Russian TV: "Doubts over voting machines cloud Obama's S.Carolina win"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X6aUyeJo24



There really is no doubt Obama won South Carolina, and that's not the point.

As with Clinton in NH, the count is done by machines that are programmable - and therefore susceptible to human error and, more importantly, human corruption. In NH, the paper was badly secured. In SC, there isn't even a paper trail. We should never have to speculate. Only automatic hand-counts of secure paper ballots can assure that there is no cheating by machine.

What a joke that, given our recent experiences with elections stolen by the retail, on the ground method, we are not constantly up in arms to demand that the potential for wholesale fraud by machine be banished.

Now is the time to complain every time these machines are used (especially DREs) - not in November!

Let's fix this at least, before we fight the real battle to finally establish democracy through public campaign finance, automatic media time for candidates, and proportional representation.

irregularities?

That's rich.

:rofl:

Think of it in reverse: How bad are things here, when Russian TV is reporting on the unreliability of US elections? That's why I'm posting it.

Fact is, there will ALWAYS be questions about election counts so long as these machines are in place.

Wouldn't matter who the candidate was- though if anything might potentially disparage something about Obama, one can count on rationalizations or avoidance of the issue, as opposed to than a reasoned response.

Just pointing out a fact about South Carolina's DRE's

as well as an observation about a pattern that I've seen.

Whether your post was sarcastic or not- no way to know, but it's a sad state of affairs when the Russian media can point out that an American state's elections are both potentially invalid- and unverifieable.

"Wouldn't matter who the candidate was- though if anything might potentially disparage something about Obama, one can count on rationalizations or avoidance of the issue, as opposed to than a reasoned response."

So far, there have been no allegations of major fraud, enough that could overturn the results of this election.

Would it then be fair of me to say that, there's a pattern I see emerging, whenever something that has to do with Barack Obama comes up, some stupid people accuse Obama supporters of being cultish because the only thing they can ever do to help their candidate is whine on the internet?

They only malfunction when he loses, don'tchaknow.

He won by swiftboating the Clintons and courting the fundie vote.

:kick:

:hi:

Will the Super Tuesday states fall for it too?

The rest are Republicans.

There's Hope for you yet.

So it must be true.

I think Hillary would just as soon let this election be forgotten.

so terribly true, tho...

You're sounding like we already own the government. When, if you recall, we are still in the process of regaining control. Pelosi, Reid, Lieberman, the Nelson bros. and the Blue Tic Dems all caved on everything the 26% wanted.

that they are even talking about it in their news! SHAME, SHAME on us!

voting machines vote using you!"

...through back door deals, like a hundred minimum wage cooks each "donating" $3,000?

since they cannot be checked. And yes, Obama won.

And Obama commands the conversation with an easy smile, diplomacy, and a sharp mind.

Bush was easy to manipulate and easier to manipulate the world away from the US for the same reason. He was once seen coming out of a private discussion during a summit with a shiny bauble. Putin easily had Bush eating out of his hand. And, at the same time using Bush as the fear element across the world.

I am fully in favor of a verifiable paper trail but this is laughable.

just because of the corruption in their own? If that's the rule, the foreign news services worldwide will have to be downsized, and in the U.S. they'll be made microscopic. Oh, wait, they already are...

Now that we have such a dubious voting system, sleazy, faux-democratic leaders like Putin can point to us and say, "Look, they're doing it too!" This gives them cover, muddies the issue, and destroys our credibility as a voice of democracy and progress in the world. Russian TV is controlled by Putin, so this report comes straight from the Kremlin. Even if the machines were perfectly secure and accurate, this would be a problem. One more reason to go back to paper!

If he screwed up at something else, I could at least vote him out.

The USA is definitely not the most "democratic" government in the world. Just look at the past two presidential elections that were rigged. Not to mention the massive restrictive barriers that are in place to prevent smaller parties from even getting on the ballot. A party could get a vast amount of the vote in the USA and not win a single seat due to single member districts and the first past the post election system. In addition, the US has been dominated by the same two parties since before the Civil War. And do not forget all of the anti-democratic military/CIA interventions during and after the Cold War. The US government is in no position to lecture the world on democracy. So lets not try to prettify something that is actually quite ugly and reactionary.

Welcome to DU!

I read somewhere a while ago that there are third world countries with more reliable electoral systems than we have here in what is supposed to be the model democracy...this is a HUGE issue, and one that needs to be brought to the forefront and fixed before November.

Like the OP, I don't question that Obama won in SC, merely fear that the lack of a possible hand recount in SC and many other states will come back to bite us in the ass in November. I don't even understand how voting without a paper trail is even legal, and this is coming from a total treehugger who tries to save paper and any other waste whenever I can...

Just my two cents, since there didn't seem to be very many real responses to the OP...

:hi:

I assume this was based on exit polling, not actual vote counts. In other words, the exit polls were similar to the subsequent vote count.