HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Voting machine conspiracy...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:29 PM

 

Voting machine conspiracy theories have been officially discredited

The lawsuit against the "suspicious" software installed in Ohio voting machines was rejected, yet Obama won Ohio anyway.

Obama won the elections again.

Either the fraudsters are doing a bad job, or the theories regarding the machines being rigged or switching votes are simply unfounded.

49 replies, 3847 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 49 replies Author Time Post
Reply Voting machine conspiracy theories have been officially discredited (Original post)
Welcome_hubby Nov 2012 OP
dorkzilla Nov 2012 #1
KansDem Nov 2012 #4
LisaL Nov 2012 #8
KansDem Nov 2012 #16
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #25
lib123 Nov 2012 #28
Cha Nov 2012 #45
ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #44
Coyotl Nov 2012 #17
dorkzilla Nov 2012 #21
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #22
dorkzilla Nov 2012 #26
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #27
dorkzilla Nov 2012 #30
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #33
dorkzilla Nov 2012 #37
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #38
PoliticAverse Nov 2012 #2
jenw2 Nov 2012 #39
yodermon Nov 2012 #3
Firebirds01 Nov 2012 #5
Floyd_Gondolli Nov 2012 #6
Festivito Nov 2012 #7
Welcome_hubby Nov 2012 #9
Qutzupalotl Nov 2012 #32
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #48
Festivito Nov 2012 #42
UCmeNdc Nov 2012 #10
progressivebydesign Nov 2012 #11
Welcome_hubby Nov 2012 #12
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #35
GCP Nov 2012 #47
hack89 Nov 2012 #13
democrattotheend Nov 2012 #14
truthisfreedom Nov 2012 #15
aquart Nov 2012 #18
Welcome_hubby Nov 2012 #20
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #36
Coyotl Nov 2012 #19
reflection Nov 2012 #23
bleever Nov 2012 #24
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #29
OldDem2012 Nov 2012 #31
Live and Learn Nov 2012 #34
Liberal1975 Nov 2012 #40
Cha Nov 2012 #46
eridani Nov 2012 #49
LiberalAndProud Nov 2012 #41
Kablooie Nov 2012 #43

Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:33 PM

1. Perhaps...

...our side figured out how to unfix them? I think that's why Rove couldn't wrap his big canned ham head around losing Ohio.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:43 PM

4. Anonymous?

They said they would be monitoring Rove's servers. Maybe...?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:56 PM

8. Oh come on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #8)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:29 PM

16. Karl seemed to know something the rest of us didn't...



"Meltdown" starts at 9'26" It looks like the numbers Karl expected didn't match the official tally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #16)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:17 PM

25. Karl was playing a role

 

His role was designed to be shocked, shocked I say at the Romney loss.

The Romney loss is designed for nothing more than to set up Jeb Bush as the savior in 2016.

Romney was fed bullshit about his chances all the way through so he'd play his part. Rove and Co. knew there was no way Romney would ever be president.

2012 was nothing more than a setup to put Jeb Bush in the white house come 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #25)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:20 PM

28. I agree.

Most of these pundits, karl rove, dick morris, barone, knew romney had zero chance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lib123 (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 03:04 AM

45. Then they conned the Big Rollers..and that's why I've read

they're not amused with purse strings guy, rove.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:53 AM

44. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:33 PM

17. I'll take that perhaps down to the bank and see if they will accept it.

Ooophs, perhaps seems to fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:54 PM

21. Ooophs, just raising a possibility....



Oh MY! :-P

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:01 PM

22. Ah, the conspsracy theory within a conspiracy theory to explain why the original conspiracy theory

 

FAILED

Nonsense. There was NEVER anything approaching fraud related to the machines. It was a fantasy concocted by hucksters to separate people saddened because their candidate lost from their cash.

And the tinfoilhat brigade eat up the bullshit served to them rather than accept the fact they had been grifted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:18 PM

26. Interesting

But I'm not one of the tinfoil brigade. I am decidedly NOT a conspiracy theorist, just playing devil's advocate...you just go ahead and decide everything for the rest of us.

Whatever gets you through the night....

















Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #26)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:20 PM

27. You are the mark

 

You accept the bullshit grift instead of reality.

You are the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #27)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:24 PM

30. No, i don't...

I was playing devil's advocate. I don't accept any bullshit. I was just answering a question theoretically.

But if you makes your widdew bwain feel superior...feel free!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #30)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:26 PM

33. And now the ad hominem attack

 

No other argument, so you resort to ad hominem.

The grifters will make money no matter who loses. Right now, the biggest makrks are Allen West supporters, and the hucksters will make a fortune off those assholes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:29 PM

37. Grow up.

"And now the ad hominem attack". Nice try. Really??? zzzzzzzzz

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #37)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:38 PM

38. And yet another ad hominem

 

Logical discourse requires logical response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:34 PM

2. Sorry but that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the results.

The amount of fraud that was programmed in could just have been insufficient to win in this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:43 PM

39. This! They didn't cheat enough this election so expect them to cheat more in the future.

 

It's just common sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:38 PM

3. false dichotomy. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:44 PM

5. the court challenge

 

came before the election. The story on the software was noted in national news sources (christian science monitor, among others). They had no way of knowing whether the court would throw out the case or not. If they did the switch and the court okayed the case, they would be busted for sure. That is why I think Husted left early and Rove was frantic. They planned to throw the elected but Husted decided he wouldn't sacrifice himself as the potential of a court-ordered investigation was looming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:47 PM

6. They put all their eggs in the suppression basket

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:55 PM

7. Bullshit title and bullshit comments.

1. It's not official and does not involve any official.
2. One person putting in new code is not necessarily a conspiracy.
3. Not necessarily does not mean it is not.
4. When your reason employs and either-or, you're not proving your point.

Welcome to DU, and substitute malarkey for bullshit if it helps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Festivito (Reply #7)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:03 PM

9. Do you think Anonymous un-stole the elections?

 

Or does do you favor the "they-stole-too-little" approach?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:26 PM

32. Stealing Ohio would not have been enough.

The fact that they didn't doesn't mean they couldn't. Their problem was no one was willing to risk jail time just to narrow a losing margin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #32)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 03:31 AM

48. +1! excellent point. they saw it was too hard for them to stop the Obama 270 march, and risking

turning Ohio with so many eyes on them wasn't worth it. Karl thought it would be done though, and that's why he said it's too early to call it. they need to correct the problems with voting, because I still don't trust it can't be easily screwed over by those in charge of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:05 AM

42. Both your own examples go against your own discretization theory.

It could be that Anonymous threatening to watch stopped some persons from changing vote counts along the line the counts pass.

It could be that the turnout was large enough that stealing it became more risky.

It could be that the combination with other efforts just didn't do enough.
(e.g., voter roll reductions, registrations dumped, wrong-date mailers, long lines in certain areas, poll watchers, ID requirements, citizen check-boxes, wrong information about felons losing voting rights, sell-out pundits, sell-out religious leaders, sell-out religions, sell-out organizations, the old optical reader thinks the circle is lower than it is on the paper trick, ... the list goes on and on.)

But, it doesn't matter does it, which of the reasons, or any combination of the reasons. The idea that they can and would manipulate the computerized voting is not proved and not disproved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:06 PM

10. Make voting machines counting verifiable and have a clear paper trail

There is no reason to not have a transparent, verifiable voting system with paper receipts identifying all transactions. If you need a recount the paper and the electronic actions should match. Voters should each get a paper receipt showing how they voted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:09 PM

11. That type of logic wouldn't pass through a basic IQ test.

The fact that the President won Ohio, does not mean that the machines were NOT rigged. You have to remember that they steal elections through thousands of little efforts. One bad machine in one precinct, voter purge in Florida, robo calls with the wrong date, billboards threatening minority voters with prison.

Just because he won, doesn't mean that there wasn't machine fraud. It could also mean that he won by so much, AND because the Dems run the Justice Dept and govt, we were able to oversee things and be on top of everything. How many provisional ballots had to be given out in Ohio?? That was also part of it...

That assumption would fail the "If all smaugs are thors, and all thors are thrains" question on an IQ test. It proves nothign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressivebydesign (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:14 PM

12. Has the Justice Department uncovered any voting machine fraud?

 

I would imagine that the Justice Department's efforts to be "on top of everything" would have resulted in at least one alarming discovery or arrest regarding the voting machines. Any yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressivebydesign (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:28 PM

35. If the machines were hackable, Romney would be president-elect

 

He's not. The entire vote-hacking conspiracy theory is nothing more than bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #35)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 03:16 AM

47. It must be nice to be so certain of something

Without any proof.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:20 PM

13. Not according to Free Republic

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:21 PM

14. Not necessarily

In order to rig an election without it being detected, someone would have to rig each machine by only a very small amount to avoid any suspicious results, such as Romney significantly overperforming in Cuyahoga county. If the state went for Romney in a way that was inconsistent with pre-election polls and was out of whack with the national trend, it would raise suspicion. But it is possible to rig the machines to give just a little bit of a bump to a candidate without being detected.

The good news is, it does show that the amount that machine rigging can effect an election is minimal and would only make a difference in a very close election. On the other hand, Obama winning Ohio does not mean that the machines were not rigged at all. His margin there is surprisingly narrow compared to pre-election polls and compared to how other states that looked more competitive broke.

For example, the pre-election RCP average in New Hampshire was Obama +2, and he won by 5.8. In Iowa, the RCP average was O+2.4 and he won by 5.6. In neighboring Pennsylvania, the average was O+3.8 and he won by 5.2. Virginia was O+0.3 before the election; Obama won by 3. Nationally, Obama was +0.7 and his lead right now looks to be about 2.6.

In Ohio, by contrast, Obama won by 1.9% compared to a 2.9% lead in the RCP average.

Doesn't that seem a little odd? There are plenty of other plausible explanations, but I think it is definitely possible that there was some tampering that inflated Romney's numbers a little bit there and would have pushed him over the edge if the vote had been closer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:23 PM

15. There was one machine taken out of service for flipping votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:36 PM

18. Thank you for your concern.

Propagandistic crap promulgated by assholes afraid of jail.

IMHO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aquart (Reply #18)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:49 PM

20. Actually, it's lack of concern

 

Get it right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aquart (Reply #18)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:29 PM

36. The vote hacking hucksters thank you for your contribution.

 

Bigger and more successful grifters than Palin ever dreamed of being.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:37 PM

19. Either this false premise or that false premise is false logic

I sue California for voting machines, it gets tossed, Obama wins. Either the fraudsters failed or theories are false. Logical, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:09 PM

23. Just because he won OH

doesn't prove there wasn't fraud. Let's get real, it's not like they weren't trying. We need to keep the spotlight on OH and FL unti they figure out how to run a proper election. People should not have to jump through hoops to vote and voting machines should not be screwed with right before an election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:17 PM

24. Zzzz...

Please up your game if you're going to join this rodeo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:21 PM

29. The marks of the grifters will never admit they've been conned

 

They are as detached from reality as those in the GOP who were shocked when Romney lost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:24 PM

31. Trashing this thread as unsubstantiated opinion, not fact....3....2....1....POOF!! nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:27 PM

34. Well that's a bit naive and lacking in logic. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:49 PM

40. I Disagree

Obama winning the election only proves Obama won the election. I'm not saying the machines are rigged or can be, because I don't know. What I do know is there is no reason we can't have a uniform system of voting that is verifiable. I also know that voting should not be the responsibility of partisans in either party. Clean it up, streamline it and make it uniform for everyone. A victory in this, or any other election should not prevent the people from demanding it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal1975 (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 03:06 AM

46. Exactly, Liberal1975..

Welcome to DU!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal1975 (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 04:16 AM

49. Exactly! As verified voting advocate David Dill once said--

--It is not enough that elections be accurate; we have to know that they were accurate, and we don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:55 AM

41. It seems to me that if the machines can be hacked, they will.

Since it has been demonstrated many times that they are hackable, it follows that they will be (if not have been) hacked. If exit polls fall too far from the actual outcome, red flags will be raised, so there is an art to it. Still, to pretend that a vulnerable system won't be exploited would be naive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Welcome_hubby (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:07 AM

43. Maybe the fraudsters are closet Democrats.

No. I don't think so either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread