Analysts say a pattern is developing regarding touchscreen results

[berniew1]

One pattern that is developing based on the experience of voters in Florida, New Mexico, Ohio, and elsewhere(especially swing states) is the the machines appear to have been set with a default to Bush. Then if a voter successfully punched the ballot for another candidate, Bush was replaced by that candidate. But it appears that in many cases the voter did not successfully accomplish this and in some cases it was hard or impossible to get the other candidate to register. This was a major problem in Mahoning county in Ohio, and possibly Mercer, but also occurred in many counties and several states. They had to replace some of the machines in counties like Mahoning after repeated attempts by techs to "recalibrate" the machines after widespread reports of problems. This also happened in Florida and New Mexico. But this means that Bush would get not only the votes of those who didn't notice that the punched candidate didn't register but any intentional non votes or accidental non votes or unsuccessfully completed votes. Quite an advantage. As much as 2 to 4% in some areas and even more perhaps in some minority areas.

[bleever]

1. What does 2-4% matter? Oh yeah: everything.

We're gonna get inside those machines eventually, one way or the other.

[GetTheRightVote]

4. Hopefully therefore they do and correct them so we can not catch them

[berniew1]

62. Richard Phillips detailed documentation confirmed this fraud in Ohio

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x181715

[SharonAnn]

2. Not surprising. 1% here, 1% there, and all the manipulation

adds up to 5% or more.

[TexasChick]

3. Truly sickening! Just sickening!

:puke:


Kerry is my President, dang it!

[pa28]

5. I've only heard heard of one anecdotal case . . .

where the machine would default to Kerry. And that I can't cite.

These machines should be impounded and audited for a pattern of abuse. Unfortunately, in Bushworld "should" means "won't".

[KaliTracy]

32. in Ohio it happened in Youngstown.... possibly

somewhere else in Ohio, but definitely Youngstown -- after I (and several thousand people) Wrote to All Things Considered about their report on "Election Myths" where Pam Fessler told us it was Dixicrats in Florida, and soccer Moms against terrorism in the 'burbs, and Moral Values overall, and told them that they needed to do "Investigative" reporting -- not base their reports on psychological analysis, she went to Youngstown and found at least one person (if not more) that had problems with the machine *and reported the problem* -- she interviewed him...

Florida Broward (sp) County also had accounts of votes changing that people complained about to poll workers.

[Pirate Smile]

6. Do you have a link? Geez, somebody needs to see the default settings

on those machines but whatever was there is probably gone now.

[TexasChick]

8. OMG, Pirate Smile. I think you just accidentally just made me sicker.

:puke:

[Pirate Smile]

9. Sorry.

[TexasChick]

12. I think you may have lost me there, Pirate Smile. n/t

[Laelth]

7. Link?

What's this from? Sounds like good reporting. Curious about the source.

-Laelth

[TexasChick]

10. LOL! I love your picture! It's derived from a saying of an interpretation

the Japanese tried to make in a video game to English?

[Laelth]

15. Yes. It was a Japanese attempt at English, I think.

It was a console game called "Zero Wing"--kind of fun, for its day. :)

-Laelth

[berniew1]

14. There have been several stories; one analyst on this is Richard Phillips

His website is http://northnet.org/minstrel/alpage.htm
not sure which article
see Mahoning County
there have been lots of other posts related to this for Mahoning and Mercer, and several regarding New Mexico and Florida. I'll look for them. But i don't know how to search for such on this site. I've seen several on other sites. There was a thread regarding this and New Mexico.

[The Backlash Cometh]

If this is true, Bush didn't win by much. In fact, he lost by a landslide

[Mike Niendorff]

11. source?

Would like to see a source-link, if available.


MDN

[berniew1]

16. Here's another source: link note the 20 to 30 machines Kerry >>Bush

VINDICATOR STAFF REPORT http://www.vindy.com/basic/news/281829446390855.php

[berniew1]

18. Here's one New Mex. thread; anyone know how to find the other one?

here's one N.M. thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x176532

I'm interested in knowing more about patterns in New Mexico if someone knows how to find the previous thread that had more on this.

[berniew1]

21. It wasn't just the Presidential Race; U.S. Senate races also

# Time Reported Type Location Incident Description FT Voter?
10/22/04, 8:00 AM PSTMachine problemSarasota County, Florida
A friend of the caller was attempting to cast a vote for Betty Castor (democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Florida) when the machine brought up names of only Republican candidates.
This happened 3 times.
***********************************
033202 11/02/04, 7:46 AM PSTMachine problemFair Oaks Recreation Center - 5019 North
34th Street , Hillsborough County, FloridaMachine (2nd on right) automatically jumped to Martinez after voter attempted to vote for Castor - machine would not let her change the vote or view her final vote summary.

[L. Coyote]

51. And the correlations in the Florida Senate race by machine type are...

The E-Touch counties have a 7:8 correlation between Republican registration percentages and Martinez votes.

In Op-Scan counties the correlation is only 0.51.

[leftchick]

60. I believe Bowles beat Burr in NC....

NC is totally out of whack!

[MinneapolisMatt]

13. I just have one question:

Why, OH WHY, would any voting machine have a "default" candidate? Obviously, that would give a candidate a vote they didn't really earn. Can you imagine if the default candidate was set as John Kerry? THe Republicans would be SCREAMING!

I just can't inderstand how people can ignore this, even the dumb MSM. This is such a non-partisan issue...it's our DEMOCRACY for Christ's sake!

Of course I *really do* know why they had Bush as the default (we all do). But I'm starting to get pissed-off that the topic of having a "default" candidate isn't even being used by the Democratic Leadership as a talking point with all of the election fraud issues.

If you don't vote for someone, or "leave it blank" (sarcasm), it shouldn't register a vote for ANYBODY!

Grrrrrrrrr.

[RaulVB]

17. We really need to get inside them

And make a proper examination.

No other solution for this.

[buzzard]

19. And this is how likely??

[zann725]

44. Who are we kidding? They've had 6 wks. & access to clean-up the 'fix.'

How can we win against these thugs?!

[enough]

20. "DEFAULT TO BUSH"

a very important issue, thanks berniew1

[EMunster]

22. This needs a source...

[AtLiberty]

23. According to Clint Curtis' testimony...

...the software can be designed so there's just a 2 percent difference between candidates. Annnnnnnnnd, the software can be designed to eat the source code at the end of election day...meaning evidence can vanish instantly.

[Hamoth]

24. am ..I... the analyst mentioned here?

i know i posted this possiblity a week ago and hte thread sank like a rock. see; "Did indervotes go to bush" posted by hamoth.

I emailed the possibility to Cliff Arnebeck and have heard nothing on this since. I would be greatly impressed to see confirmation of my hypothesis...

[berniew1]

25. Not specifically; but I may have seen your thread also; noticed several

Tom Hartman is another who mentioned this; but I probably saw yours also.

[buddysmellgood]

26. Gosh, were'nt the exit polls off by 2 to 4 percent? We need to impound

the machines and then run faux elections on them. The machines can be programmed to understand when they are being tested and when they are being used in an election. We need open source code.

[Pierre de Fermat]

27. I'm new, so forgive me...

"One pattern that is developing based on the experience of voters in Florida, New Mexico, Ohio, and elsewhere(especially swing states) is the the machines appear to have been set with a default to Bush"


I'm new, so forgive me. Please provide the links to the evidence. Thanks.

[BlueDog2u]

34. Welcome, Pierre!

Of 92 reported incidents of DRE touchscreen votes being changed from the candidate selected by the voter, 86 went Kerry-Bush. One went the other way, and five were not indicated. The theory that many machines were calibrated to default to Bush would explain this pattern. I think the theory makes a lot of sense, and we should pursue it with all deliberate speed. Machines must be impounded!

[Hamoth]

28. Here's ONE of the sources reporting that NM machines

were defaulting to bush at start.

i can't find it, but I read an interview with the NM SOS or some such offficial saying that the machines were set to default to the candidate at the top of the list. In a few cases, this was actually Kerry, but most it was Bush.

Here's the one source i COULD find:
"The two major machine errors involved voters who selected Kerry on an electronic touch screen and saw their vote change to Bush on a summary screen. The second was a specific problem with the Sequoia AVC Edge machine where voters saw preselected default choices presented to them. According to EFF and VFF, counties where the most serious problems were reported include Mahoning and Franklin County in Ohio, Broward and Palm Beach Counties Broward and Palm Beach in Florida, in Florida, Mercer and Philadelphia County in Pennsylvania, Harris County in Texas and Bernalillo County in New Mexico."
http://www.counterpunch.org/harrison12082004.html

[berniew1]

29. Richard Phillips says he's doing a detailed analysis of this re: Ohio

Should be on his web site soon; see previous site URL

[Hamoth]

30. no kiddin!? You mean i was right!? Hot damn!

I love it when a plan comes together!

[BlueDog2u]

33. Hamoth....this theory makes a lot of sense to me

I wonder how widespread this particular fraud was? This might explain the NC discrepancies, for example, which Ignatzmouse documented days ago, between the early paper voting patterns and the DRE election day results. The discrepancy was quite large.

[EFerrari]

37. You know, I think that's about a wrap. Since about 11/5, we've

been reading about the suppression of the black and student vote, about votes added to final tally, and about Bush being the machine default.

How much more would you need to do to steal an election?

[berniew1]

31. Does anyone know what type of vote equipment was used in Fairfield County?

[rdmccur]

35. I voted in NM

Did not have a problem with president vote but with congressional seat (US). When I tried to register a vote for the Democratic candidate, the Republican was selected. Now I may have not quite touched the sceen on exactly the right spot for the Democratic candidate but I certainly was closer to that selection than the Republican. Now I'm thinking that the default may not have been only for the Republican choice for president but perhaps the congressional seats as well!

[sharman]

43. Congressional races

If there was a default setting for Republican candidates, that would be a huge advantage in down-ballot races like Senate and House of Representatives. A significant number of voters vote for president only.

[EFerrari]

36. Of COURSE B* was the default. Mail this to Bob at Freepress.org?

[berniew1]

38. There is strong evidence Kerry won New Mexico; see URL with

this thread and the current DU New Mexico thread

Lots of evidence here:
http://www.helpamericarecount.org/NewMexicoData/NewMexicoGeneralElection.pdf

[berniew1]

39. Kick as support for evidence Kerry won New Mexico

See analysis, URLs, threads,etc.

[berniew1]

40. from RH Phillips; confirmation; he's working on more details

Yes, I think the default theory is powerful. It completely explains how voters could press Kerry and have Bush come up on the screen. I was told today that it has been confirmed that this was done in Texas. And I verified online that the ES&S administrative password by default is 1111, and cannot be modified easily.

RHP

[november3rd]

41. The "pattern"

They knew about the pattern during the whole early voting period before November 2nd.

[Straight Shooter]

42. "de fault" is de bush

Kick

:dem:

[berniew1]

45. New Mexico voter suppression and machine manipulation were flagrant

http://www.helpamericarecount.org/NewMexicoData/NewMexicoGeneralElection.pdf
This is backed up by lots of EIRS cases and solid analysis. Its clear New Mexico was stolen in a flagrant and obvious manner after looking at the documentation. And that Kerry won New Mexico.
But it has also been shown that the same type of manipulations occurred in other states such as Ohio and Florida, etc. And it appears Kerry may have won several more states when the machine manipulation there is more closely investigated.

[berniew1]

46. Links to the 3 threads with supporting documentation on this fraud pattern

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=176532&mesg_id=176532

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x177375

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=176637&mesg_id=176637

[lonestarnot]

47. Not Surprised!

Cheat'n no good biaches!

[L. Coyote]

48. Florida: Comparison President vs. Senate Races by Voting Machine Type

There are also very discernable correlations with voting machine types in Florida. Here are several:



These Pearson correlations use the percentage difference for Bush and Martinez (US Senate) and compare them to: percentage of voters in counties, percentage of turnout, percentages of party registrations, and percentage of votes for the candidates. The raw data is county based, not-weighted for county populations.

The next graph makes the same analyses, except for the Bush 2000 - 2004 vote percentage changes. They make a good comparison. With a stacked bar chart, the overall state pattern shows, but bear in mind that negative and positive values cancel each other out and reduce overall correlations.



Several variables in addition to county populations need to be considered. Where are the E-Touch and Op-Scan machines located? Florida is a complex situation with the small Dixiecrat counties and large liberal counties skewing analysis when using county data. Nonetheless, some variables, such as turnout, "should be" independent of these factors. Here we still see a very discernable difference by voting machines. As has been said, "Something's fishy in Florida."



And it ain't the fish.

[L. Coyote]

49. Nevada: Non-Vote comparison President vs. Senate races.

Here are some summary statistics and a graph for Nevada races.

Summary		
% Non-Votes	President	Senate
		
average	        0.979	        4.412

stdev	        0.266	        0.878

Counties are sorted alphabetically from left to right. First valley in Presidential non-vote is Clarke County (Las Vegas) with 65.74% of votes. That non-vote percent is 0.659, compared to 4.272 % for the Senate race in the same county.

To obtain the raw data download the spreadsheet with the state results for President and Senate, plus some initial analysis.

Comparing electronic and other voting methods and non-voting percentages by type, Ohio provides a good example.



In Ohio, the very low standard deviation for E-Vote really stands out.

Follow this link to download spreadsheets with state results and some analysis for Ohio, New Mexico, Iowa, South Dakota, and Florida.

It is a well-known fact that spoilage with punch cards is high. Was there targeted placement of E-voting equipment to ensure less spoilage in Republican strongholds, state? Was this part of the Ohio mosaic of factors?

[berniew1]

50. Summary of documentation on this thread-- URL

www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[understandinglife]

63. Very helpful; thank you (n/t)

[BushSpeak]

52. Would this be a hardware or software problem?

From what I've read there were two types of calibration problems.
1) Size of the zone to be selected. A smaller zone or off center zone for Kerry, naturally.

2) The pressure needed to record the vote. There was a problem in California where you had to push really hard with several tries for Kerry to register. Later in the ballot, the same zone had no problem to record the vote.

Would this be a hardware or software problem?

I have thought from the beginning that this was the type of fraud they used. Much less risk with a badly calibrated machine, than having to serve time for flipping the votes.

One way to check on election day would have been to skip the presidential vote and see what showed on review. That would give the default candidate.

What would have happened if election judges caught this and closed down the machines on election day until they got machines that worked. Imagine several precincts on strike where people couldn't vote because of fixed machines.

[berniew1]

56. There is difference in default to Bush and poorly calibrated

What is mainly being talked about here is a software issue. that the counter was set to Bush and only changed to another candidate if the voter successfully caused the equipment to change from Bush to your candidate. This could be done for touchscreens or optical scan, but the main discussion and cases discussed are for touchscreens. There is a separate pattern documented for optical scans.
But your method could be used to intentionally poorly calibrate the Kerrry(or Dem senate candidate) punch area and just cost Kerry votes. But this wouldn't do what was observed in the election repeatedly- register Bush when intent was Kerry.

[BushSpeak]

58. I agree, it was a bit of both.

I would think that there is a bit of legal difference between poorly calibrated machines with a default for Bush and software that actually flips votes from one candidate to the other.

This seems much more subtle, but just as efficient. If caught, they can blame it on the machines and not intentional software fraud.

This seems to follow the same pattern throughout the election. A technical obstacle course to record a vote for Kerry, but avoiding flagrant fraud.

I actually asked the question of a default for Bush, a couple of weeks ago on another thread.

My original question stands:
Is zone and pressure calibration a hardware or software problem?

Do the zones change from page to page?
Does the ballot order on touch screens change from precinct to precinct as on the Ohio punch cards?

I live in France and voted absentee, so I have to rely on DUers to get first hand information.

(By the way, Andy Stephenson said on Break for News a interview that a certain Jeff Dean who is now on Diebold's Board of Directors and their senior programmer, was convicted of embezzlement for computer hacking in the early 90's . He did this by installing a back door on the accounting software of his Seattle law firm.

Zip file
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews041216.zip
mp3 file
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews041216.mp3

[BushSpeak]

59. I agree, it was a bit of both.

I would think that there is a bit of legal difference between poorly calibrated machines with a default for Bush and software that actually flips votes from one candidate to the other.

This seems much more subtle, but just as efficient. If caught, they can blame it on the machines and not intentional software fraud.

This seems to follow the same pattern throughout the election. A technical obstacle course to record a vote for Kerry, but avoiding flagrant fraud.

I actually asked the question of a default for Bush, a couple of weeks ago on another thread.

My original question stands:
Is zone and pressure calibration a hardware or software problem?

Do the zones change from page to page?
Does the ballot order on touch screens change from precinct to precinct as on the Ohio punch cards?

I live in France and voted absentee, so I have to rely on DUers to get first hand information.

(By the way, Andy Stephenson said on Break for News a interview that a certain Jeff Dean who is now on Diebold's Board of Directors and their senior programmer for GEMS software, was convicted of embezzlement for computer hacking in the early 90's . He did this by installing a back door on the accounting software of his Seattle law firm.

Zip file
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews041216.zip
mp3 file
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews041216.mp3

[NVMojo]

53. DO NOT BE FOOLED BY PAPER TRAILS

I say this with all sincerity. Even with paper trails, these touch screen machines can still cheat. No county clerk is going to verify the paper trails one at a time following an election. They will just look at the final totals that come out on the end. If you are lucky, your county clerk will verify the voting sign in logs with the totals on the end of the paper trail rolls and they will match and report it as such. But if not, it doesn't take much to still steal an election. Cuz, unless you unroll those rolls and actually look at each vote, you can't prove it is right or wrong.

[Stevepol]

65. You're right, a paper trail won't do it alone. You have to have

a required audit, and of course the paper ballot has to be "voter-verified"; that is, the voter has to verify the paper ballot contains his vote before it is dropped in the box for storage. Then, there has to be an audit that hand counts enough of the machine counted precincts to insure that the paper and the machine count match. That's the problem with the optical scanners: nobody audits or recounts unless there's a problem. This is what happened in MN I suspect in 02 when Mondale lost. I could be wrong, but I didn't read anything about a recount or audit in MN, which would likely have found that the ES&S scanners were overcounting the Repub and/or undercounting Mondale.

[eridani]

66. Of course, if you are going to make vote tabulation auditable--

--you also have to actually do the damned audits! Otherwise, what's the point?

[Niche]

54. 3 million votes... this is where they came from... I'm sure of it.

[flintdem]

55. Scientists looking at vote differences between machine types

Two political scientists have examined the New Hampshire and Florida’s different voting machines in the 2004 election to see if they gave Bush an advantage.

Jonathan Wand and Michael Herron have both published articles in prominent political science journals finding problems with the Florida 2000 vote:

The Butterfly Did It: The Aberrant Vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida (Jonathan Wand, Kenneth Shotts, Jasjeet Sekhon, Walter Mebane, Jr., Michael Herron, and Henry Brady). American Political Science Review, 95:4, pp 793--810. 2001.

“Overvoting and Representation: An examination of overvoted presidential ballots in Broward and Miami-Dade counties Counties” (Michael Herron and Jasjeet S. Sekhon). Electoral Studies 22: 21–47. 2003.


Here are the links to their new papers

Florida 2004 Paper
http://wand.stanford.edu/elections/us/FL2004/WandFlorida2004.pdf

New Hampshire 2004 Paper
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~herron/nh.pdf

[berniew1]

57. Likely not a useful study. You have to look at pattern observed and why.

This pattern has been documented by analysts in lots of areas, and confirmed to make sense by computer experts. Its the only thing that explains what was seen in the cases looked at here.

Different technologies are often used in different types of areas- big counties vs small counties; urban vs rural or suburban;
the ways of manipulating votes are mostly pretty well known and they are different for different types of equipment.
But in general looking at patterns for one type of equipment vs another isn't generally useful; unless you can somehow normalize for different demographic circumstances.
Noted in New Mexico however, different patterns of fraud regarding undervotes based on whether touchscreen or optical scan. But both involved fraud. You just have to look at the vote patterns and understand how one could make that pattern happen if it doesn't make sense.

[malatesta1137]

61. the machines appear to have been set with a default to Bush????

NO KIDDING.

We knew that MONTHS ago, we don't need 'analysts' to tell us this now. What we need is a strong leader who doesn't cave in less than 12 hours after the polls are closed and STANDS UP AGAINST FRAUD.

[adolfo]

64. Very interesting

Do you notice anything about optically scanned ballots?

[eridani]

67. Another possibility besides 'defaults'

From Ernest Partridge--a DU article of a couple of weeks ago.

Numerous reports from throughout the country, but most significantly from Florida and Ohio, indicate that attempts to select "John Kerry" on DRE screens resulted in "George Bush" appearing on the verification screen. In some reported cases, several attempts to correct this error were unavailing. (I have heard no reports of the opposite result: Bush votes converted to Kerry). The media have routinely dismissed these incidents as curiosities, and as "insufficient to change the outcome of the election." Nowhere in the mainstream media have I encountered the question: "is is possible that such switches might have taken place without evidence thereof on the screen?"

Here's an intriguing possibility: these DRE "glitches" are the tip of a malignant iceberg. A software program designed to convert (say) every tenth Kerry vote to Bush, occasionally breaks through to record the switch on a screen. This was not intended, of course. It is a "bug" that was not found and corrected before the machines were released. Maybe, and maybe not. But surely it is an hypothesis worthy of investigation by an enterprising journalist. There has apparently been no such investigation in the mainstream media.
The silence is deafening.

In a carefully monitored election, such malfunctions would trigger serious investigations. The misbehaving machines would be immediately withdrawn and subject to thorough examination by computer experts. I've heard of no such investigations. If there were none, then why not?

[L. Coyote]

70. Non-Voting Statistics. State Comparisons May Be Useful.

I just completed a New Mexico statistical summary with ten stats for fifty-two variables (ya gotta luv computers, esp. fill right!). Here is the comparison of non-votes in the 2000 and 2004 presidential races.

I sorted to three voting machine categories with 11 counties each, plus both E-voting vendors in one category (22 counties) and, of course, statewide with all 33 counties. All numbers represent percentages of non-votes.

2000		2004			
					
Average Deviation:					
0.226		1.313		OpScan	
0.789		1.478		E-Voting Danather	
1.441		1.084		E-Voting Sequoia	
1.242		1.371		E-Voting All	
1.672		1.709		Statewide	
					
Covariance					
30.362		112.067		OpScan	
24.882		39.717		E-Voting Danather	
30.176		36.242		E-Voting Sequoia	
31.261		40.844		E-Voting All	
57.710		65.030		Statewide	
					
Mean (average)					
0.745		1.172		OpScan	
3.171		3.721		E-Voting Danather	
4.776		2.991		E-Voting Sequoia	
3.973		3.356		E-Voting All	
2.897		2.628		Statewide	
					
Skew					
0.983		3.279		OpScan	
0.457		0.008		E-Voting Danather	
1.654		1.595		E-Voting Sequoia	
1.936		0.660		E-Voting All	
1.291		0.922		Statewide	
					
Population Standard Deviation:					
0.270		2.291		OpScan	
0.990		1.715		E-Voting Danather	
2.125		1.580		E-Voting Sequoia	
1.841		1.689		E-Voting All	
2.145		2.171		Statewide	

The 2000 comparison will have utility to those who know what machines were used in 2000. I assume there have been changes. Who can answer this?

For 2004, the mean of 3.721% E-Voting Danather really stands out.

The spreadsheet is available online for those who wish to review the statistical summary or do more in-depth analysis.

Here is a comparison with what happened in Ohio with non-votes. Check out the standard deviation for E-voting!



And here is a comparison for two races in Nevada, an all E-vote state.

[read the law first]

68. Then how could you have any (or so many) undervotes? n/t

[berniew1]

72. There was a major systematic effort to create misvotes in minority areas

See
http://www.helpamericarecount.org/NewMexicoData/NewMexicoGeneralElection.pdf

and http://northnet.org/minstrel/alpage.htm

and the voteprotect.org EIRS system
and the votersunite.org (or .com) site

[KaryninMiami]

69. FYI- that's exactly what happened in 2002 when I voted for Governor..

It was the first year we voted on our "spiffy new electronic machines". I voted for Bill McBride and when it asked me to recheck my vote, it said I had voted for Jeb (Bush), which of course could NEVER HAPPEN- not in this life anyway. It too 2 tries to get it to "Stick". I'll never know whether it really did stick however, or who I actually voted for. But I did know at that moment that something was terribly wrong and wondered how many people did not take the time to recheck their choices before hitting the final VOTE button. Most probably didn't pay attention. They picked the candidate and hit VOTE and left. I felt sick about it for weeks. That was before I learned the truth.

Turns out, there were many people like me who'd had the same experience. But who would believe us? Rig the election? Defaults going to Bush? Come on. This is America.

And so it goes.

Can we impeach Jeb if we find out for sure that the 2002 election was rigged? Anyone know? I'm game to start the proceedings if there's a shot at it....

[berniew1]

71. updated documentation on this pattern at links here

Updated documentation the pattern in Mahoning County, Ohio
http://northnet.org/minstrel/youngstown.htm

and for New Mexico and Florida at:
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

I hear this will be on a national news program tonight.