Debate and Discussion

For the liberals who voted the Democrats in to "get us out of Iraq"
mapaghimagsik at 10:39AM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
Another excuse used for firing the prosecutors was they were not going after enough cases of “voter fraud”. Strangely enough, this was a big hot button for the administration, although the number of voter fraud cases are so small as to be fast approaching zero.

Its also painfully clear from Monica Goodling's Testimony (“I'm loyal to the President” was her exact quote, when her loyalty should have been elsewhere, as should the presidents' ) that there was politicization at levels which were to remain politically neutral in order for justice, which is supposed to be blind to party, is served.

Voter Fraud is also codespeak for voter caging, designed to keep minorities and the poor off voter roles, since those classes of people generally don't vote the rightwing line.

Not to dally too far off topic, but its a damn shame that a country like Estonia can figure out on-line voting (everyone's got a smart chip card with their PK on it) while the United States can't even seem to get paper ballots right.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
TnTComic at 11:08AM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
mapaghimagsik
Not to dally too far off topic, but its a damn shame that a country like Estonia can figure out on-line voting (everyone's got a smart chip card with their PK on it) while the United States can't even seem to get paper ballots right.

Hell, I can file my taxes on the phone… BUT VOTE?!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Phantom Penguin at 11:57AM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,075
joined: 1-6-2006
TnTComic
mapaghimagsik
Not to dally too far off topic, but its a damn shame that a country like Estonia can figure out on-line voting (everyone's got a smart chip card with their PK on it) while the United States can't even seem to get paper ballots right.

Hell, I can file my taxes on the phone… BUT VOTE?!!!

Estonia is also a country with a population of one million. Thats a couple hundred million short of the US.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:42PM
TnTComic at 12:11PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Phantom Penguin
Estonia is also a country with a population of one million. Thats a couple hundred million short of the US.


My point was that we are trusted to take care of our taxes via the phone, but we can't vote. What do you think is more vital to the country? Accurately tabulating votes, or collecting taxes?





(A: collecting taxes)
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Ronson at 1:16PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
Well, the difference is that taxes are not anonymous. I honestly don't trust any anonymous ballots cast via a computer. There's too much opportunity to alter the results.

I personally don't see why we don't have a computerized voting system that spits out a ballot written in very clear English listing everyone you voted for, with a bar code printed at the bottom. That way, the first count could be made by a computer reading the bar code and any recount could be easily made.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM
mapaghimagsik at 1:28PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
Ronson
Well, the difference is that taxes are not anonymous. I honestly don't trust any anonymous ballots cast via a computer. There's too much opportunity to alter the results.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. How are Federal Income Taxes Anonymous?

edit: Darn Ronson. I apoligize for misreading, and understand your point, I think. I guess it would be hard to capture fraud when voting is supposed to be anonymous.

I personally don't see why we don't have a computerized voting system that spits out a ballot written in very clear English listing everyone you voted for, with a bar code printed at the bottom. That way, the first count could be made by a computer reading the bar code and any recount could be easily made.

The voting machine I used showed you the printed paper ballot, but you didn't get to keep the receipt.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
TnTComic at 6:35PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Ronson
Well, the difference is that taxes are not anonymous. I honestly don't trust any anonymous ballots cast via a computer. There's too much opportunity to alter the results.

You're completely missing my point.

We can do taxes via computer, but not vote? The complexity of one is clearly greater than the other.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
mapaghimagsik at 9:10PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
Phantom Penguin
TnTComic
mapaghimagsik
Not to dally too far off topic, but its a damn shame that a country like Estonia can figure out on-line voting (everyone's got a smart chip card with their PK on it) while the United States can't even seem to get paper ballots right.

Hell, I can file my taxes on the phone… BUT VOTE?!!!

Estonia is also a country with a population of one million. Thats a couple hundred million short of the US.


1.3 million thank you. :D

I may not be a computer expert, but I do know there's this idea that computers “scale”

Our economy is several *hundred* times larger than Estonia's as well.

I very much appreciate you reading the comment and actually caring to comment, but can you – who might be more computer savvy – explain where scaling by a factor of 100 is really that big of a deal?
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
mapaghimagsik at 9:14PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
TnTComic
Ronson
Well, the difference is that taxes are not anonymous. I honestly don't trust any anonymous ballots cast via a computer. There's too much opportunity to alter the results.

You're completely missing my point.

We can do taxes via computer, but not vote? The complexity of one is clearly greater than the other.

Okay, so I got this computer guy screaming “but but but” in my ear. I'll try and translate:

Taxes are computationally intensive, but have pretty well defined rules.

Votes are supposed to be anonymous, where someone can vote, but not vote twice, and you cannot tell who voted for what. Its doable, since you could determine a list of who voted, but not a list of who voted for what. Uh..insert computer jabber here.

So I guess there's a way to do it, and its been well documented, though hell if I would understand it.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
warren at 10:30PM, Aug. 17, 2007
(offline)
posts: 110
joined: 1-9-2007
You'd think we could do it fairly easily. The problem comes with validating that the vote you cast was actually cast by you.

The last election (for the first time) I was asked for my ID. That's great to make sure I didn't vote twice, but voter fraud is normally a lot better organized with poll workers stacking votes before or after the official poll times.

Computers (especially ones not connected to a central computer) only add a false sense of security. Workers could still easily stack votes during slow periods.

I sort of like the idea of the chipped cards that would need inserted in the machine, but can only imagine the uproar when some machines don't work properly… or a hiccup in the mail delays shipments. There would always be people who didn't trust the anonymity, though.
Warren

On the Duck:
Title -updating! ~30 strips!
PAC -New! >10 strips.

Others:
Spare Change -updating! ~2000 strips!
Mass Production -hiatus. ~300 strips.

This guy does Piss Mario, Stick, and Filler!
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:48PM
TnTComic at 5:14AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
warren
You'd think we could do it fairly easily. The problem comes with validating that the vote you cast was actually cast by you.

They validate that its me when I say they owe me thousands of dollars in tax refunds. And they certainly would validate that its me if I owed them thousands of dollars.

Voter fraud is an inevitibility, just like tax fraud. The reason I wish we could cast a vote as easily as we FILE OUR GODDAMN TAXES is that it would be nice to see voter turnout in the 80 and 90 percent area instead of the 30 or 40.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 6:51AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
The only reason there is a stink about voter fraud is because Gore lost in 2000. The recount of 2 counties that were heavily Gore was a bad strategy on that campaign's part. They should have let the count be certified, then challenged, and then he could have gotten the entire state recounted and not had the difficulty of getting it stopped by the USSC on grounds that it violated the 14th amendment. Of course this is all provided for in the constitution of Florida, (I live here). If Gore had been smart, things might have turned out differently. But of course, Gore lost, so that means that the Republicans cheated. Yeah okay.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
TnTComic at 7:32AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Of course its that simple to you. Its more comfortable to believe that then to believe that its possible to rig elections.

Personally, I was more bothered by the President of the company that produces voting machines telling Bush not to worry about the election in ‘04 in a letter he wrote 10 months before the election.

But what do I know? I’m just a sore loser!
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 10:29AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
TnTComic
Of course its that simple to you. Its more comfortable to believe that then to believe that its possible to rig elections.

Personally, I was more bothered by the President of the company that produces voting machines telling Bush not to worry about the election in ‘04 in a letter he wrote 10 months before the election.

But what do I know? I’m just a sore loser!

I never said that you were a sore loser. I just stated fact. The fact is that the USSC said that a campaign can't just recount part of the state, it has to recount the entire state because the state's electoral votes are winner takes all. Because the Gore campaign waited so long to start counting, there was danger of producing a constitutional crisis with the seemingly never ending litigation. As I said, they should have avoided trying to win political points by challenging the certification and instead, just followed Florida law.

If that makes you a sore loser in your own mind then so be it. Or maybe you think the election was rigged because Bush won? I don't know. I don't live in conspiracy theory land.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
TitanOne at 11:33AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 199
joined: 5-12-2007
Vindibudd
TnTComic
Of course its that simple to you. Its more comfortable to believe that then to believe that its possible to rig elections.

Personally, I was more bothered by the President of the company that produces voting machines telling Bush not to worry about the election in ‘04 in a letter he wrote 10 months before the election.

But what do I know? I’m just a sore loser!

I never said that you were a sore loser. I just stated fact. The fact is that the USSC said that a campaign can't just recount part of the state, it has to recount the entire state because the state's electoral votes are winner takes all. Because the Gore campaign waited so long to start counting, there was danger of producing a constitutional crisis with the seemingly never ending litigation. As I said, they should have avoided trying to win political points by challenging the certification and instead, just followed Florida law.

If that makes you a sore loser in your own mind then so be it. Or maybe you think the election was rigged because Bush won? I don't know. I don't live in conspiracy theory land.

I think you're missing the point. If the system uses easily riggable counting machines for votes, what American citizen with half a brain, or a conscience, would approve of such a thing?

We can't have banana republic elections where our votes can be manipulated by cheats. It shouldn't matter to you which party or candidate has used the cheats, or even whether or not it's happened..YET. What matters is that's sitting there like a weapon waiting to be used. Hillary Clinton may use it in 2008 to take the White House, and then you (I'm guessing you're a Republican) will suddenly develop a “bad feeling about this”.

Well, in all likelihood, the Democrats will take the House, the Senate, and the Executive Branch sixteen months from now. At that time I'm going to check your posts and see if, by then, you have moved into conspiracy land!

Meanwhile, you should be more worried about constitutional trampling and vote rigging.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:30PM
mapaghimagsik at 11:49AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006

From the Times:

Last October, President Bush spoke with Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to pass along concerns by Republicans that some prosecutors were not aggressively addressing voter fraud, the White House said Monday. Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, was among the politicians who complained directly to the president, according to an administration official.

So unfortunately, trying to link this to the shenanigans around the 2000 election is simply not true.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
TnTComic at 11:58AM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Vindibudd
The only reason there is a stink about voter fraud is because Gore lost in 2000.

So… yeah, don't try to play innocent. You dropped the gauntlet with that.

People couldn't possibly have a problem with voter fraud unless they're sore losers!

I mean, it couldn't have anything to do with the FACT that the deciding state was Florida, that Bush had connections in Florida, and thousands of voters were disqualified in Florida under false pretenses. It also couldn't have ANYTHING to do with the absentee votes cast by overseas soldiers that were counted even though they came in past the deadline. NO! The only thing people have a problem with is Gore losing!

I'm a libertarian. I don't give a fuck that Gore lost. I give a fuck that the process was fucked.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 1:02PM, Aug. 18, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
TnTComic
Vindibudd
The only reason there is a stink about voter fraud is because Gore lost in 2000.

So… yeah, don't try to play innocent. You dropped the gauntlet with that.

People couldn't possibly have a problem with voter fraud unless they're sore losers!

I mean, it couldn't have anything to do with the FACT that the deciding state was Florida, that Bush had connections in Florida, and thousands of voters were disqualified in Florida under false pretenses. It also couldn't have ANYTHING to do with the absentee votes cast by overseas soldiers that were counted even though they came in past the deadline. NO! The only thing people have a problem with is Gore losing!

I'm a libertarian. I don't give a fuck that Gore lost. I give a fuck that the process was fucked.

Yeah, I am not going to continue a conversation with a laundry list of black helicopters and tin hats.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
mapaghimagsik at 1:04PM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
Because with billions of dollars on the line, thinking that anyone would mess with the voting process is purely into conspiracy theory.

Its why I never see any security in Las Vegas. Everyone plays honestly and fair.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
Vindibudd at 1:35PM, Aug. 18, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
mapaghimagsik
Because with billions of dollars on the line, thinking that anyone would mess with the voting process is purely into conspiracy theory.

Its why I never see any security in Las Vegas. Everyone plays honestly and fair.

When your evidence of a conspiracy is that “Florida decided the election and Bush has ties to Florida” then you are entering the realm of paranoia. It is completely out in the open what happened there and if a person cannot accept that, then they stray into well what if this and what if that and pretty soon we are digging up Monoliths buried with Jimmy Hoffa on the Moon and Art Bell is the President.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
TnTComic at 2:13PM, Aug. 18, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Vindibudd
When your evidence of a conspiracy is that “Florida decided the election and Bush has ties to Florida” then you are entering the realm of paranoia. It is completely out in the open what happened there and if a person cannot accept that, then they stray into well what if this and what if that and pretty soon we are digging up Monoliths buried with Jimmy Hoffa on the Moon and Art Bell is the President.

I think you're dismissing the politics that goes on at the smaller levels.

How about that Diebold incident? I see you didn't address that. More tin foil hats?

Look, to me its clear that you're simply of the opinion that all the election B.S. was the product of sour grapes. Let's do some googling:

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/12/04/disenfranchised.voters/index.html

Not to mention the incidents where voters were disqualified because they had names SIMILAR to convicted felons.

You also didn't address the absentee ballot thing either.

Any reason? Or just more comfortable to paint people as conspiracy nuts?

Look, this sort of thing is important to everybody. Suppose it happens to the guy YOU vote for next time.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 3:38PM, Aug. 18, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
TnTComic
I think you're dismissing the politics that goes on at the smaller levels.

No, I am dismissing this idea that we can't have a fair election because everything is rigged. You have no evidence that things are rigged, you have random coincidences that are magnified because of an outcome that some people just did not like. You talk about Florida being the deciding factor and that it must have been rigged. Here, how about this, was California rigged?

Were

Washington
Oregon
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Illinois
Michigan
New Mexico
Pennsylvania
Maryland
Delaware
New York
Vermont
Massachusetts
New Jersey
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Maine
Hawaii

all rigged as well? Well they must have overcome the giant conspiracy! The Bush For Prez Conspiracy Corp failed to deliver the biggest electoral prize in the country with California. But of course, the shenanigans only happened in Florida where those absentee ballots from soldiers in the field arrived late, because you know, we can't let people defending the country vote. Screw those mother—-ers! Rules are RULES! Except for when we ignore Florida's recount procedure and only pick two heavily Democratic counties to recount because we only need to come up with 550 more votes. Then it is okay to ignore rules.

TnTComic
How about that Diebold incident? I see you didn't address that. More tin foil hats?

What about it? You say that the Diebold guy told Bush not to worry about the election. Yeah? So? Oh you mean that they were in on the whole thing together? It must be a conspiracy! It was rigged! Or not.

TnTComic
Look, to me its clear that you're simply of the opinion that all the election B.S. was the product of sour grapes. Let's do some googling:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/12/04/disenfranchised.voters/index.html

Well, that may be clear to you, but what is really clear is that I think that the only reason that people are hyper excited about vote fraud all of a sudden is because of 2000. No one seemed to care when Mayor Richard Daley was ballot stuffing Kennedy to victory of Nixon. Now bam, Gore loses and it's the Second Coming of Tyranny. I am against vote fraud and always have been. But I just seem to have a problem signing on to the idea that people on the left that wail the loudest are of the ulterior motive free variety especially when it comes to the fact that they only have problems with elections they lose.

What happened in 2006? Did the Bush Election Fraud Conspiracy get caught sleeping?

Here is a Right Wing Site that lists Democratic voter fraud, but hey, it is the Republicans there so it must be completely false.

TnTComic
Not to mention the incidents where voters were disqualified because they had names SIMILAR to convicted felons.

Yeah, that could happen, but that doesn't make it part of a giant conspiracy, it could actually be that there were mistakes, and there are always provisional ballots, like when they can't verify addresses and such.

TnTComic
You also didn't address the absentee ballot thing either.
Any reason? Or just more comfortable to paint people as conspiracy nuts?

Because military service people are not directly responsible for the delivery of their ballots, it is something the federal government is responsible for, so if it is a little late, then I am not going to whine about it like apparently you do. We can't have those people defending our country be voting, they might vote a way we don't like!

TnTComic
Look, this sort of thing is important to everybody. Suppose it happens to the guy YOU vote for next time.

It has happened plenty of times to the guys I have supported. But now Bush fires prosecutors for not going after voter fraud and you all are apoplectic with rage about it. Make up your minds.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
TnTComic at 5:39AM, Aug. 19, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
It would be nice if you could discuss the topic at hand without calling me a whiner, a nut and a sore loser.

last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 10:14AM, Aug. 19, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
I didn't call you a nut, and I didn't call you a sore loser. I did say you were apparently whining about absentee ballots though.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
TnTComic at 10:44AM, Aug. 19, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Vindibudd
I didn't call you a nut, and I didn't call you a sore loser. I did say you were apparently whining about absentee ballots though.

You know what, Vindi, don't even try that cheap shit. If you tell me that you play tennis, and I say tennis players are fags, you'd be right in thinking that I called you a fag. Just cut it out, quit trying to play innocent. You're better than that.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 12:50PM, Aug. 19, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
TnTComic
You know what, Vindi, don't even try that cheap shit. If you tell me that you play tennis, and I say tennis players are fags, you'd be right in thinking that I called you a fag. Just cut it out, quit trying to play innocent. You're better than that.

Well,

A. I don't think you are a nut.
B. I don't think you are a sore loser.

Now, TnT, you can continue screaming at me with all sorts of profanity and slurs but that does not change the fact that I never called you either of those things. I am not playing innocent, I am playing literate. If I wanted to call you a whack-job moon-bat, I can certainly do that, but then there is no reason to even be talking to you if I believed that is there?

Some of the arguments you make are conspiracy theory based but that does not make you a “nut”. People who invent conspiracy theories are nuts. People who believe them are just not thinking very critically. Not thinking critically doesn't make you crazy, it just makes you intellectually lazy.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
Ronson at 2:02PM, Aug. 19, 2007
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
Here we go down the voter fraud hole again…

just some bullet points pointing out things that have been said.

- Kennedy probably had ballots stuffed in Illinois. Nixon probably had ballots stuffed in California. Both candidates backed off the issue because they were both guilty. I honestly would have preferred an indictment against both instigators from both parties, as it did cast doubt on our system.

- Tens of thousands of names were removed from the voter polls from having names similar to a felons list. Some of these people were not the people on the list, and some of them were felons in other states, which the Florida constitution states they can not hold against them. When the Florida government was told about the error rate, they still decided it was worth going through with. Not coincidentally, more minorities were represented on the list than not, and thus thousands of voters were unconstitutionally disenfranchised that could conceivably have swayed the election. But it's unprovable because there's no way to say how many were actually turned away.

- Absentee ballots and provisional ballots are NEVER counted unless the vote count is incredibly close (usually less than 1%). As a result, those purged from the voter rolls, those living overseas, our soldiers and others who were not allowed to vote on election day never had their vote counted. I will not say that that conclusively proves that these voters would have swayed the election, but I will say that I think that their vote should be counted every time and that it is politicial games to not do so.

- George W. Bush's lawyers blocked a full recount of the Florida votes statewide, not Al Gore. Yes, Gore's tactic was stupid and led to suspicion, whereas he should have demanded a statewide hand recount from the beginning. The Supreme Court halted all recounting on the grounds that it would do “irreparable harm” to GWB to have the votes recounted. Interesting phrasing to us laymen, but I'm sure it doesn't sound quite as partisan if you understand legalese.

- Conspiracy theories are not necessarily untrue, and they are certainly not all crazy. In fact, conspiracies happen all the time. Hiding the actual reality around Pat Tillman's death ACTUALLY HAPPENED. That's a conspiracy of our military to hide the truth. The reasons are unknown yet, and there is much speculation which ranges from very dismissive to fire on the hair. These things happen all the time in a government with as much secrecy as ours has. To pretend that it's silly to think it can't happen is just foolish and dangerous for America's future.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM
TnTComic at 2:11PM, Aug. 19, 2007
(offline)
posts: 681
joined: 6-25-2007
Vindi, you can frame it however you like, but you're playing innocent while continuing to insult me. I don't mind the latter, but the former is aggravating.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:31PM
Vindibudd at 2:46PM, Aug. 19, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
TnTComic
Vindi, you can frame it however you like, but you're playing innocent while continuing to insult me. I don't mind the latter, but the former is aggravating.

Sigh.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
Vindibudd at 2:49PM, Aug. 19, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
Once upon a time we had this discussion, Ronson. I doubt either of us has had a change in viewpoint. My problem at this point is the whole attitude that there was a giant ongoing Republican election conspiracy here when in reality, it would be close to impossible to rig an entire nationwide election.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved