You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #122: This is an oversimplification of GA [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
Cookie wookie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-01-04 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
122. This is an oversimplification of GA
Edited on Mon Nov-01-04 01:05 AM by desert
1) Georgia isn't controlled by Democrats. We have a Rep governor, a Dem Secty of State, a Dem House and a Repub Senate.

2) The Dems in our government who defend e-voting machines in Georgia are led by Secty of State Cox. She wants to run for governor and has made a career choice to defend e-voting, since she was the one who talked the state into paying for it and staked her career on it. The idea that she did this because she intended to leave the vote open to hackers seems ludicrous, as does the idea that those in the SOS's office and the Georgia State Assembly don't want voter verified paper ballots because they want the elections to be hacked.

3) Logic test: If it's true there are all these security vulnerabilities, anyone from any political persuasion could hack the vote. Why would the Dem leadership want that? It would mean loss of control to any hacker from any political or nonpolitical persuasion.

4) As far as Cox and the Dems who support paperless evoting in GA, never have I witnessed a more unimaginative, disinterested and unknowledgeable group of people when it comes to technology.

Float this: The Dems supporting evoting in GA do so because they know nothing about technology, have no interest in learning anything, and trust Cox to tell them the truth. Her line: Our votes are safe and secure. They bite, hook, line and sinker.

5) If we had gotten our vvpat bill out of the rules committee we had the votes on the floor of the Dem dominated House to pass it, it seems your conspiracy would have to be limited to the Rules Committee and/or members of the SOS's office (and whoever their partners in crime might be).

6) A more plausible conspiracy theory would be that Cox has some overt or covert deal with Diebold to turn a blind eye, which would enable them (Diebold) to throw the vote via the GEMS code or their hackers -- and that means a victory for Bush and the Repugs, not Kerry and Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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