Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

HOLT STATEMENT ON NEW JERSEY (Insecurities and Inaccuracies of the Sequoia AVC Advantage) Report

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-17-08 09:27 PM
Original message
HOLT STATEMENT ON NEW JERSEY (Insecurities and Inaccuracies of the Sequoia AVC Advantage) Report

HOLT STATEMENT ON NEW JERSEY VOTING REPORT

October 17, 2008

Contact: Zach Goldberg
202-225-5801 (office)

West Windsor U.S. Representative Holt commended the New Jersey Superior Court for releasing today a redacted copy of the voting machine inspection report, Insecurities and Inaccuracies of the Sequoia AVC Advantage 9.00 DRE Voting Machine.

As I indicated last week when the report was withheld at the request of New Jerseys voting system vendor, if it indicated that the voting equipment was reliable Sequoia would have been eager to see it published, Holt said. Now we know why the vendor wanted the report suppressed.

Among other things, the report concluded that:

    Anomalies noticed by County Clerks in the New Jersey 2008 Presidential Primary were caused by two different programming errors on the part of Sequoia, and had the effect of disenfranchising voters.

    New Jersey should not use any version of the AVC Advantage that it has not actually examined with the assistance of skilled computer-security experts.

    The AVC Advantages susceptibility to installation of a fraudulent vote-counting program is far more than an imperfection: it is a fatal flaw.

    The AVC Advantage is too insecure to use in New Jersey. New Jersey should immediately implement the 2005 law passed by the Legislature, requiring an individual voter-verified record of each vote cast, by adopting precinct-count optical-scan voting equipment.

The State should take whatever action it can to detect and remedy these and other vulnerabilities and to provide back-up measures in time for the November election, Holt said.

Holt previously has urged the Secretary of State to deploy emergency back-up ballots to be used and counted as regular ballots in the election.

The emergency back-up paper ballots would be offered to voters if there is an apparent malfunction of the machines on Election Day. If an error is subtle and undetected, the voter would not be given the alternative of an emergency back-up paper ballot. The voter can avoid using suspect voting machines by requesting and using an absentee paper ballot, by mail or in person, per regular absentee voting procedures.

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/nj12_holt/101708b....

Refresh | +8 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-17-08 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Seems to me a lot of stuff is coming to a head.
Barack going to extend the powers of the USA Special Prosecutor, now this. Look for a a whole series of bombshells on election fraud in the next 1-2 weeks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. wow, just in time...
...to do nothing about it!

where have the democrats been for eight years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. well, Holt busted his butt
trying to enact federal legislation to require paper trails and audits in every federal election. That's a long story.

In the case of New Jersey, they actually have a paper trail requirement that they haven't implemented yet, and that's a long story too. But no need to train your fire on Democrats in general.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Quit pushing Holt's legislation, OTOH.
The most significant thing resulting from Holt's failed legislation is all the bad feelings in the reform movement. Giving it rest may be best.

Meanwhile, forget Holt's fixed tiered 2, 5, and 10% audits. They're are no match for the risk-based audits which ARE the LAW in NJ.

Any statistician or poly-sci prof worth their salt will tell ya! ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. I wasn't, even
But if someone is going to complain about Holt raising this issue too late, I think the record should reflect that he has been raising it all along.

And, Wilms, don't bother to tell me what to quit. You know I'm stubborn as hell. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. it's a problem that effects the party as a whole...
...and one would think that if the dems wanted to do anything about it, they would address is such. nothing doing , appraently.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 03:35 AM
Response to Reply #13
23. You are sbsolutely right. They were more interested in blocking Republican Voter ID
Edited on Mon Oct-20-08 03:35 AM by Bill Bored
amendments than passing their own damn bill. At least that's how it played out in Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
demodonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. Maybe some people will quit pushing it, when other people quit bashing it -- and him...

... and his supporters. Holt remains a supporter of fair elections whether you like his bills or not.

At risk of getting my head ripped off, had HR 811 passed my state would be voting on paper ballots in 16 days. But it didn't so let's move on. Please.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Perhaps. But the sequence here was OTOH mentioning it, then me.
And it's ok if you missed it that he and I were having a bit of fun.

But you reply, apparently mistaking me again, for a Holt Bill basher, and now a Basher of Holt himself, and insinuating I question if he is "a supporter of fair elections". I'll assume you've confused me with someone else or just have some reason to profile me in some way.

Meanwhile, I am well aware, as are others, that you won't be voting on a paper ballot in 16 days, and who you hold responsible for that.

"Move on", indeed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
demodonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I did NOT say YOU are the Holt basher directly, but you blame ME for my recalcitrant legislature?

Guess what -- I don't give a rats ass what you think of the way I am going to have to vote in 16 days, because YOU obviously don't care for anything except having your own "fun" at the expense of anyone you don't like be it me, Rush Holt, or Santa Claus.

Have your "fun" Wilms, go ahead and have your "fun".

As I have said time and time and time again, this forum was once productive, and it's a damn shame how far it's fallen since 2004.

I'm moving on. Go ahead and take another swipe at me if you want to have the last word, which I am sure you will.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 03:27 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. But HR811 never came to a vote in the House!
Let's face it: The bill had some very serious problems from Day 1. It took months to fix them. Some parts got worse before they got better. Some parts just got worse -- period.

Then we are told: "What do you expect? It's a sausage factory." (Ha, ha, ha. Very funny.)

But the fact is, ALL THAT SAID, the bill NEVER even came to a vote on the floor of the House. Why the hell not?

Could it be that PA's isn't the only recalcitrant legislature?

If Congress and the party leadership are to blame, and I don't see who else would be, then as difficult as it might seem, I think it would be better to work at the State level.

Either that, or find a sponsor in Congress who won't take No for an answer. But you see, that's impossible because whenever we try to talk to another rep about this issue, they always refer us to Holt, and we are back to Square 1.

The bottom line is: We have Congress right where they want us! That's the problem. Holt is a nice guy but until you find a sponsor for the bill who can get it passed, it ain't gonna happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. That's been explained to her over and over.
She's not interested, Bill.

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. I doubt the idea of finding another sponsor for the bill has been seriously discussed.
Edited on Mon Oct-20-08 12:18 PM by Bill Bored
Holt has become the go-to guy on this issue. I have personally tried to get another Rep in Congress with experience investigating elections to deal with it, but they won't touch it. They refer me Holt and Mulder, sign on as co-sponsors and wash their hands of it.

So it's Holt's way or the highway (beltway actually), and if he fails, there's no second chance. The Senate seems to be completely uninterested. Feinstein and Dodd would make things WORSE!

So overall, the best thing Congress can do is probably absolutely nothing, which thankfully is what they've done since HAVA was passed. A simple bill like Ensign's, which Andy Stephenson (may he RIP) had lobbied for before the Dems got control, might have helped, but that didn't happen either.

What would be nice is for Holt to push his precinct aggregation audit bill. That might be less controversial, would definitely do some good, and it's definitely a heck of a lot cheaper. In this era of the BIG BAILOUT, it makes sense not to ask for more money to be spent on voting systems for a while, unless the next administration sees this is a major priority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. fixed tiered reeks of that california audit, that gold audit or some such
Our risk based audits are way the fuck better..... period, I think Rebbeca will agree on that one front and center.

I wanna hear what Appel says about the over votes, that was redacted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 03:03 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. How come NJ isn't auditing absentee ballots?
They have the best law in the country, but they're breaking it by NOT appointing an audit board. And Holt is telling everyone to vote absentee? WTF? Without the audit, might as well use the DREs!

Audit that shit! That's why they wrote the law! Too busy hacking DREs to worry about paper ballots I guess.

Frickin' JERSEY! :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. I'm firing up the task force for 2009, I'm speaking at the Eithical Culture Society Nov 9th
In Maplewood. Thats the Kickoff for petitoins to have a state law mandating all 21 counties post precinct level results onlib=ne 24 hrs after an election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. That's NOT going to be easy. NJ does NOT sort absentee ballots by precinct.
Edited on Mon Oct-20-08 12:52 PM by Bill Bored
If they follow the LAW, what is supposed to happen is:
1. Appoint independent audit board.
2. Divide absentees ballots into batches BEFORE they are scanned
3. Record tallies for each batch
4. Pick batches to audit randomly after the election
5. If there is more than a 0.1% vote shift when the hand count is compared to the machine count, the audit is doubled
6. The audit board should write additional regulations (there may not be time for this now)

You can actually read the law here:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bills/PL07/349_.PDF

If I were you, I'd try to get your activist types and their friends in the Legislature to demand the appointment of the audit board before the election, and conduct an audit of absentee ballots. Holt might be able to help, although his interference in State affairs might not be appreciated. It wouldn't hurt for him to write a letter of support though.

Then advocate that everyone vote absentee in THIS election, so you will have VVPBs. Problem solved (sort of)!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Actually, Democrats in General and the Party Leadership in particular KILLED the Holt bill.
Steny Hoyer, et al, were the ones who gutted the bill's provisions that would have had the effect of banning DREs had they been implemented per the original effective date of the bill.

And the Committee on House Administration gutted the software disclosure requirements so much so, that the software that had to be disclosed, EVEN UNDER A NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, did NOT even include Voting System Source Code.

Frankly, the Dems are often not the brightest lights on the tree, and some of our leading advocates seem to be letting them get away with it rather consistently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. yeah, Hoyer was no friend of the bill n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-17-08 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. He wants opti-scan equipment?
Paper trail or not, those machines can be hacked and in fact were hacked heavily in 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. two thoughts about that
(1) If you have evidence that optical scanners "in fact were hacked heavily in 2004," you really ought to share it. No, exit polls don't count. Nor does the "Berkeley study" that was withdrawn.

(2) I'm pretty sure Holt knows that optical scanners can be hacked, which is why he has advocated post-election audits. These don't make it impossible to steal an election -- it's never impossible to steal an election -- but they make it much harder for one or a few people to steal it, which is serious progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Op-scan problems in the 2004 election
First, the results can be altered by manipulating both the memory cards and through the central tabulating system.

1) From Reps. John Conyers, Jr., Jerrold Nadler, and Robert Wexler; House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution,
November 5, 2004 letter to The Honorable David M. Walker, Comptroller General of the United States
... In Florida, there was a substantial drop off in Democratic votes in proportion to voter registration in counties utilizing optical scan machines that was apparently not present in counties using other mechanisms.

2) From a BBV article:
Diebold's opti-scan voting equipment used a memory card design that offered penetration by a lone programmer such that standard canvassing procedures cannot detect election manipulation.

The Diebold optical scan system was used in about 800 jurisdictions in 2004. Among them were several hotbeds of controversy: Volusia County (FL); King County (WA); and the New Hampshire primary election, where machine results differed markedly from hand-counted localities.

3) Leon County, Florida Elections Supervisor Ion Sancho and Information Systems Officer Thomas James authorized (among others) security expert Dr. Herbert Thompson, and special consultant Harri Hursti, identify any problems in Leon County's election security.

Computer expert Harri Hursti gained control over Leon County memory cards, which handle the vote-reporting from the precincts. Dr. Herbert Thompson, took control of the Leon County central tabulator by implanting a trojan horse-like script.

Diebold Optical Scan Voting System Hacked (3 Ways)

1. An altered memory card (electronic ballot box) was substituted for a real one. The optical scan machine performed seamlessly, issuing a report that looked like the real thing. No checksum captured the change in the executable program Diebold designed into the memory card.

2. A second altered memory card was demonstrated, using a program that was shorter than the original. It still worked, showing that there is also no check for the number of bytes in the program.

3. A third altered memory card was demonstrated with the votes themselves changed, showing that the data block (votes) can be altered without triggering any error message.

How to "Roll over the odometer" in Diebold optical scan machines

Integer overflow checks do not seem to exist in this system, making it possible to stuff the ballot box without triggering any error message.

More here: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0505/S00381.htm .

4) It is indeed a giant step forward that Holt is advocating post election audits. I hope he gets them. Because, while the Optical scan voting equipment does offer a paper trail, it is very difficult to get authorization for a recount, as we saw in the past two stolen Presidential elections, so our chances of being able to have the paper ballots counted by hand are slim. Most states have very strict criteria for inspecting paper ballots, eg., Washington SOS Sam Reed prohibited checking paper ballets, deeming them "unauthorized recounts".


5) Finally (for this post anyway), though this doesn't prove anything, you might find it interesting. I did some personal analysis of the Florida election numbers by county and posted this here on DU in Nov 2004 :

In the Florida charts, 16 of the counties had results that look as if they had been transposed, or flipped
(eg Suwannee Co: 4,236 expected Rep -11,145 actual Rep votes, and 10,035 expected Dem - 4,513 actual Dem votes).
All those counties used the opti-scan machines, and Bush won in all 16 counties.

24 Counties had results that looked heavily padded, and/or skimmed, or both. 22 used Opti-scans and 2 used touch-screen. Bush won 22 of the counties (inc the 2 touch-screens counties), and Kerry won only 2.

The remaining 27 counties (unless I am off by 1 or 2) had votes that seemed at least somewhat reasonable based on numbers alone. Of those counties, 9 were won by Kerry. There was a mix of OPti-scan and touch screen, which didnt seem to correlate to any pattern...

Bottom line is that in 38 of 40 opti-scan counties with the most messed up, flipped, padded and/or skimmed results, Bush won.

In the 27 counties with results that were reasonably in line with the demographics (that I know of), Kerry won 1/3...

---------------
TRANSPOSED or "FLIPPED" VOTES
COUNTY - Expected Repub - Actual Repub - Expected Dem - Actual Dem -Voting Equipment - FLA Loc.
Baker - 2,415 - 7,738 - 6,895 - 2,180 - Sequoia Op-Scan - P
Bradford - 3,072 - 7,553 - 6,663 - 3,244 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Columbia - 7,825 - 16,753 - 14,119 - 8,029 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
DeSoto - 2,413 - 5,510 - 5,630 - 3,910 - Diebold Op-Scan - C
Dixie - 968 - 4,433 - 4,988 - 1,959 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Gilchrist - 2,133 - 4,930 - 4,106 - 2,015 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Gulf - 1,928 - 4,797 - 4,874 - 2,398 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Hardee - 1,936 - 5,047 - 4,619 - 2,147 - Diebold Op-Scan - C
Hendry - 3,010 - 5,756 - 5,523 - 3,960 - ES&S Op-Scan - SC
Holmes - 1,171 - 6,410 - 6,036 - 1,810 - ES&S Op-Scan- P
Jackson - 4,339 - 12,092 - 14,127 - 7,529 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Lafayette - 440 - 2,460 - 2,755 - 845 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Levy - 4,594 - 10,408 - 9,940 - 6,073 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Suwannee - 4,236 - 11,145 - 10,035 - 4,513 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Union - 855 - 3,396 - 3,529 - 1,251 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Washington - 2,634 - 7,367 - 6,947 - 2,911 - Diebold Op-Scan - P

POTENTIALLY PADDED AND/OR SKIMMED VOTES
COUNTY - Expected Rep - Actual Rep - Expected Dem - Actual Dem -Voting Equipment - FLA Loc
Bay - 33,079 - 53,305 - 29,351 - 21,034 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Calhoun - 709 - 3,780 - 4,911 - 2,116 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Citrus - 28,809 - 61,813 - 27,039 - 29,271 - Diebold Op-Scan - WC/P
Clay - 45,877 - 61,813 - 20,794 - 18,887 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Duval - 139,605 - 218,476 - 174,965 - 157,624 - Diebold Op-Scan - NE
Escambia - 62,602 - 93,311 - 58,149 - 48,207 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Franklin 943 - 3,472 - 4,586 - 2,400 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Gadsden -*Dem won - 2,347 - 6,236 - 17,361 - 14,610 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Glades - 852 - 1,983 - 2,227 - 1,434 - Diebold Op-Scan - C
Hamilton - 755 - 2,786 - 3,994 - 2,252 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Highlands - 14,976 20,475 13,401 - 12,986 - ES&S Op-Scan - C
Jefferson *Dem won- 1,551 - 3,298 - 5,408 - 4,134 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Liberty - 237 - 1,927 - 2,667 - 1,070 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Madison - 1,238 - 4,195 6,605 - 4,048 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Nassau - 16,031 - 23,726 - 12,017 - 8,543 - ES&S E-Touch - NE
Okaloosa - 51,059 - 69,320 22,085 - 19,276 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Okeechobee - 3,622 - 6,975 - 7,124 - 5,150 - Diebold Op-Scan - C
Polk - 82,059 - 123,457 - 89,851 - 85,923 - Diebold Op-Scan - C
Putnam - 8,690 - 18,303 - 17,878 - 12,407 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Santa Rosa - 37,543 - 51,952 - 18,880 - 14,635 - ES&S Op-Scan - P
Taylor - 1,622 - 5,466 - 6,486 - 3,049 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Wakulla - 2,850 - 6,777 - 7,864 - 4,896 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Walton - 11,987 - 17,526 - 8,802 - 6,205 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Sumter - 13,851 - 19,794 13,004 - 11,583 - ES&S E-Touch NC
~~~~~~~~~
If you count all northern counties 'panhandle' except those on the NE coast, there are 32 . Of the 40 counties with unreasonable numbers, 30 were in the panhandle. 8 were in the central portion of the state (not on a coast), and 2 were on the northeast coast.
~~~~~~~~~
REASONABLE RESULTS (or at least SOMEWHAT reasonable, based on mumbers alone)
COUNTY - Expected Rep - Actual Rep - Expected Dem - Actual Dem -Voting Equipment - FLA loc.

Alachua - *Dem won - 30,887 - 47,615 - 56,111 - 62,348 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Brevard - 118,772 - 152,838 - 96,860 - 110,153 - Diebold Op-Scan - EC
Broward -*Dem won - 184,152 - 236,794 - 346,565 - 441,733 - ES&S E-Touch - SE
Charlotte - 35,806 - 44,402 - 25,435 - 34,227 - ES&S E-Touch - WC
Collier - 67,388 - 82,493 - 30,912 - 43,277 - ES&S E-Touch - SW
Flagler - 15,669 - 19,624 - 14,657 - 18,563 - Diebold Op-Scan - NE
Hernando - 31,303 - 40,137 - 29,428 - 35,006 - Diebold Op-Scan - WC
Hillsborough - 159,843 - 241,630 - 190,023 - 210,892 - Sequoia E-Touch **? WC
Indian River - 31,325 - 36,744 - 18,433 - 23,850 - Sequoia E-Touch - EC
Lake - 58,388 - 73,971 - 42,237 - 47,963 - ES&S E-Touch - C
Lee - 91,895 - 114,153 - 57,513 - 76,874 - ES&S E-Touch - SW
Leon - *Dem won - 34,165 - 47,902 - 73,214 - 79,591 - Diebold Op-Scan - P
Manatee - 63,489 - 81,237 - 47,384 - 61,193 - Diebold Op-Scan - WC
Marion - 60,279 - 81,235 - 55,427 - 57,225 - ES&S Op-Scan - NC
Martin - 37,953 - 41,303 - 19,905 - 30,149 - ES&S E-Touch - SC
Miami-Dade -*Dem won - 248,045 - 326,362 - 305,486 - 383,032 - ES&S E-Touch - EC
Monroe - *Dem won - 15,286 - 19,457 - 14,278 - 19,646 - Diebold Op-Scan - SW
Orange- *Dem won - 135,299- 191,389 - 154,938 - 192,030 - ES&S Op-Scan - EC
Osceola - 20,804 - 32,812 - 25,508 - 30,295 - Diebold Op-Scan- **? - C
Palm Beach- *Dem won - 144,679 - 174,233 - 204,000 - 275,030 - Sequoia E-Touch - SE
Pasco - 76,531 - 103,195 - 71,237 - 84,729 - ES&S E-Touch - WC
Pinellas - 175,947 - 222,630 - 169,789 - 222,103 - Sequoia E-Touch - WC
Sarasota - 93,552 - 104,446 - 60,833 - 88,225 -Diebold E-Touch - WC
Seminole - 82,869 - 107,913 - 60,037 - 76,802 - Diebold Op-Scan - EC
St. Johns - 45,678 - 58,802 - 24,272 - 26,215 - Diebold Op-Scan -**? - NE
St. Lucie- *Dem won - 30,272 - 38,919 - 34,288 - 43,367 - Diebold Op-Scan - EC
Volusia - *Dem won - 74,891 - 100,209 - 85,000 - 106,853 -Diebold Op-Scan- EC

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. point by point
Point 1: see e.g. Walter Mebane's correspondence with Kathy Dopp. The registration figures aren't a very good benchmark because crossover voting consistently varies from county to county. Using other elections as benchmarks, there is no sign of an op-scan effect. See also the critiques of the Berkeley study.

Point 2: I can't tell what the point is here; surely not just that op-scans are hackable. As for the NH primary, results in hand count jurisdictions diverged not only in 2008 but also in 2004 and 2000, consistent with the hypothesis that these jurisdictions are actually politically different. See Herron et al.. I suppose it's arguable that the same hacking occurred in 2000 and 2004, although I don't find it very plausible in light of the results.

Point 3: Completely off topic, as it doesn't describe election events. Again, I haven't contested that the scanners are hackable.

Point 4: Assumes what was to be supported ("the last two stolen Presidential elections"), but of course you're right that in many states it's difficult or impossible actually to use the paper ballots or records after the election.

Point 5: I'm happy to discuss this if you can explain what you actually did. "look as if they had been transposed, or flipped" and "Expected Dem" don't let me replicate your methodology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. Wasn't the Berekley 2004 stuff re FL DREs?
Edited on Sat Oct-18-08 06:56 PM by Bill Bored
Perhaps you have confused the Berkeley statisticians with Kathy Dopp.
I often make that mistake myself. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
machI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-08 06:29 AM
Response to Original message
4. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-19-08 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
16. Congressman Holt, where you 3 years ago ?
Ms Mulder showed up at my Newark NJ Voting machine demo in 2005, we talked at great length, so I know Michelle was aware, I made sure myself.

Additionally Congressman, please explain why certain towns had 1500 over votes in the Essex County Primary, more votes than people who signed in to vote, explain how Sequoia did that.... and why that section was redacted.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-20-08 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. Ooooooo. Redacted. Sounds juicy. Was it in the newspapers at the time? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 14th 2014, 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC