Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BridgeTheGap

(3,615 posts)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:38 AM Oct 2012

Will Bain-Linked E-Voting Machines Give Romney the White House?

Electronic voting machines owned by Mitt Romney's business buddies and set to count the votes in Cincinnati could decide the 2012 election.

The narrative is already being hyped by the corporate media. As Kelly O'Donnell reported for NBC's Today Show on Monday, October 8, Ohio's Hamilton County is "ground zero" for deciding who holds the White House come January, 2013.

O'Donnell pointed out that no candidate has won the White House without carrying Ohio since John Kennedy did it in 1960. No Republican has EVER won the White House without Ohio's electoral votes.

As we document in the e-book WILL THE GOP STEAL AMERICA'S 2012 ELECTION (www.freepress.org) George W. Bush got a second term in 2004 thanks to the manipulation of the electronic vote count by Ohio's then-Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell. Blackwell served as the co-chair of the state's committee to re-elect Bush/Cheney while simultaneously administering the election.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/12130-will-hig-owned-e-voting-machines-give-romney-the-white-house

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Will Bain-Linked E-Voting Machines Give Romney the White House? (Original Post) BridgeTheGap Oct 2012 OP
NO NO NO NO NO Voice for Peace Oct 2012 #1
Ohio voted on punch cards in 2004 Coyotl Oct 2012 #2
Either you really think this is a problem or you don't. If you do, groovedaddy Oct 2012 #3
These worries can only serve to discourage voters Onlooker Oct 2012 #4
I am very concerned about the potential for fraud. This isn't groovedaddy Oct 2012 #5
I certainly didn't mean to imply that your post is a ploy Onlooker Oct 2012 #6
I'm tired of us getting our asses kicked in close elections groovedaddy Oct 2012 #7
 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
2. Ohio voted on punch cards in 2004
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:00 AM
Oct 2012

Only a few counties voted electronic, and those counties shifted blue in 2004.

Bush stole Ohio with punch cards, and that has been proven:

The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched To Bush Votes
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html



Conclusions

The 2004 Ohio Presidential voting results do not accurately reflect voter intentions. In Cuyahoga County, the election was flawed and the design appears to have been manipulated. At locations with several ballot orders in use, many votes were cast by voters crossing precincts, hence counted other than as intended. At precincts with the highest Kerry support, the percentage of uncounted votes is inexplicably high. The obvious inference—intentional manipulation produced concentrated undercounting, cross-voting, and vote-switching in areas of highest Kerry support—cannot be ignored in the face of the evidence and statistics. The possibility that ballots were switched to different precincts, post-voting to effect vote-switching, must be considered in a complete chain of custody context.

Many individual ballots resulted in a vote-switch, a two-vote margin difference from the intended result. Switched-votes cast for Kerry and counted for Bush had twice the impact as their actual occurrence, by each subtracting one from Kerry and adding one to Bush. Bush and Kerry votes also went uncounted as non-votes or were miscounted as minor candidate votes. A high percentage of all Cuyahoga County votes were cast at locations with multiple ballot orders. The manner in which precincts and ballot orders were combined increased the probability of a Kerry cross-vote being recorded as a Bush vote. Quantitative analyses of candidate votes and of non-vote percentages evidence the cross-voting and the patterns of cross-voting and vote-switching.

Sorting locations and precincts to their specific cross-voting probability subsets reveals intended voting patterns and the degree of cross-voting. The combinations of ballot orders and precincts at polling locations enables quantitative analysis of cross-voting and vote-switching. The complexity of the election's organization—the great number of combinations of ballot orders and locations—also makes the task of determining the number of cross-votes laborious and complex. While that process is not concluded herein, the procedures so far taken in this study define the process. This process may be more easily applied to other Ohio counties given less-complex ballot order combinations.

groovedaddy

(6,229 posts)
3. Either you really think this is a problem or you don't. If you do,
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:11 AM
Oct 2012

you realize that so much of what is taking place may just be an exercise in futility. If you don't think it's a problem, it's fairly simple: business as usual. As for the 2nd option, they are counting on the vast majority of people in this country to fall in here.

 

Onlooker

(5,636 posts)
4. These worries can only serve to discourage voters
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:22 AM
Oct 2012

Unless there's a plan to deal with this problem, the more we draw attention to the possibility of electronic voter fraud, the more likely it is that people will say, "Why should I even bother to vote?"

Since there is nothing we can do about it between now and the election, we have to hope (1) that people are not so corrupt as to commit electronic voter fraud, (2) there are controls in place, (3) Obama wins by a large enough margin that election fraud will not be enough to steal the election.

I don't see what else we can do.

groovedaddy

(6,229 posts)
5. I am very concerned about the potential for fraud. This isn't
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 12:17 PM
Oct 2012

hypothetical. They've done it in the past and they'll do it again. The less media attention there is on it, the more smug they are about pulling it off. This isn't a ploy to get people to stay away from the polls. It is a demand that our votes be counted for the candidate we vote for.

 

Onlooker

(5,636 posts)
6. I certainly didn't mean to imply that your post is a ploy
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:34 PM
Oct 2012

... I'm just not sure what else we can do. Someone in the Obama campaign said that if they win by a big enough margin, election fraud won't be able to steal the election. If there will be an attempt to steal the election, our only choice at this point is to hope that Obama supporters turn out in droves and Rmoney supporters stay home. All our energy should be focused in driving up Obama's margin of victory.

groovedaddy

(6,229 posts)
7. I'm tired of us getting our asses kicked in close elections
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 08:52 AM
Oct 2012

This could be one of them, and not just the Presidential race. While the eyes are on that big prize, Congressional races are vitally important too. Far too many "anomalies" have occurred in recent congressional elections that were close (i.e. special election in Florida Congressional district).

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Will Bain-Linked E-Voting...