Many people voting stated that when they pushed Kerry, Bush

[rainy]

appeared on the screen. They said that it took two or three times until Kerry actually registered. I wonder if this was suppose to only happen on the inside, like Bush would get some of Kerry's votes but the voter was not suppose to see it. I bet it was a mistake in the program that was suppose to only happen internally.

[raccoon]

1. God, I bet you're right

What state was this, by the way?

[TheFarseer]

2. Probably some people didn't catch that

If they were in a hurry or just careless and accidentally voted for bush.

[FreedomAngel82]

13. Probably

Especially in Ohio with the long lines. I wonder if that's how Bush got more votes then voters?

[Ready4Change]

3. More sloppy programming. n/t

[rainy]

4. I guess, if you're gonna steal an election you've gotta be more

careful in you programing.

[libertypirate]

5. Not if you want it to look like an error...

You want it to look as though you are not hidding it.

[PaganPreacher]

22. So, the programmers deliberately added extra lines of code...

to make the display change, instead of just having a hidden vote switch or a total number change (both of which would be easier, and not alert the voter to a problem)?

Even knowing that the unneccesary extra lines of code, causing the display to change (allowing the voter to see that his vote was "changed") would attract official attention and lead back to the programmers?

And, after deliberately adding the lines of code, no one else in the grand Rovian conpiracy decided that was a bad idea, and took the extra code out?

That sounds like (1) making a plan to rob 1000 banks with a dozen of your friends, (2) deliberately using your own deposit slips to write the stickup notes, (3) expecting no one to find your name on the deposit slips, and (4) nobody thinking that it was a bad idea.

It just doesn't compute.

The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[MARALE]

24. It depends on where the change was made

If the change was madein the software before the name was displayed, then it makes sense. It doesn't mean that there had to be extra lines added, just depends on where the Kerry = Bush code was written. I imagine it was in a call that was invoked after a certain count and depending on where the subroutine was put in the code, it could be a understandable mistake.

WB

[PaganPreacher]

25. That presumes that the display and tally are "serial"...

rather than "parallel" processes, and that the original program was changed, or a subroutine was added, by a third party (neither manufacturer nor end user). If the manufacturers wanted to change the numbers, they would be able to replace the original codes with new codes containing integral changes (that would not show up on the screen).

If the programmers could write a subroutine to kick in at almost any point in the chain (which they can), why would they choose to write it to activate before the display (in a "serial" system), or in addition to the recording routine (in the case of "parallel" systems)? I can't find a reasonable answer to that one.

Another problem with the "third party conspirators" theory: Because of the geographical separation of machines, we are now talking about a conspiracy of hundreds of technicians in several states, all willing to go to prison just to add a few votes to the Bush side, using a system that points to their individual guilt.

If that was the case, we are also talking about (a) a situation where none of the machines were tested to see if the alteration or subroutine actually worked (without crashing the machines); (b) the programs were tested, but none of the QA people noticed that the screen display changed, too; or (c) that the conspirators noticed, but didn't care that they were showing the victims that they were being defrauded.

The way I look at it is, "if people are intelligent enough to find a way to game a complex system on a massive scale, they are intelligent enough to avoid obvious mistakes. If a conspiracy of experts is doing it, the likelihood of obvious mistakes is much less."

For me, the "display problem = proof of fraud" equation strains credulity. The more likely answer, to me, is that the display change of votes before the voter certifies the results ("press here to save your choices") is the usual kind of computer error that we all have on our Windows boxes, and that causes ATMs to need service on a regular basis. I believe in condensed water vapor, bad semiconductors, or rough handling of the machines in transit before I believe in a shadowy multistate conspiracy to give W a few votes here and there.

The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[libertypirate]

28. It's really simple....

Things that happen in front of your face are very hard to believe that they are intentional.

[libertypirate]

27. What is worse then hidden vote stealing...

When it's done right in front of your face...

How many Americans saw the reports and said yeah that happened to me, looks like they know about it. Someone will take care of it... It's a big country... Yeah computers fail and have glitches...

Even knowing that the unnecessary extra lines of code, causing the display to change (allowing the voter to see that his vote was "changed") would attract official attention and lead back to the programmers?

Has it yet? No, it never will...

Considering how many viruses run amok and how few authors ever get caught, I doubt it will get back...

What doesn't compute is giving them a win because it happened in front of your face and somehow you legitimized it as a glitch.

You fell hook line and sinker.

[FreedomAngel82]

14. Yep

They probably worked fast so they could easily steal the election and everything with the programming that Curtis has talked about.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rainy]

8. Can you support your words as it is documented that all of the

errors in the new voting machines favored Bush. All of them.

[CottonBear]

9. I'll bet that you have absolutely no evidence

to support that statement. Nationwide, all deviations and errors favored *.

[FreedomAngel82]

15. Exactly

Why would the democrats try to steal the election by all the errors favoring Bush? Duh!

[PaganPreacher]

23. Speaking of evidence....

what is your evidence that all machine errors and deviations favored Bush?

The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[KaryninMiami]

7. It happened to me in 2002 in Florida (Gov. race)

Every time it asked me to "confirm my choice", it said I had voted to Jeb Bush. It took till the 3rd try to regsiter my choice (which was NOT Jeb!). It also could be that the default was programmed to one candidate with the expectation taht some people- many people perhaps, would not check their votes carefully before hitting the entire button. Whatever happened, as referenced in today's article on the Election Fraud conference in Nashville, http://www.tennessean.com/local/archives/05/03/68078488...
(in another post at DU), I still do not know if my vote counted.

[FreedomAngel82]

16. What I think

is what probably happened is it counted each time a vote went through. So that's why they had to have it rigged like this. So each time Jeb Bush's name went through the machine it got counted as a vote.

[keepthemhonest]

10. good point

I bet you are right as well.

[Catamount]

11. I remember people stating this in Florida, early on election day!

I felt then, that it was over!:banghead:

[Drifter]

12. That is a very naive ...

understanding of systems like that.

I particularly enjoy when someone posts what they believe to be the 7 lines of BASIC code that would flip every 10th democratic vote to a republican vote. Clearly someone who has never been paid to write software.

Jesus Christ give it a rest already.

Cheers
Drifter

[FreedomAngel82]

17. If you go to the

cspan website and type in Cliff Arnebeck he has an interview with the Washington journal and he was telling how whoever did the rigging flipped whoever was republican and voted for Kerry to Bush. There were a lot of republicans who were angry at Bush and they (the republicans) couldn't have it known their people disliked Bush.

[Bill Bored]

18. Do you know the date of that interview? nt

[Chi]

21. Question

Heya Drifter
As someone who does get paid to write software (which I assume you are by your post)...
are you saying rainy's hypothesis is impossible?

Thanx in Advance

[berniew1]

19. voters in 18 states reported switching

http://www.flcv.com/summary.html

[Sancho]

20. Happened to us in Florida....

My wife was at one station and tried to vote for Betty Castor - and Martinez appeared at the "check your vote". She tried to fix it before "voting". After she couldn't she "loudly" called the techie's and said all she wanted to do was vote for Castor. They rebooted the machine, etc...but she has no idea who got the vote. She complained inside and outside to all those present.

I suspect things like this happened all over Florida with the touch screens if you go by the stories.

[MissWaverly]

26. Happened to me in Baltimore City, Maryland

I pressed the square next to Kerry and the machine defaulted to
Bush 5 times, on the SIXTH time, the square next to Kerry lit up,
talked to people in Baltimore County, same thing

Bush rec'd 1,024,703 votes in Maryland
on November 2, 2004, there were only 733,643 Registered Republican
who voted, do you really believe that all those democrats and all
those independent voters and every single republican voter voted
for Bush. I didn't think so.

Now a lot of people said why didn't people complain when this happened. First wait in line for at least 2 hours, add hundreds of tired impatient people around you, next have people try to keep you from voting at the registration table, first have them demand your voter registration card, and they are LOUD in your face saying that IF YOU DON"T HAVE IT, YOU CAN'T VOTE, and then when you produce it,
they then say, Well, this ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH, YOU HAVE TO SHOW A PHOTO
ID, AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT, TOO BAD, THEN YOU CAN'T VOTE. Then
you show it and you are finally you are allowed to go in to vote. Now you are going to rush outside and tell these same people that the machine is not working right. I didn't think so.