Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama Lost Millions of Votes and Could have Lost the election

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
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 12:52 AM
Original message
Obama Lost Millions of Votes and Could have Lost the election


Snip...Do you think people should count a smaller paper ballot that could be handed out with a large scannable ballot or in combination with other voting mechanisms, i.e. touchscreen or lever voting machines, and the smaller ballot put into a smaller ballot box to be counted in the poll on election day? In New Mexico the County Clerk in Bernalillo County did research with the Univerity of Utah, the University of New Mexico, and MIT at Berkley to find the best way to hand count paper ballots. They found that hand counting 2 races took less time than it took to scan the ballot through the M-100 ES&S tabulator. If waited till mid day and started counting the ballots in the smaller box and then after counting them placed them in a locked ballot box, we would have a completely independent canvass of the vote from the MIC and Corporate American canvass of the votes. That way we would have a hand counted and witnessed talley of the votes for the most important races of president and congress to compare the corporate electronic software based totals with.

Do you value your right to vote enough to count ballots and produce a people centered election result ? Today we should use computers to create a statewide data base so anybody from any county could vote and not be able to vote twice that is registered. Registration could be same day as voting and the poll calls the County Clerk and updates the data base, with confirmation of two forms of legal ID showing the same address, that would allow people to register and vote on the same day-AND not vote twice. If this system was nationalized, with enough servers, people could vote anywhere in the US with the same criteria.

The Constitution declares the power of the government resides in the hands of the people and elections are how we transfer that power to our government. Shouldn't our government assure, assist, and provide services to maximize the ability to vote and have their vote counted? We need national and federal election standards.

We need to separate our votes and counting them from existing MIC and Corporate American protocol and people should count votes for president and congress, at the very least. Is democracy worth it to you to count a few races on election day by hand?

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/do-you-value-your-righ...
Refresh | +17 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. Yes Yes Yes yes yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jtrockville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. What? We're supposed to COUNT the votes? ACCURATELY?
Gee... I dunno... seems like an insurmountable task.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-09 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. lol
:fistbump:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ohtransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
3. K&R for VVPBs!
(Voter Verified Paper Ballots)

Thanks Andy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
4. K&R!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-06-09 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
5. Excellent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
"They found that hand counting 2 races took less time than it took to scan the ballot through the M-100 ES&S tabulator."

What more can you say. I'm convinced!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-08-09 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Now we need to get Joe Biden moving

Vice President Joe Biden says

We should pass a federal law mandating that the same machine with paper trails be mandatory for every federal election.


Mandating, Mandating that we have a paper ballot with a standardized machine standardized requirement


Should be a standardized federal electoral process for federal offices meaning President,Vice President, house and senate

(Video Joe Biden)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/853216/candidate_challeng ...



Forget the machine Joe Biden all we need is a ballot box. The states can keep their scanners, touch screens and levers. But there has to be a separate ballot for President,Vice President, house and senate and that ballot must be counted at the poll at the close of election.


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
troubleinwinter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-09 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. I have just spent an hour looking for any such "report".
Edited on Sat Feb-14-09 11:56 PM by troubleinwinter
Have you managed to locate it? What is "MIT at Berkley"?

I only found this- a post 2006 election study regarding "... using optical scanners... durable paper ballots, which represent the official record of the vote... allows for recounts... allows elections to be audited for accuracy":

New Mexico: Independent Researchers Find High Voter Confidence in New Paper Ballot System
By New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson
August 23, 2007
Governor Richardson Calls Transition to Paper Ballot a Succes

Independent researchers from the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project, the University of New Mexico and the University of Utah issued a report today on the administration of the 2006 General Election and the states transition to a paper ballot voting system. Over eight in 10 voters rated their voting experience excellent or good and the report concluded that New Mexico is on the cutting edge of election administration and has executive and local leadership forging aggressively ahead with the intent of building a better, strong, efficacious and more voter confident voting system.

This independent report confirms that our states transition to a paper ballot system has been successful, said Governor Bill Richardson. Voters and poll workers favored the new voting process and gave it high marks for reliability, privacy and ease of use. Our experience clearly demonstrates that states can transition to paper ballot in less than a year and conduct accurate and transparent elections.

According to researchers, New Mexico is the first state to move from a predominantly electronic voting system to a single durable paper ballot system statewide, using optical scanners. Governor Richardson, working closely with New Mexico election reform groups and key state legislators passed legislation in 2005 requiring all state elections to be conducted with a voter verifiable paper trail, but could allow for continued use of Direct Recording Electronic voting systems (DREs). Recognizing state and national concerns over continued use of DREs, during the 2006 legislative session Governor Richardson pushed for a single state-wide voting system using durable paper ballots, which represent the official record of the vote. The paper ballot system allows for recounts of New Mexico elections, which the DRE systems did not, and it also allows elections to be audited for accuracy and provide an environment that promotes greater voter confidence, which the previous electronic systems could not accommodate.

Some of the reports findings include:

(the NM election) system is fundamentally working, where voter problems are infrequent and where voter and poll worker confidence is generally high. (p.4)

Voters and poll worker data also indicated that both groups were largely favorable to the new voting process. Poll workers gave the new process particularly high marks on reliability, privacy and ease of use.


Over eight in 10 voters rated their voting experience excellent or good (p. 5)
Three in five poll workers indicated that voters were satisfied with the new system (p. 4)
65% of poll workers also considered the optical scan paper ballot system better than previous voting systems. (p. 30)

We listened. We acted. New Mexico now has a progressive process for its voters - one durable, unified paper ballot system that with some recommended adjustments will further improve the election process as we look to 2008, said Speaker Ben Lujan.

The report also recommends improvements in voter, poll worker and poll judge education, poll worker and poll judge training and precinct preparations. The report demonstrates the strong role played by county clerks for the implementation of a new policy.

The report also outlines the important role played by county clerks and the professional staff of the Secretary of State for the implementation of a new policy. Despite early misgivings, we convinced many county clerks to embrace this change. And with their hard work, the transition was a success, said Governor Richardson. By working with this research team the county clerks of Santa Fe, Bernalillo, and Dona Ana Counties have provided a real service to improve future elections in our state.

The three part report provides Election Day observations in Bernalillo, Dona Ana and Santa Fe counties, examines the attitudes and experiences of a random sample of poll workers in the same counties and analyzes the experience of a random sample of registered voters in the first Congressional District.

Funding for the report was provided by the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology project from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation; research support was provided by the Institute of Political Policy and International Affairs at the University of Utah and the Department of Political Science at the University of Utah; and from the Research Allocation Committee in the College of Arts and Science at the University of New Mexico and the Department of Political Science at the University of New Mexico.
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_conten...


If you locate the "MIT at Berkley" study that "convinced" you, please post it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-15-09 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. actually, I can help
The reference must be to this report. The "MIT at Berkley" bit surely refers to the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project. Yes, activists should try to talk sense.

I can't look for the page reference right now, but the study did find that it's quicker, under particular circumstances, to hand-count two races than to scan all the races. I'm not sure why that is a useful comparison (especially where precinct-based optical scanners are in use, and the scanning time is distributed throughout the day). For folks who advocate hand-counting the federal races, it may be useful to have some estimates of how long that takes -- although I don't think these would be the right estimates, because they seem to include time overhead that would be specific to audits. (That's my recollection, so don't rely on it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
troubleinwinter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-15-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Interesting. Thanks.
Speed isn't the be-all & end-all, but it is valuable to have the info., and interesting finding about accuracy. Yes, the hand count was only two races vs. entire ballot scanned. Precinct scanners are used throughout the day where I vote.

While machines do make mistakes, these results suggest that the M100 and M650 voting machines are more accurate in counting ballots, and replicating results across counts, than tallying ballots by hand.

Surprisingly, hand counts were very quick, although its important to keep in mind that only 2 ballot questions were tallied.... The average time for hand counting was about 12 seconds per ballot. Overall, the M100 machine counts in our audit averaged slightly longer than the hand counts.

Using hand count one as the base count to compare against, it is clear that machine counts take longer, but remember that the machines counted the entire ballot whereas the hand counters only counted two ballot items.


Not only is there no such thing as "MIT at Berkley", (and if one cites a study, one might care to cite accurately if one wants credibility :crazy:) I grew up in Berkeley and would have appreciated it at least being spelled correctly!

I can't find what the intended use of the "petition" is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
troubleinwinter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-15-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. And....
I am "convinced", too. It has been in my sig line for 3-1/2 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-06-09 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
6. I'm wondering how many votes Obama truly received
CNN still has the figure as a little under 67 million.

I was on youtube looking at the Election night coverage again. There were soooo many Obama celebration parties in large public areas---where were the McCain parties?! McCain allegedly got 58 million votes yet there is absolutely no footage of public displays of support except for that lame gathering at the Phoenix Hotel and another lame gathering at UPenn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-08-09 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
7. Dude...
Obama stole the election! Well, we dems stole it. Yep, we figured out that by placing certain coding into the computers that we could manipulate the outcome of elections. Shoot, it all started right here!

And that is why Obama and so many other dems won. We will crush the republican party forever, now that we control the technology.

And here you are trying to stop us. 4 shame, Dude!. The only way we can be stopped is by a careful check of the count, and here you are suggesting just that!

Stop it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-08-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. So
you think people should count a smaller paper ballot that could be handed out with a large scannable ballot or in combination with other voting mechanisms, i.e. touchscreen or lever voting machines, and the smaller ballot with a only a few races on it be put into a smaller ballot box to be counted in the poll on election day?

We can't just keep stealing elections like we did for Obama people will get suspicious.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-12-09 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. kick.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 Thu Jul 24th 2014, 06:33 PM
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