Reply #16: How Can You Be Sure? That results are “plausible” is besides the point.

[Wilms]

How Can You Be Sure?

Vendor Failures and Lax Security Procedures Call Election Results Into Question In States Across The Country

By Warren Stewart, VoteTrustUSA
June 11, 2006

snip

The fact that the official results are “plausible” in California’s special election is beside the point. In fact, if the corrupted results had been “plausible” in Pottawattamie County, there would have been no scrutiny and losing candidates would have been elected.

After a publicly observed hand count of the ballots, voters can be reasonably confident in the results of elections in Pottawattmie County. Without a similar hand count of the California special election, voters have no reason to believe the official results are accurate.

snip

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1385&Itemid=26


Also...

Talking Points Memo On Elections

by Dave Berman

June 11, 2006

snip

1. Secret vote counting guarantees inconclusive outcomes. Whether it is paperless DREs or optical scanners with interpreted or proprietary code, votes are being "counted" in secret, without even a chance for voters, elections officials or the media to examine the process or verify the results.

2. Unverified voting means there is NO BASIS for confidence in the results reported. Blind trust is required to accept current election results.

3. The media should not report what it cannot prove or independently verify. We now have faith-based reporting about faith-based elections.

4. The Consent of the Governed is being assumed, not sought, under current election conditions. According to the Declaration of Independence, the "just Power" of government derives from the Consent of the Governed.

snip/more

http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2006/06/talking-points-memo-on-elections-for.html


Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x433461