The Import of 92% Favoring Transparent Elections; PLUS "the tough ? FAQ"

Great graphic for the Zogby poll at bradblog. see http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3276
It's suitable as a handout alone or in conjunction with other information.

I'll leave to bradblog, votetrustusa, scoop, democracyfornewhampshire, blackboxvoting.org, rawstory, electionfraudnews.com and other blogs to cover the merits. This is intended to cover the typical questions that come up to throw water and argue that this does not represent a confirmation that this movement has powerful ways in which it may proceed, namely by asserting continually the public's right to view vote counting and to obtain information about it, and the converse position against secret vote counting.

In order for people to spread the word, they need to feel some confidence, so the best strategy for (as Autorank phrases it on democraticunderground) "the deluded and the complicit" who either don't want transparent elections or just don't happen to see it clearly just yet because they are too tired, stressed or "concerned" is to rain on the proverbial parade. In contrast, the elections officials around the country KNOW it's about confidence, they even use the word confidence all the time, and they talk up the machines all the time. The problem is, the truth and the numbers are on OUR side, not on the side of secret vote counting. The further problem is that confidence is a codeword for trust in elections, which is not part of our constitutional system, checks and balances is.

With that understanding, here's how I explain the wondering questions or deal with the deluded or the complicit who don't understand FULLY how important 92% is.

First, I put it IN CONTEXT. It's one of the highest political values ever measured. Pretty much the ONLY way we can come up with anything more popular is to go to something about which there is NO SUBSTANTIAL CONTROVERSY. But with the ability to view vote counting and obtain information on it, THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS RAPIDLY MOVING TO ELIMINATE THIS WIDELY HELD AND BELIEVED VALUE ABOUT THE FOUNDATIONS OF DEMOCRACY.

WHAT DOES 92% MEAN? IT MEANS WINNING IF YOU KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE PRIZE


And, it's also higher than the percentage of people who can get a basic math long division problem right. (no cite, to see if someone missing the point will call me on it)

And so, if you can find it in your courage quotient to mention the high price of gas benefiting the oil companies, notch that up at least another 5% to get at how much easier it is to comment against secret vote counting and in favor of public involvement and rights to get information about vote counting...

For additional discussion in replies below, you could nominate other things to this "PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN TRANSPARENT ELECTIONS IS MORE POPULAR THAN...."

GuvWurld says "The Beatles."

Other Nominations??

Ideally, any nominations should be very broadly shared among all groups, and does not come at the expense or objection of any normal demographic (working in elections offices or for vendors is a changeable characteristic, and doesn't count) With election transparency, the lowest support is the 85 or 86% support among 18-24 year olds. Still very high. But "the kids" also spike high in believing the elections are stolen or doubtful as well, so kudos to the kids for thinking about it the corrupting aspects of secrecy.

Ok, now that you know more about the scope, breadth and depth of the political power that's on our side, here are the FAQ on some approaches to deal with questions or responses that alread appear to repreat sometimes:

FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

1. What about the 8% that seemingly don't agree with this? ANSWER: There's no such thing as an 8% opposition. The 8% figure is arrived at by subtracting the transparency total of 92% from 100% and assuming the difference is the opposition to transparency, but this is not so. A big chunk of the voters outside the 92% (about 2.3%) is undecided or unsure or didn't understand the question, and specifically answered the question in the NS column. Outside of that, I'm sure (but don't have numbers) that some are just contrarians, some confused, others perhaps are highly trusting persons who perhaps know a reputable pollworker and simply "trust" them but don't realize our system is based on checks and balances, not trust. By no means should we focus on the few percent in the negative when we have one of the strongest political values ever measured ON OUR SIDE.

2. Are we sure that the polling question is worded fairly? ANSWER: It simply doesn't matter, though the question is worded by the professionals at Zogby to be nonmisleading and fair. That being said, the point is that if you word it in this "unfair" or "slanted" way, essentially EVERYONE AGREES WITH IT. So, we're looking for a successful way to present what we believe, and this works and gets extremely high levels of acceptance: public witnessing of vote counting and public rights to get information about vote counting.

3. Can politicians run on numbers like 92%? ANSWER: This question should answer itself. Even a bad campaign could benefit.

4. Won't the other side be able to lower these numbers? ANSWER: If they dare to attack transparency, they might make a dent in 92% but in democracy remember that 50.1% is all it takes to win, so there's a huge margin. But they would also pay a high price for attacking public transparency and the public's right to know, so they will hesitate to do so in the first place.

5. Does it matter that in some or even many states these public rights on vote counting are not the law on the books or are being negatively impacted by invisible electronic voting? ANSWER: This is the debate, but what we are measuring are NORMATIVE political values about what should be, or what the public prefers or agrees with. We can then use those normative values to show how particular situations or public "servants" are out of touch with the public's views and mood.

6. What is the key to handling other objections to this? ANSWER: Don't let anyone, even a friend, let you get your eyes off of this prize: the power of the 92%. The numbers are real, but even if they weren't, the momentum and shot in the arm that the public will get from re-asserting its rights in our democracy is so valuable that it is ALWAYS a strategic mistake to focus on the negative when the positive is so much better to focus on AND propels us forward.... Anyone who, in effect, wants to focus on the negative is really saying that so long as there is ANYBODY in opposition to public transparency, we should all sit on our hands or otherwise feel bad, feel powerless, and feel impotent. That will be the most promising line of attack for folks like Ken Blackwell. Don't let the b'tards get you, or democracy, down. It's time to celebrate victory that occurs when everyone knows that we have this powerful commonality here with all political persuasions. It's one of the things that it means to be a citizen in American democracy. Nontransparency therefore can not, and will not, stand.

7. What can I/we do to reinforce this poll? ANSWER: Talk it up, email to listservs, point out in your own words the tidal wave trend toward nontransparent and invisible and secret vote counting in contrast, call radio shows, suggest to columnists, bloggers and oped writers that they write on this or interview folks on this such as attorney Paul Lehto ( lehtolawyer@gmail.com 425-422-1387 (cell)) who commissioned the poll with help from Democracy for New Hampshire and Michael Collins of electionfraudnews.com . Read the links that are in the bradblog article http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3276

Maybe those are the people who don't support transparency....Or maybe its a good measurement of how many Bushies know its necessary for them to win.

since the poll is of likely voters. But please see FAQ question #1 also.

..or really at all, they are not a significantly large enough group to pay attention to.

The non-transparency is caused by the deliberate introduction into our election system, during the 2002-2004 period, of extremely insecure, insider hackable electronic voting machines, run on TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by private corporations with close ties to the Bush junta, and furthermore with virtually no audit/recount controls. These corporations were given a nearly $4 billion boondoggle to fast-track the purchase of non-transparent, electronic voting systems in states/counties around the country. The bill--the so-called "Help America Vote Act"--was engineered by the two biggest crooks in the Anthrax Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney (abetted by Bilderberg 'Democrat' Christopher Dodd).

Boycott the machines! Vote by Absentee Ballot this November! FLOOD election officials with MOUNTAINS of paper ballots to deal with, and FORCE reform NOW. Talking it up, emailing listservs, calling your Congressperson--are not enough! We are about to witness Stolen Election III. We cannot prevent it. But if enough people vote AB--and many are (it's up to 50% in Los Angeles)--if everybody who despises the Bush regime (60% to 70%), or if everybody who opposes any U.S. participation in a widened Mideast war (84% in one poll!), or if everybody who WANTS transparent elections (92% in this Zogby poll!)--votes Absentee this fall, we will create panic and crisis in this election theft system, and force state/local election officials to the table.

We MUST suggest a way for people to protest. And this Absentee Ballot protest is the best thing I've heard of. It's easy. Everybody can do it. (Most states have some form of AB voting). It HELPS turnout! To those who say "it's all rigged--why vote?", we say: but this is a PROTEST aimed at UN-rigging the system! It helps overcome feelings of hopelessness. It turns voting into an active protest, rather than a passive act of despair. AB votes are NOT "safe"--and will NOT give us accurate vote counts this November--but a big citizen revolt against the electronic voting machines, through AB voting, CAN significantly change the political dynamics of struggles for election transparency at the state/local level, where election system decisions are made.

We can save the '08 primaries and general election--by jump-starting reform NOW, with a big AB vote protest.

These '06 Congressional elections will be closely watched, no question about it. The election reform movement has grown by leaps and bounds--with many new groups active on this issue, and many new books, articles and whole web sites devoted to it, and much greater awareness than in '04. Some results will be challenged. Lawsuits will go forward. Intense monitoring will occur and quick analysis of statistics. But we still have a highly objectionable situation of egregious non-transparency. What's going to happen afterward? More activism, I'm sure. But where is the solution?

We CANNOT count on a Congress that will take action. And even if they DO take action, one likely outcome is locking IN this system of corporate "trade secrets" but with a required paper trail, placing the onus of discovering election fraud on citizens and not on election officials. Another likely outcome will be that they'll fuddle around with new federal rules for another two years! We have got to rid the system of PRIVATE electronic programming. All machines that have it must go. NOW!

How do we do that? We do it with IMMEDIATE PRESSURE on state/local officials, by REFUSING to vote on these RIGGABLE MACHINES!

The thing we have to face is that this private corporate control of our election system has been DELIBERATE. It is NOT going to be changed quickly enough by the normal methods, to save our democracy. We have met corruption and resistance among election officials in most states. And there are too many other dire things happening--Bush grabbing all sorts of unconstitutional powers, and yet ANOTHER illegal and unjust war being planned (--with the good possibility that we will be in it before November!). We've got to do something NOW! Jump-starting election reform by a citizen revolt against the machines will ALSO send a powerful message to our government that people are on to them, that people are angry, and that we have RE-EMPOWERED ourselves. We will not put up with this any more! We have had it!

Bust the Machines--Vote Absentee!

pretty much, including absentee votes that happen to be scanned optically without the full and robust complement of pre-announcement-of-election-results manual audits, etc.etc.

I have a hard time joining the details of this cry (though I do join it in spirit) because the CA50 Congressional District has a lot of irregularities IN ABSENTEE BALLOTS. of course they priced the recount at a record price of $150,000 so no recount has occurred.

OK with me to vote absentee so long as no illusion of safety is had and the complaints about the nontransparency of that are registered. Then that's just doing the best one can to make some lemonade from a lot of lemons.

The answer to 7 can be expanded more, it is the work of this whole forum...!

Keep doing what you do, you both are working for the same goal, so that we the people can see the votes--BEING---counted. :patriot: :patriot:

Shake em up!!

You've been told over and over by numerous posters that voting absentee is more likely to lead to uncounted and/or unaudited votes. Yet you insist on advocating your formula for voter disenfranchisement on an election reform forum.

Fraudsters love you, PP. They LOVE you.

We should ask Skinner for a new forum. We could call it the

Peace Patriot's Voter Disenfranchisement and Adolescent Rage Forum

BTW. How come no bouncy frogs? :shrug:

At least I didn't tell Land Shark to get his own FORUM!
:shrug:

PP is instructing people to throw it away.

Methinks you miss PP's point.

That point being that if you have a machine with no paper trail but your system is one that has a setup for paper absentee ballots, the use of the paper absentee ballot will send a signal to the election officials that you don't like the machines.

It is a good nail to drive in the coffin the machines must surely be placed in. It is, however, just one nail, and if one can use it, one should, along with any others found hereabouts.

The use of the machines in any shape or form are tantamount to "throw it away" so paper + machine will at least not carry so far.

Lets be sensible here..... lets read what is written and lets not have the knee-jerk reactions so common to too many of the rad libs. K?

Land Shark quoted me out of context (no harm, no foul).

I said we could use the 92% to compare with the Beatles specifically because John Lennon once said the Beatles are more popular than Jesus.

http://www.newsoftheodd.com/article1012.html

So, as any third year law student can aptly explain, if election transparency is more popular than the Beatles, and the Beatles are more popular than Jesus, ergo, ipso fatso, and so forth, hand counted paper ballots are more popular than Jesus. Let it be known. And it was good. Etc.

:smoke:

I can dig it. You made the right call.

So this dude I was talking to about the elections was naysaying me the whole way about vote stealing, etc.

Finally, I say, well, if you go down to the election's office and tell them you want to see how the votes are actually counted they will tell you it is a secret and you can't watch.

That done it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Each and every machine needs to be audited. Of course, that means there has to be a paper trail. If you don't have a paper trail yet, why not? What are you waiting for?

So, in the audit it works like this: If you have a precinct with three hundred votes, you hand count about 50 of those votes and multiply that total times 6 and if the numbers ain't damn close to matching the machine count, you've got yerself a problem, eh?

...chocolate ice cream.

http://www.gurl.com/react/polls/results/1,,622712,00.html

with poll workers, and asking them to make a note of it whenever we go to vote.

Let them know we find non-transparent voting systems unacceptable and that we do not like them, lest the poll workers labor under the delusion that we all love the new, fun, and exciting machines. As if it were like the old days, when we first stepped up to a Pac-man console. Wheee!:crazy: