It Came from Diebold

posted at 8:28 am on November 7, 2006 by Bryan

ACORN: Voter fraud
Pelosi preemptively delegitimizes
“Either we win or you cheated!”

Download Vent for your iPod
Subscribe to Hot Air TV on iTunes

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I know, I know–it’s pronounced DEE-bold. My bad! DIE-bold sounds so much more sinister, though…

Michelle on November 7, 2006 at 8:31 AM

Those who usually scream the loudest about fraud are usually the ones commiting the fraud.

MikeyB on November 7, 2006 at 8:40 AM

A SIMPLE POLL TEST could finally make this a REAL Democracy.

seejanemom on November 7, 2006 at 8:48 AM

Sorry, THIS is the TEST.

Sorry, I wrote it while I was sober, I promise.

seejanemom on November 7, 2006 at 8:49 AM

Mrs. Heinz-Kerry-Heinz-Heinz …. that’s funny.

I always have the same question: Once the Democrats win an election (and they will sooner or later) … how exactly are they going to square their victory with their whole Diebold theory?

Has not one of them figured out that if a Democrat takes the White House – their precious conspiracy theories are going to vanish in a puff of logic?

There I go with rational thinking again; learly, the average moonbat will just chalk up a Democrat win to a vast Rovian conspiracy to lull them into a false sense of confidence before Chimpy McBushhallihitler finally storms the Reichstag …

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 8:50 AM

Hey – if Democrats surprisingly do better than I expect tonight … can we all agree to universally blame it on voter fraud and insist every Democrats was sElected not Elected? For at least the next two years, can we get every conservative blogger to insist that Democrats stole their electoral victories?

Cuz, well, that’d be funny. Really funny.

Besides – it’s not like we’d need, you know, evidence.

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 8:54 AM

Let’s see… the Democrats have a documented history of:

Committing voter fraud by registering ineligible voters,
Sabotaging vehicles used by others to carry voters to the polls,
Defacing veteran’s memorials,
Attacking Republican campaign offices,
and much, much more. I have not seen similar reports of Republican misbehavior. Yet they want the American people to vote for them? A Democratic win would be nothing less than placing the criminals in charge of the jail.

In fairness, I should note that I have little use for Republican, either, but at least my disagreements with them are philosophical, not criminal.

(Change of subject – I trust the Boss won’t mind)

Support Project Valour-IT. Join a team, make a contibution!

Rusty Bill on November 7, 2006 at 8:58 AM

I just voted using those machines. Everything went fine. But I couldn’t find Kerry or Bill Clinton’s name anywhere. I thought they were running for something, seeing as I saw them in every single commercial.

antoniojvr on November 7, 2006 at 9:00 AM

Hey – if Democrats surprisingly do better than I expect tonight … can we all agree to universally blame it on voter fraud and insist every Democrats was sElected not Elected?

No, that would be because God, Gaia and the Fates have gotten together and decided to restore America to what they’ve always meant it to be: run by Liberals. Democrats always win because they’re not evil Republicans, actual vote totals notwithstanding.

New Logic 101, now available at a University near you!

Pablo on November 7, 2006 at 9:07 AM

You mean they haven’t put subliminable messages in the machines to make you vote Republican, or at least make you see Democrat where Republican is? The conspiracy theorists of today are just soooo lazy.

- The Cat

MirCat on November 7, 2006 at 9:14 AM

There wasn’t anything wrong with the machines in those 4 Florida counties in 2000 and there’s nothing wrong with them now…
now, the Texas ballot boxes in the JFK/LBJ election of 1960, that was some world class cheatin’ (‘course everything’s bigger and better in Texas..!)

Somebody said, I wanna be a Democrat when I die, because then I’ll come back from the dead…to vote!

Jen the Neocon on November 7, 2006 at 9:20 AM

Vote Dem or Nancy Pelosi will kill a puppy.

E L Frederick on November 7, 2006 at 9:22 AM

A serious question: why do liberals care so much about this election?

I understand why partisan Democrats do; it’s just politics. They want a little power.

But why do far left moonbats care? A Democrat Congress – especially one with a narrow majority – isn’t going to change much. I’m not sure they’ll change anything; after all, the only way they win is on the backs of moderate southern and western state Democrats.

So why do the DUmmies and KOSsacks get so excited? What exactly do they think might change here?

Is this all about President Bush? Is this all about impeachment fantasies?

I just don’t get it. Somebody explain it to me. What does the far Left think a narrow Dem majority will do for them?

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 9:24 AM

cacophony…nice one, how long you been waiting to interject that into a Vent?

Wade on November 7, 2006 at 9:27 AM

Only controversy at my polling place was the lines. They divided the lines by last name A-K and L-Z. Nice attempt, but when they noticed the A-K stack of voter verification books (yes, like any sane election we have to show ID to prove we are who we say we are before voting) was about 8 times the size of the L-Z don’t you think they could have divvied up the alphabet a bit differently?

Instead we had one line with about 200 people in it and another line with 3 people in it. Who’s bright idea was it to think the population’s last name is evenly divided throughout the alphabet?

Faith1 on November 7, 2006 at 9:37 AM

Great vent, Michelle!

BTW-It is NOT TeRAYsa anymore, it it TeREEsa. Kerry lost the election, remember?

Also, I must ask once again, what is the back ground music in your vent? And will you set up the vent so that we can control volume and screen size, etc?

The False Dervish on November 7, 2006 at 9:38 AM

Yep, went to the polls this morning, voted against every tinfoil hatted, Godless, democrat I could find. Feels good!

NRA4Freedom on November 7, 2006 at 9:59 AM

NRA4Freedom,
I’m with you and made sure in 2004 that my mother didn’t vote again ,considering she’s been dead since 1999.
If you don’t check on your love ones who pass away then they will surely use their vote..

alyce on November 7, 2006 at 10:14 AM

Louisiana has voting machines from Sequoia Voting Systems. Oooh, Hugo Chávez is hacking even as I write… to help Bill “The Freezer” Jefferson, no doubt.

What’s beyond stupid is Dems, in my area, have been trying to convince the clueless that evil, Republican wizards can hack into individual voting machines. Gad, the polls have been open for three hours already. Where’s my ray gun???

Aunt B on November 7, 2006 at 10:18 AM

We here in the Peoples Republic of Washington (King and Snohomish counties) don’t have to worry about mamma machine. Polling places are outlawed by [imperial] decree.

Instead we are forced to vote by mail. Makes it easier for the dead, illegals, felons, and imaginary friends to vote – they don’t have to show id or even exist in the same reality.

Also – Don’t Forget to research and vote for LOCAL AND STATE JUDICIAL OFFICES. We got to get rid of advocate state and local judges.

CrazyFool on November 7, 2006 at 10:35 AM

I did ok. I used one of those machines this a.m. just fine. I had a large amount of elderly in my voting place and defintely more people than usual. It was a ‘coffee and donuts’ relaxed ‘talk about the ballgame’ type of atmosphere in the voting place in the Maryland city where I’m at.

Rain is predicted in my location for later in the day and my understanding is that Dem’s don’t go out in the rain, whereas I know for a fact Republicans will sit through a heavy downpour even for a troop benefit concert. Dems just seem to be more likely to be whiners and Repubs are more likely to be fighters.

johnnyU on November 7, 2006 at 10:38 AM

We’re not using Diebold machines in my Florida county, but we are using touchscreen voting machines that only store an electronic record (i.e. there is no physical record of my vote… only one that depends on the hovering arrangement of a few electronically charged particles).

I’m no “Republican conspiracy” theorist — but I do think that trusting our votes to a purely electronic record is really really stupid. These machines can and have been hacked. There have been demonstrations in which votes were changed without there being any evidence of tampering, and without physical access to the voting machines. I’m not a technophobe, as supporters of these machines would have you believe. I don’t trust them precisely because I understand the dangers.

The public has no idea how these machines work. With paper ballots, there are publicly available procedures for counting votes. Not so with electronic voting machines. Their innards are proprietary. The right of the company to protect their software has trumped the right of the people to know that their votes are being counted fairly, and that’s a travesty.

That should scare you, regardless of how you vote.

Mark Jaquith on November 7, 2006 at 10:50 AM

Is it just me, or was Florida 2000 the most brazen attempt to steal an election (and in broad daylight!) ever? And why, with Lieberman implicated in that, is he such a darling on the right?

Tonight and tomorrow are cheat time for the left. It will probably be a mess, with the full propaganda force of their MSM behind the myriad attempts at election fraud. If Democrats could be trusted, why would they be Democrats?

Halley on November 7, 2006 at 10:53 AM

Actually, the cry of “Either we won or you cheated!” makes a lot of sense.

Hypothetically speaking, let’s say I was running for some race. And I stuff the ballot box. And yet, I still lost.

Wouldn’t it make sense if I cry foul?

…I’m…just sayin’…

CatsGodot on November 7, 2006 at 11:08 AM

I voted a straight republican ticket, and where there was no republican running, I wrote in Ronald Reagan.

JackM on November 7, 2006 at 11:29 AM

Perhaps a lot of dumbocrats will still be too busy down in Florida re-counting dusty election year 2000 ballots, to remember to vote today.

JackM on November 7, 2006 at 11:35 AM

The problem with electronic voting machines is very real. They are easily hacked and they leave no trail when they are penetrated. Diebold has been outright incompetent in the manufacture of these machines and boldly lied about it. The “mother machines” or tabulators that the memory cards are put into where the votes are counted from all the individual voting machines can be hacked and you can change the vote tallys in a matter of seconds. I’m worried about all sort of voter fraud, and I’m frankly shocked to hear Michelle dismissing the e-voting problem so casually as a nutty conspiracy theory. It might be worth Michelle’s time to do a little research on the subject first. Watch the HBO special Hacking Democracy…

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7236791207107726851&q=hack+the+vote&hl=en

It’s admittedly a one sided view, but it does shed light on the problem.

greggish on November 7, 2006 at 11:42 AM

Can the Democrat party possibly suck anymore than they do at this moment? I mean, how pathetic are they going to get? How about instead conceding elections when their candidates lose, they have a cage match? They can scream ‘Give me the seat, give me the seat’ at the Republican who won. Or better yet, since they like mob politics, why not have a rumble? Winner gets to be in the House. I mean, I loathe that party but I feel embarrassed for them to be acting like this. No pride, no attachment to any meaningful code of values. Just blind, hungry, petulant ambition…
As to the problem with voting machines, greggish, as your party of choice pretty much wrote the book and filled the library on election fraud from JFK on down, I don’t see what’s so ‘alarming’ about voter machine fraud. I guess the fact that democrats are the ones sqawking about it, means THEY havn’t figured out how to cheat the machines yet; don’t worry, greggish, once the dems figure out how to hack them, it won’t be a ‘alarming problem’ anymore. In the meantime, grab some smokes and candy bars, and go berate some homeless people into the polls.

austinnelly on November 7, 2006 at 11:52 AM

As to the problem with voting machines, greggish, as your party of choice pretty much wrote the book and filled the library on election fraud from JFK on down, I don’t see what’s so ‘alarming’ about voter machine fraud. I guess the fact that democrats are the ones sqawking about it, means THEY havn’t figured out how to cheat the machines yet; don’t worry, greggish, once the dems figure out how to hack them, it won’t be a ‘alarming problem’ anymore. In the meantime, grab some smokes and candy bars, and go berate some homeless people into the polls.

Actually, it’s my former party of choice. I’m Jewish and am well aware of where the left is taking the Democratic party. The point is that the current state of e-voting is yet another attack on the integrity of our elections, and it should concern everyone. I don’t think it’s a partisan issue to say that it’s a problem that needs to be fixed.

greggish on November 7, 2006 at 12:04 PM

Greggish:

The problem – for those with short memories – is that less than a decade ago, it was primarily DEMOCRATS squawking about problems with PAPER ballots (not to mention our pal Hanging Chad from 2000) and demanding ELECTRONIC voting.

So which is it? Can we just pick one and stick with it? Liberals seem stuck on this “Diebold is easy to hack” meme, but c’mon: you think paper ballots haven’t been screwed with a few hundred times (and guess who the culprits often were!)?

Hell, how many of us could actually “hack” an electronic machine? Now how many of us could figure out how to – oops! – misplace a few thousand paper votes?

Blaming Diebold is dishonest. There are problems either way, and since Dems demanded what they now hate – well, it’s hard to have sympathy. So how about sticking to one option? I don’t much care which. Frankly, I’d guess that most hackers tend to be LIBERAL, anyway. So let’s go back to paper. After all, it seemed that only Democrats were too dumb to figure out “butterfly ballots.”

A final honest question for you: if Democrats had WON the last two or three election cycles – do you think we’d be hearing a peep about Diebold?

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 12:10 PM

Professor Blather:

Let’s just pick one that works as well as possible, without obvious flaws. The main problem with the current electronic machines is that there is no record aside from the possibly hacked one to go back to and correct things. I’m all for e-voting, but we need to get machines that leave a tangible unalterable record to check if needed. I don’t think Diebold is evil. I just think they are incompetent. By the way, I’m for voter ID too. It’s time we all stop playing around with our elections and get serious about who’s voting.

greggish on November 7, 2006 at 12:18 PM

By the way, I’m for voter ID too.

Well at least that’s nice to hear. I’ve NEVER understood how anybody is against that. Don’t we all at least want voters to be who they claim?

In fact, I think Democrat opposition to voter ID has seriously undermined their credibility on e-voting problems. The two positions seem awfully hypocritical. If they don’t even care WHO is voting, why should I care about possible e-voting problems?

For all I know – “mythical Republican hackers” are just balancing Democratic voter fraud committed by repeat voters, felons, and illegal aliens …

Bottom line: I just find it hard to believe was can’t all agree on a single best method of voting – to be used only by people who are supposed to be voting.

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 12:23 PM

I’ve been voting on these machines for several years. Piece of cake. But I’m not a sniveling, whiny, sore loser Democrat, so maybe that explains it.

BTW, I voted for Bush today as well. Not George, but someone on the GOP ticket where I live is named Bush.

JammieWearingFool on November 7, 2006 at 12:32 PM

I see that MSNBC is reporting voter fraud – by republicans. Nowhere on their site do you see a mention of ACORN, white out, etc.

BobK on November 7, 2006 at 1:30 PM

We here in the Peoples Republic of Washington (King and Snohomish counties) don’t have to worry about mamma machine. Polling places are outlawed by [imperial] decree.

Instead we are forced to vote by mail. Makes it easier for the dead, illegals, felons, and imaginary friends to vote – they don’t have to show id or even exist in the same reality.

Same here on the other side of WA State (Franklin Co.) I hate it.

StephC on November 7, 2006 at 1:34 PM

As you can see by my name, I live in NJ. I’m one of the rare principled conservatives in a sea of liberals. I also know several of the elderly ladies that run the polls by me. Still, they asked me for ID which I gladly gave. I don’t believe it’s a requirement here, but it’s by far the most logical thing we can do to minimize voter fraud. A name and address on your ID can definitely limit the number of places you can go to vote for those people that hop to different polls to vote. The only possible reason I can see to be against it is to encourage fraud.

And maybe I’m mistaken, but I thought you needed to have ID on you if you were over 18 in case you had a run in with the police. Am I mistaken here? Maybe it’s just my NYC upbringing where I saw the cops trying to take back the city under Giuliani after Dinkins nearly destroyed the place.

Yes, I held my nose and voted for Tom Kean Jr. for Senate. He’s a buffoon, but he doesn’t appear to be corrupt like Menendez is, at least not yet. Have a good day all.

njrob on November 7, 2006 at 1:55 PM

Mark Jaquith,

The public has no idea how these machines work. With paper ballots, there are publicly available procedures for counting votes. Not so with electronic voting machines.

We’ve been using a paper ballot which you then feed into an optical scanner for years. It seems like the best of both worlds. If you can read, you can’t screw the ballot up, and there will always be an original paper record of each vote if something happens to the electronic data, intended or unintended. There’s also no human involved in the counting unless the ballot is messed up…in which case the scanner won’t accept it until a poll worker gets you straightened out.

I don’t recall anyone ever requesting a recount other than a write in candidate for a city post a few years back.

Pablo on November 7, 2006 at 2:02 PM

CrazyFool, then your best option is to start cranking out babies.

JackM, good idea. If the dead can vote, then the dead should be able to hold office. Ronaldus Magnus from the grave is better than Kennedy/Kerry/Clinton, et al stealing oxygen.

urbancenturion on November 7, 2006 at 2:30 PM

The ballot I used today had no marks on it identifying who voted. Which means that if a boxful of new ballots suddenly “appeared”, there wuold be no way to substantiate if they were legitimate or not. A similar problem occurs if a boxful of votes from a predominantly “red” district were to fall out of a car window and into a river on the way to the counting station.

The only way to completely rid ourselves of “flaws” in the electoral process would be to dispense with the secret ballot so that audits can be performed after the fact. A record would be made of every vote ever cast – and would be on the record. And if your vote suddenly showed up a few days after election day on a website that didn’t jibe with the one you cast, then an investigation could ensue.

urbancenturion on November 7, 2006 at 2:48 PM

Pablo,

Same here in Indy. We used to have ancient pull-lever machines, but a few election cycles ago they got the electronic ballot readers. I’ve never heard of any problems or controversies. Every time I’ve voted it was smooth sailing.

Jezla on November 7, 2006 at 2:52 PM

The only way to completely rid ourselves of “flaws” in the electoral process would be to dispense with the secret ballot so that audits can be performed after the fact. A record would be made of every vote ever cast – and would be on the record. And if your vote suddenly showed up a few days after election day on a website that didn’t jibe with the one you cast, then an investigation could ensue.

So what do people think of Urbancenturion’s idea? (Great name, by the way!). What’s wrong with it? Wouldn’t it just about solve every problem – if you could later check your OWN vote?

You could even keep it semi-secret by publishing votes by Social Security #.

Seems workable to me.

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 2:53 PM

I’m turning in my absentee ballot. I do not trust the machines.

Theworldisnotenough on November 7, 2006 at 2:56 PM

There wasn’t anything wrong with the machines in those 4 Florida counties in 2000 and there’s nothing wrong with them now…

Of course there wasn’t becuase there were no machines in those counties and 2000.

How could you forget THE HANGING CHAD…

JaHerer22 on November 7, 2006 at 3:11 PM

Of course there wasn’t becuase there were no machines in those counties and 2000.

How could you forget THE HANGING CHAD…

Yup.

And how could you forget Democrats SCREAMING afterwards for electronic voting …?

Oh, the irony. It burns, it burns.

Professor Blather on November 7, 2006 at 3:35 PM

I’m in favor of a voting system where:

- I am required to show government-issued photo ID.
- I am allowed to anonymously fill in my paper ballot or use the electronic voting machine without a moonbat “observer” filming me.
- I am issued some kind of receipt with a unique serial number on it and a confirmation of my choices. After the election is certified, I can visit a website and enter the serial number on my receipt to confirm that my choices were correctly recorded.

Dave Shay on November 7, 2006 at 4:10 PM

I voted a straight republican ticket, and where there was no republican running, I wrote in Ronald Reagan.

JackM on November 7, 2006 at 11:29 AM

Hah… Too funny. I gotta remember that for next time.

Lawrence on November 7, 2006 at 6:04 PM

just voted using those machines. Everything went fine. But I couldn’t find Kerry or Bill Clinton’s name anywhere. I thought they were running for something, seeing as I saw them in every single commercial.

Did not see George Bush either although everyone was running against him. Strange!

Wade on November 7, 2006 at 6:31 PM

I failed your test seejanemom, but not for a lack of Patriotism…Im just not that smart and currently blindly drunk. Ill retake it tommorow when I sober up.

This is my first comment and I look forward to bringing absolutely nothing to the table.

Donkeyhue on November 7, 2006 at 6:40 PM

I love you Michelle!!!

Republicans will do the unthinkable and hold the house and senate and even pick up a couple seats.

YHIHF.

James on November 7, 2006 at 7:48 PM

The winnah and still champion of all dirty elections? Coke Stevenson vs Lyndon Johnson in 1948. Best dirty trick?
It was called voting by the string. “Motor Voters” from south of the Rio Grande were brought in by the truckload. They were generally illiterate in Spanish let alone English. So they were each given a piece of string with a big knot at the top and little knots on down the line. They were to place the big knot in a certain place, stretch the string and then make an “X” by each of the little knots.

One remote precinct had about 547 people living there. Had a good turnout as 868 of them voted. Total was Lyndon Johnson 865, Coke Stevenson 3. When George Parr, the “Duke of Duvall County” was asked to explain that kind of result. He replied, “Three of those dumb Mexicans hung the string in the wrong place.”

So what is new at the polling place?

Oilpatcher on November 7, 2006 at 8:38 PM