of the source code (at least, the unencrypted parts). The results in this report were devastating as a myriad of serious programming flaws and security problems were discovered. Importantly, some of the most obvious flaws in the code had already been pointed out years before by Dr. Douglas Jones, Chair of the Iowa Board of Examiners for Voting Machines and Electronic Voting Systems, at a time when the code belonged to Global Election Systems (GES), later acquired by Diebold. Jones actually called for the de-certification of Diebold direct recording system, after reading the Rubin report.

                Since there are currently 33,000 working AccuVote-TS voting machines manufactured by Diebold around the country (and the number is been steadily rising as a result of HAVA) the results of this analysis has fundamental and potentially devastating implications for future elections.

                The Maryland story: an Enron-like "audit?"

                Maryland is a case in point. Currently at the center of a controversy, Maryland purchased 5000 such machines in March 2002 (at a cost of $17 million) and has signed an agreement to purchase another 11,000 at a cost of $55.6 million. The Rubin report, mentioned above, prompted Maryland Gov. Robert L. Erhlich Jr. to hire Science Applications International (SAIC) to perform an independent risk assessment on Diebold’s machines. The risk assessment was performed from August 5th through August 26th 2003 and the 200-page report was delivered to State officials on Sep 2.

                After substantial redacting, the report was made public on September 24th. The SAIC found 328 security weaknesses, 26 of them being critical, and concluded “the system, as implemented in policy, procedure, and technology, is at high risk of compromise.” Thomas W. Swidarski, president of Diebold Election Systems claimed there were no problems: “We are pleased to be moving forward. The thorough system assessment conducted by SAIC verifies that the Diebold voting station provides an unprecedented level of election security. [...] Maryland has established a new standard of excellence for the electronic voting process. Diebold Election Systems looks forward to supporting the state as it strives to be a leader in election reform in this country." The report provided 17 recommendations to “mitigate” the risks. And despite the report Maryland decided to proceed with its $55.6 million contract to purchase the 11,000 machines. In doing so they completely disregarded the inherent flaws with these voting machines.
                A cover-up?

                Given that only a small portion of the report was released “for security reasons” it is not surprising that many people have been left with the suspicion that there has been a major cover-up. Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Chairman Brian E. Frosh (D-Dist. 16) of Chevy Chase called for public hearings into the SAIC report and asked why the Ehrlich administration released only 69 of the 200-page report: "You don't inspire confidence by saying, 'We know we have a lousy system but we're going to fix and it, and by the way, we're not going to tell you all the problems we've found and how we are fixing them. It looks terrible. It looks like you are trying to hide something."

                This suspicion is deepened by numerous “redactions” that appear to be random and unnecessary. For instance, what version of the software was tested? Since the version number was redacted, we don't know. Why was information about the function of the voting system redacted? Again, this remains a mystery.

                Further suspicions have been fomented by apparent conflicts of interest that are currently being investigated. The credibility of Diebold has been badly shaken by the content of internal memos leaked by a Diebold insider. This is particularly disturbing, since the attitude of these companies is that people, including Election Board Examiners, should simply trust them, despite the droves of evidence that they have not merited such trust.

                It is important to note that the SAIC report does not even consider the issue of adding a paper trail to the Diebold machines. This should be a necessary precondition for any electronic voting. Given all these problems, the existence of an independent paper trail seems like a minimum, low-tech, and reasonably affordable way of providing some insurance against high-tech mistakes and fraud, as argued by most computer scientists.

                Defying rational explanation, the encryption and password upgrades will be made only for the machines destined for Maryland, per the Diebold Election Systems Director of Voting Industry. They will not be available for the 33,000 touch-screen machines already in use elsewhere. Despite over 300 flaws identified by the SAIC report, 26 of which are extremely critical, it looks like Georgia will use more than 20,000 flawed machines. Several counties for the recall vote in California will use a voting system that is, quoting the SAIC report: at high risk of compromise.

                What’s Next?

                We, as voters, have gotten the Diebold machines basically by chance. There is no apparent reason to believe that ES&S or Sequoia are any better, especially in the absence of more stringent standards. None of the systems have a paper trail, and the FEC standards in place are from 1990, predating these issues of transparency. The standards are voluntary, although many states have adopted them. New FEC standards are due to be released by the end of this year -- too late for the 2004 election. Do you think your vote is safe?





                So, 5000 machines/17 million. Your telling me the DNC doesn't have $3,700 laying around (If my math is right, early in the AM)? Or for that matter 17 million? Howard Dean lights his cigars with $3,700.00.

                I find it HIGHLY odd that such an obvious and relatively easy thing to do HAS NOT been done. Explain to me why the Democratic leadership has not pursued this is this is absolutely the cause in their mind? Why not moveon.bitch? Hell, a bunch of college "radicals" could come up with that kind of money.

                Like I have said many many times, I'm willing to be shown, but nobody seems to want to show. I find that curious...

                Comment

                • BigBadBrian
                  TOASTMASTER GENERAL
                  • Jan 2004
                  • 10625

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Big Train
                  The Rubin report, mentioned above, prompted Maryland Gov. Robert L. Erhlich Jr. to hire Science Applications International (SAIC) to perform an independent risk assessment on Diebold’s machines. The risk assessment was performed from August 5th through August 26th 2003 and the 200-page report was delivered to State officials on Sep 2.


                  Does anyone recognize SAIC? They are the ones that botched the FBI's $170 Million Dollar new software program that has been in the works for the last three years. Yeah, they are well qualified to invesigate problems with Diebold.

                  On the flip side, it's great to have a a software engineering background.
                  “If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush

                  Comment

                  • FORD
                    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

                    • Jan 2004
                    • 59558

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Big Train
                    Ford,

                    For the MILLIONETH time...WHAT is SOOO hard about demonstrating with a voting machine?

                    I'm sure they are all great with stats, but stats can be skewed as any student would tell you.

                    Show me with a machine or let it go...
                    The demonstration was done live on a CNBC talk show last summer called "Topic A with Tina Brown". The guest host for that episode was Governor Howard Dean. I can't find a clip of the actual video. The one site that had the entire show is mysteriously "missing" this segment, so the BCE probably hacked it.

                    But a complete transcript of the episode is located here complete with several screen caps of the Diebold hacking.

                    Eat Us And Smile

                    Cenk For America 2024!!

                    Justice Democrats


                    "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

                    Comment

                    • knuckleboner
                      Crazy Ass Mofo
                      • Jan 2004
                      • 2927

                      #11
                      1 in 959,000?

                      um...it's been a while since i took stats, but that seems AWFULLY high for a sample with a margin of error of around 3%. effectively, the exit polls were 2.5% off of the actual value.

                      while that's unlikely (assuming a perfect sample, which exit polls are not) i sincerely doubt that there's only a 1 in 959,000 chance that the sample would be 2.5% off of the actual result.

                      there is a 1 in 1 chance this article's math is shady...

                      Comment

                      • Phil theStalker
                        Full Member Status

                        • Jan 2004
                        • 3843

                        #12
                        BBB,

                        Enjoy yourself.

                        Tit's later than you think.


                        Add to Ignore list

                        Comment

                        • Cathedral
                          ROTH ARMY ELITE
                          • Jan 2004
                          • 6621

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Phil theStalker
                          BBB,

                          Enjoy yourself.

                          Tit's later than you think.


                          No, it's too late...........

                          Comment

                          • Big Train
                            Full Member Status

                            • Apr 2004
                            • 4013

                            #14
                            Ford,

                            If this HAS been done as you claim then WHY oh WHY are the Dems so silent about what it absolutely their best piece of evidence?

                            It just doesn't add up to me. If they could show conclusively that it can be done on a Diebold machine, then why not make it the centerpiece of a huge DNC backed investigation? Seems straight ahead.

                            Either the DNC has no sack or they have no conclusive proof...I'm fine with it either way...do tell..

                            Comment

                            • FORD
                              ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

                              • Jan 2004
                              • 59558

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Big Train
                              Ford,

                              If this HAS been done as you claim then WHY oh WHY are the Dems so silent about what it absolutely their best piece of evidence?

                              It just doesn't add up to me. If they could show conclusively that it can be done on a Diebold machine, then why not make it the centerpiece of a huge DNC backed investigation? Seems straight ahead.

                              Either the DNC has no sack or they have no conclusive proof...I'm fine with it either way...do tell..

                              As I said, it was Howard Dean who put this demonstration on TV. And it is Howard Dean who now chairs the DNC. I can say for a fact that this issue IS a priority for him before the next elections.

                              As for why you don't hear about it very often, it's because the whore media doesn't want it on the air. The show that Dean guest hosted was the exception, not the rule. And let's face it, CNBC is basically the bastard stepchild of the NBC network and the more popular MSRNC cable channel. It was the first and last time I ever watched the show in question, so maybe the GE warmongers weren't that concerned with one airing on their third string channel.
                              Eat Us And Smile

                              Cenk For America 2024!!

                              Justice Democrats


                              "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

                              Comment

                              Working...