Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New York Election Official: New voting machines provide “a giant possibility of fraud.”

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
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-10 11:17 PM
Original message
New York Election Official: New voting machines provide “a giant possibility of fraud.”
Edited on Tue Nov-09-10 11:38 PM by Bill Bored


The Issues With the New Voting Machines

Written by Wendy Karpel Kreitzman Friday, 05 November 2010

County Commissioner Speaks Out at GNVOA Meeting


New York State’s new digital voting machines are up and running, but there are many issues involving the machines and many problems as well, according to William Biamonte, Democratic commissioner for the Nassau County Board of Elections. Mr. Biamonte....explained that the county believes that the new machines provide “a giant possibility of fraud.” He said that Nassau County is currently in court fighting over the forced use of these new machines. And he noted that the fight against these electronic voting machines is bi-partisan, with support from the Nassau County Legislature.

“Nassau County says that these new machines are a disaster,” according to Mr. Biamonte.....Someone can easily and quickly hack in to these systems “with only some computer knowledge.”

Mr. Biamonte also noted that several studies show that these new machines are “unconstitutional.” Case law, he said, proves that the machines “violate state law in a number of ways.”

-snip-

Mr. Biamonte went on to tell the group of elected officials that “the new machines undermine the integrity of elections.”

As well, he firmly stated that these new machines are a “financial burden for Nassau County taxpayers.” The machines are expensive and the cost of paper and machine parts is quite high, and all must be purchased from the private manufacturer.

-snip-

“It’s a long-shot, but we would be negligent if we did not do this (the lawsuits),” Mr. Biamonte stated.

Read the whole article at:
http://www.antonnews.com/greatneckrecord/news/11400-the...
Refresh | +27 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-10 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-10 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. YES! YES! YES!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-10 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
3. Amazing that these machines began coming in during the late 1960's ....!!!
And we only woke up to computer voter HACKING in 2000!!!???

Actually, not true -- two journalists in Florida began investigating suspicious

voting results in the late 1960's and early 1970's. See link below.

Two other things to think about --

The LARGE computers used by MSM began coming in during the mid-1960s -- until then

MSM could only report actual vote totals. These LARGE computers gave them new

powers to PREDICT and CALL elections -- PREDICT and CALL Electoral College votes --

PREDICT and CALL winners and losers - even presidents!

We simply saw a reversal of those new powers in 2000!!

Also, coincidentally, these computers began to come in about the same time that

America was passing The Voting Rights Act!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-10 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R! I haven't been comfortable with these new machines, either...
I mentioned this to the election inspector (Democratic one, same guy for both the primary and last week's election) and he didn't seem awfully concerned. Thanks for posting... :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Blue Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-10 01:19 AM
Response to Original message
5. I look forward to the M$M investigation
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-10 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
6. kick - this should be in GD, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-10 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Thanks Jack! It was x-posted with a link back to here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-10 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
7. Who's complaining? We fought hard for these verifiable paper trail machines in NY
all the other machines left NO paper trail for recounts and verifiability. There may be some folks...ahem rethuglicans mostly who don't want them .

just saying we need to investigate who is truly behind this complaint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-10 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Ever hear of Bush v. Gore?
Edited on Thu Nov-11-10 01:02 AM by Bill Bored
If you want a hand count of more than 3% in NY, you have to go to court. Just like Bush and Gore! Partisan judges get to decide if your votes will be "verified" now.

I'm tired of hearing about paper that will never be counted, will only be counted if a judge says so (assuming the losing candidate can afford to pay election lawyers to sue for the hand count), or may only be counted if a 3% audit finds some discrepancies.

So far, these paper ballots are a bait and switch. Computers count the votes, kind of like Stalin.

Try to understand that lever voting machines are NOT computers and cannot be exploited to rig elections by switching votes the way computers can. So they don't need a paper trail the way computers do.

"Verifiable" voting means nothing if no one verifies enough of the vote. That's a lot harder to do than you might think and almost no election officials want to be bothered with it, esp. in NY where they are used to lever voting machines.

The officials who say the ballot scanners (and of course DREs) can be hacked, and therefore should not be used, are the honest ones. I have no use for the rest of 'em.

See this thread since you're in upstate NY:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-10 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I agree lever ballots were and are the best...but the law said we had to get them and we faught to..
get the best of the lot.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-12-10 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Glad you agree! What law do you think says we have to get rid of lever voting machines? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-01-11 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. ERMA not HAVA says dump the levers. And the Nassau lawsuit is challenging ERMA as unconstitutional.
But lots of people, and possibly elsewhere think it was HAVA. Bad information foisted on voters.

But you knew that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-10 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
12. .
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 Wed Sep 17th 2014, 02:02 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