Comments on: Did Hennepin County blow the ballot-transmission process?

By: Michelle Malkin » Who says conservative bloggers don’t do reporting?

Michelle Malkin » Who says conservative bloggers don’t do reporting? — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 23:06:09 +0000

[...] liberal government in 2005, provided original investigative coverage of the Minnesota recount (see here and here); on-the-ground coverage from the RNCC; and numerous interviews with newsmakers like this [...]

By: MUST READ FROM HOT AIR: “HENNEPIN COUNTY KNEW OF MACHINE FAILURE 11 DAYS OUT” | Minnesota Democrats Exposed

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:29:45 +0000

[...] election continues its curious path today with a new revelation about the transmission process. Yesterday, I spoke with an election judge in Hennepin County who told me that the modems in ballot-counting [...]

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Minnesota Recount: Hennepin County knew of machine failure 11 days out

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:51:07 +0000

By: Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 04:12:02 +0000

I have to confess that one time I got an IP address mixed up and inadvertently put the router/gateway address as the IP address of a device. Basically it took the entire network segment down. Ouch.

This does make one wonder about the test plans for these machines – don’t they actually test transmission to “secure location”?

By: Amazing Grace

Amazing Grace — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:04:50 +0000

I’m an election Inspector in upstate NY. We were suppose to have new voting machines this year, but thank God we didn’t need to use them because most of us haven’t a clue as to how they work. Two of us worked on getting it to print ballots for two hours with no success. Luckily, the old machines, about thirty years old worked just fine. I’ve been doing this now for about eight years and this was the first year when everything seemed to get screwed up. We normally have two or three provisional ballets, we had twenty three. People were being sent to the wrong polling places, their names were on the rolls though I had personal knowledge that the voted in the primary and previous general elections. We would never think of allowing just one person to be in charge of the tallies. Ours have to be called outby a member of both parties, written down, called into the board of elections and then the tally sheet taken down to the board of elections. I would never let just myself or any of the other inspectors to be alone with the votes. It’s just not right.
We can fight all this fraud, but the power at the moment is all on their side and I’m sure they will pass new laws to see it stays that way. Now we have to worry about Georgia. God will it never end.

By: tom

tom — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:47:14 +0000

I have to wonder…in Canada we run our elections based on a piece of paper and a pencil. We mark an X in the circle for our candidate, and then hand-count the ballots in the presence of scrutineers from each of the parties (who can challenge any ballot).

The results, once they have been tallied in a poll, then are certified by the poll captain with the consent of all scrutineers (unless otherwise noted), and all the votes are sealed in a tamper-proof bag.

The results are then reported by telephone, in the presence of all the scrutineers, to the regional returning office. The votes are then recorded and inputted by internet into the system for that riding (or district, if you prefer) at the office. These inputted vote tallies are then matched to the actual paper copies of the tallies, which are returned to the same office (other copies of the paper tallies, on carbon paper, are sent to the provincial and national offices).

If there is a discrepancy, then the appropriate bag is opened and a manual recount by the elections employees is conducted in a transparent fashion.

Once all this has happened, we still have provisions for automatic and judicial recounts.

The thing I can’t seem to figure out is why it seems to be so hard sometimes to have an election go off without any hiccups in the USA.

I don’t mean to sound condescending, so please forgive me. I honestly can’t understand how a system with automatic reporting wasn’t tested and configured properly at least a WEEK before advance voting?

Also, why is it that there seems to be no paper and pencil voting in the US? I know that you vote for more positions than we do (such as judges), but couldn’t that be handled by differently coloured ballots?

And yes, the US has over ten times the population of Canada, but to me that just means that you would need ten times the number of employees and voting stations that we have.

Here, we have an inedependant organization in charge of elections which reports directly to our Parliament (not to any party). Is it a matter of States’ rights (and hence, Federalism), that each state can run elections in any way they feel like?

This is something that I have been wondering since 2000 (for obvious reasons), and if someone could clarify it for me, even a little bit, I’d be very grateful!

Sorry for the rant. ;-)

Canucker on November 11, 2008 at 2:16 PM

That all presumes everyone wants a fair election. There are a lot of people who like the current system.

Try to tighten up controls and requirements, and people will scream about voter suppression.

I still have hopes that one day someone will come along who will ramrod voter reform through to completion. I just hope it won’t be after we find out elections have already been stolen.

One of the few federal interventions I think would be truly justified would be a federal poll observer at every precinct and voting district, concerned not with counting votes, but with making sure there’s no funny business.

They would have the right to do that for all federal elections. They may not for statewide-only elections.

By: Canucker

Canucker — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:17:00 +0000

Thank you RegularJoe!

I figured that it was probably something like that, but it’s nice to hear that there’s something fundamentally different in the US than here.

As for the “heavy hand of government”, it’s always a danger. I remember a particular head of the elections agency deciding that a huge portion of a province being evacuated for a flood wouldn’t affect the overall result/conduct of the overall election… Talk about neutering my vote!

However, if all 50 states came together to decide on a uniform method for elections, and a method for staffing an agency to oversee that method, it would do a huge service to rehabilitating the US electoral process.

My nightmare for this year was a squeaker like in 2000. Hell, as much as I hated Lurch (I mean, Kerry) in 2004, at least he had the decency to spare the country the spectacle of endless recounts.

By: RegularJoe

RegularJoe — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:58:51 +0000

Here, we have an inedependant organization in charge of elections which reports directly to our Parliament (not to any party). Is it a matter of States’ rights (and hence, Federalism), that each state can run elections in any way they feel like?

Yes, it is. The constitution allows each state to decide how it will appoint electors, and whether those electors are committing a (state, not federal) crime should they vote other than as promised.

I’m starting to think that this process may require the heavy hand of the Federal government if we’re going to have any chance at fair elections. I know, I know… who said the Feds will be fair? All I know is it isn’t working now. Even where the tallies are fair, the losers doubt the integrity of the results. With each election we come closer to the day when roughly 50% of the public refuses to recognize the results of an election, and we descend into anarchy.

By: Canucker

Canucker — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:16:08 +0000

I have to wonder…in Canada we run our elections based on a piece of paper and a pencil. We mark an X in the circle for our candidate, and then hand-count the ballots in the presence of scrutineers from each of the parties (who can challenge any ballot).

The results, once they have been tallied in a poll, then are certified by the poll captain with the consent of all scrutineers (unless otherwise noted), and all the votes are sealed in a tamper-proof bag.

The results are then reported by telephone, in the presence of all the scrutineers, to the regional returning office. The votes are then recorded and inputted by internet into the system for that riding (or district, if you prefer) at the office. These inputted vote tallies are then matched to the actual paper copies of the tallies, which are returned to the same office (other copies of the paper tallies, on carbon paper, are sent to the provincial and national offices).

If there is a discrepancy, then the appropriate bag is opened and a manual recount by the elections employees is conducted in a transparent fashion.

Once all this has happened, we still have provisions for automatic and judicial recounts.

The thing I can’t seem to figure out is why it seems to be so hard sometimes to have an election go off without any hiccups in the USA.

I don’t mean to sound condescending, so please forgive me. I honestly can’t understand how a system with automatic reporting wasn’t tested and configured properly at least a WEEK before advance voting?

Also, why is it that there seems to be no paper and pencil voting in the US? I know that you vote for more positions than we do (such as judges), but couldn’t that be handled by differently coloured ballots?

And yes, the US has over ten times the population of Canada, but to me that just means that you would need ten times the number of employees and voting stations that we have.

Here, we have an inedependant organization in charge of elections which reports directly to our Parliament (not to any party). Is it a matter of States’ rights (and hence, Federalism), that each state can run elections in any way they feel like?

This is something that I have been wondering since 2000 (for obvious reasons), and if someone could clarify it for me, even a little bit, I’d be very grateful!

Sorry for the rant. ;-)

By: ErikTheRed

ErikTheRed — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:42:42 +0000

RegularJoe on November 11, 2008 at 11:41 AM

RegularJoe – The problem with verifiable votes is that it allows people to sell their votes or be extorted into voting a certain way. I’ve had some thoughts on how to do that myself, but I’m not posting them here because I don’t think most of the people in this forum want to read a bunch of hardcore crypto stuff.

Running a secure, verifiable electronic voting system is a reasonably difficult proposition. The sort of thing that we should be throwing our best and brightest at. Judging by the source code that’s been uncovered for the existing voting systems, all of the design and implementation has been done by the lowest bidders…

By: jerseyman

jerseyman — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:39:56 +0000

But then the election is over, we all want to get along, we all want to move on… and nothing gets done to tighten up the system, remove dead people and felons and illegals from the voter rolls, get better machines and systems that eliminate human error, and it usually gets worse the next time.

Corrupt lazy election officials, corrupt partisan voter organizations, clueless, uninformed electorate…

With all of the US’s brains, talent, technology – why can’t we do a better job than this?

rockbend on November 11, 2008 at 11:01 AM

The Democrats have worked very hard to undermine the integrity of the voting process. Early voting, same day registration/voting, extending voting hours (and certification deadlines in FL 2000) have been steps to get around and undermine the protections that have been put in place. Even open primaries are a joke, allowing the opposing party to determine their opponent’s candidate.

By: Doug

Doug — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:36:36 +0000

My head hurts when I think that Franken might steal this election. He thinks this is his right as he wants to be Paul Wellstone.
I’ve joked before about Franken winning, becoming the ‘poison pill’ to take down the Dem Congress just as he did Air America Radio. I’m waiting for Coleman to win so I can start calling Franken “Senator Al Failure”. Hurry up, Norm.
Those suspecting that Hennepin county Dem officials might have screwed the IP addresses intentionally to create enough doubt so that the courts have to decide…may be right.
I think Coleman would win a revote. Franken coming this close to actual power would wipe grins off of many Democrats who voted the party line, only voting for Franken because of the ‘D’ after his name.

By: Mr_Magoo

Mr_Magoo — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:05:23 +0000

Why can’t we all go into a voting booth and vote online over a highly secure connection to one server located in a bunker somewhere?

Why does this have to be so complicated?

If Intel can deliver hundreds of thousands of classmate PCs to countries around the world, why can’t we overcome this fraudulent process?

Perhaps those in charge like to have the fraud option available when they need it.

By: jeff_from_mpls

jeff_from_mpls — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:52:07 +0000

What I want to know is why one person carried the results.
njcommuter on November 11, 2008 at 12:03 PM

Your mistake is to presume that a Democrat wants to act honorably. You need to get a more accurate picture of the garden variety Minnesota Democrat in your head.

Picture the Democrat bundling up the ballots, heading to his/her/its car, looking at you, giving you the finger, and driving off.

They’re arrogant vermin, and long past the point of caring what anyone else thinks of their wrongdoing.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:51:33 +0000

Franken will get it in the courts, and some anarchist judge will “speak truth to power” and you will say hello to Senator Franken.

Minnesota is a political cesspool, one step behind Chicago. I highly recommend avoiding this place at all cost. Why Ed moved here is a mystery to me.

jeff_from_mpls on November 11, 2008 at 10:31 AM

I wouldn’t put it past the Senate itself to “speak truth to power”; after all, they’re the final arbiter of who does and doesn’t get seated, and if Franken would represent #60 in the ‘Rat caucus, I can see them seating him regardless of the actual results of the election.

By: canopfor

canopfor — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:33:56 +0000

Two can play this game,

Coleman should ask for

another recount!!!

By: joey24007

joey24007 — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:22:48 +0000

This Franken dude is the biggest rodent to ever come down the pike .. the very fact that he is even IN THE RACE, tells me something about some folks in Minnesota

By: Christine

Christine — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:07:24 +0000

Votes for “Me, Al Franken” keep miraculously appearing and that’s…ok?
I worked the polls during the mid-term election and saw up close how difficult those touch-screen voting machines are to set up and operate. It took more than 5 hours to get them working properly.
The Libs are better at cheating, that’s why Barry won by 6% rather than 1% or 2%…but McCain wouldn’t have ordered a recount because he’s a white ‘Repub’. We can’t have another 2000 debacle; the country would have been destroyed by riots because the Obamites couldn’t be held accountable for their reaction. The fix was in anyway…

By: canopfor

canopfor — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:07:15 +0000

The electronic voting machines,cards,
online voting has to be deep-sixed!

Time to eliminate fraud!

The ballot needs to be paper,with
circles next to the candidates,put
your X on it,then into a locked
steel box which is sealed!

This is the same crock of sh#t
that happened in Broward Florida!

There needs to be a third party
involved in the election process,
so Liberals and Republicans are
seperated from any part of the
ballot counting!

Also,a tamper-proof Identification,
that proves you are legal American
citizen!!

Then your identification is scanned,
therefore ACORN can’t use your name
a bizillion times!!

Something has to change!!

By: jeff_from_mpls

jeff_from_mpls — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:06:16 +0000

I’m not strong on MN geography…

Hennepin County is what? All of metro Minneapolis?

Vatican Watcher on November 11, 2008 at 11:32 AM

Dante’s 8th Circle of Hell, the ring of fraud and treachery.

Oh, you mean physical geography? Minneapolis.

Don’t come here. Don’t even visit. It’s horrid.

By: njcommuter

njcommuter — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:03:46 +0000

What I want to know is why one person carried the results. Don’t they drive cars that can carry four people? That would allow a judge, a second poll worker, one Dem poll watcher and one GOP poll watcher. If everything is in a sealed package, kept where the folks in the rear can see it, there should be no opportunity for funny business–unless one of the people is an experienced magician, of course.

By: Burgher

Burgher — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:03:01 +0000

Jetboy

Great idea concerning the lock box paper ballot. We should also dip our finger or whole hand in indellable ink to prove that we have already voted, thus preventing a person from voting twice.

Our Precinct set up the electronic tabulation machine in a Jevhovah Witness Church gym. I thought that maybe they could take this idea one further and have the Jehovas oversee the process since they do not have a horse in the race

By: MarkTheGreat

MarkTheGreat — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:55:04 +0000

Sounds like they have found a way around the protections built into the system.

By: Eagle 1

Eagle 1 — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:51:33 +0000

We have a similar system here in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) with the optical scanners. However, the ballots, electronic card, etc. are escorted to the BOE by two judges/ pollworkers one from each party in theory. Hence in a very blue county such as this one Republican judges were very much in demand. This was the first time I worked the polls and saw nothing untowards going on in the downtown precinct where I worked. Seal numbers on the scanner and ballot boxes are recorded every step of the way, all day long with witnesses needed to sign-off. It seems to be a system which can work as long as documentation is completed every step of the way. If it is not, you fire and prosecute. If the local BOE doesn’t get their act together and enforce State Laws, you prosecute them. Our local BOE was under state supervision during this election because of past performance with the touchscreen machines and screwups at every level. Based upon what I saw anyway (in the single precinct I worked), this election was clean. Others may have had a differnt experience.

Eagle 1

By: Mojave Mark

Mojave Mark — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:50:58 +0000

Time to go biometric for voting. You get everything scanned, both hands (all 10 fingers), and both eyes. When you go to vote they scan your left eye and boom no more voter fraud and no more illegals voting. I’d scan everything initially so that the eye-patch, my hand was injured crowd could only vote once too.

Yah I know that would put us closer to the mark of the beast but at least we’d have fair elections until then.