the election part 3

loki said:

Therefore, we've got an idea. How about a sort of second American
Revolution, Canada, in which you annex all the blue states, liberate us from
King George, and thus become the world's sole superpower.'

Three words: Freedom of Speech. Read up on Canada's recent
history with the concept.

My dad's a Canadian, and most of my living blood relatives
live there, but you couldn't pay me enough to live in Canada
now.

-km

--
Only cowards fight kids -- unidentified Moscow protester

http://community.webshots.com/user/blackrosequilts
proud to be owned by a yorkie

"the black rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

loki wrote:

[loki quoted a news article]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Therefore, we've got an idea. How about a sort of second American
Revolution, Canada, in which you annex all the blue states, liberate us
from King George, and thus become the world's sole superpower.'

Three words: Freedom of Speech. Read up on Canada's recent history with
the concept.

I am Canadian.

--
'swinging on the branch
of a broken family tree'
-edie brickell

"loki" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Therefore, we've got an idea. How about a sort of second American

Revolution, Canada, in which you annex all the blue states, liberate us

from

Quoted message said:

King George, and thus become the world's sole superpower.'

as far as the rest of are concerned, you can have them, but don't expect to
become a superpower, they won't do anything to defend you,only want your
money.

In article <[email hidden]>,

loki said:

I was going to vent on both sides and tell everyone to get over it:

Kerry-ites: you lost. Deal with it. You can't blame Chad from Florida or
the EC being used instead of the popular vote.. Your guy lost. It's not the
end of the world. If you really believe Bush will be responsible for the
irreparable destruction all things dear and true blue American then you owe
it to yourself to stop wasting your time on a cycling ng and initiate armed
insurrection immediately. Otherwise volunteer, donate money, start the
battle for the midterms and 2008. But [censored] about it here is rather
pointless.

I'm not [censored]. I'm trying out different campaign speeches. I'm
trying to be productive and work for the future. If that fails, screw
Canada, I'm going to Europe!

Todd Kuzma

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 22:31:38 -0500, "loki" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I was going to vent on both sides and tell everyone to get over it:

Kerry-ites: you lost. Deal with it. You can't blame Chad from Florida or
the EC being used instead of the popular vote.. Your guy lost. It's not the
end of the world. If you really believe Bush will be responsible for the
irreparable destruction all things dear and true blue American then you owe
it to yourself to stop wasting your time on a cycling ng and initiate armed
insurrection immediately. Otherwise volunteer, donate money, start the
battle for the midterms and 2008. But [censored] about it here is rather
pointless.

One problem is that I don't really know if we lost fairly. We feared
for over a year that the opposition would rig the machines, which are
made by Republican leaders. Being a computer programmer, I know just
what they could have done. Hey, every 20th Kerry vote gets changed to
a Bush vote. Who would know?

How could anyone oppose a receipt, a paper trail, that can be observed
by the voter? The only reason for opposing such a system would be so
that cheating is impossible to detect. The opposition to such a system
makes me very suspicious.

I, and many other folks, stated before the election that the only way
to know if the machines were cheating was to see if the vote count
differs from the exit polling. It did. The exit polling looked very
good for Kerry, and the voting went the other way.

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, in a democracy is more important than
making sure that votes are counted honestly. We have no system in
place to make sure that that happens here.

"dgk" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

One problem is that I don't really know if we lost fairly. We feared
for over a year that the opposition would rig the machines, which are
made by Republican leaders. Being a computer programmer, I know just
what they could have done. Hey, every 20th Kerry vote gets changed to
a Bush vote. Who would know?

How could anyone oppose a receipt, a paper trail, that can be observed
by the voter? The only reason for opposing such a system would be so
that cheating is impossible to detect. The opposition to such a system
makes me very suspicious.

Only if it is a receipt that the voter looks at, and then goes into a locked
box, to be used in the event of a later recount.
*Not* a receipt ("I voted for X"😉 that the voter takes home.

Pete

dgk said:

I, and many other folks, stated before the election that the only way
to know if the machines were cheating was to see if the vote count
differs from the exit polling. It did. The exit polling looked very
good for Kerry, and the voting went the other way.

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

Or it's possible (and now verified) that Kerry operatives "leaked" the "good
news" to those all-too-anxious to hear it. Yet another dirty trick to try
to discourage swing-state Bush supporters from voting.

Not to mention, of course, machines with votes on 'em before the polls even
opened.

Bill "Bush was behind at 6:59 AM in Philly" S.

Pete said:

Only if it is a receipt that the voter looks at, and then goes into a
locked box, to be used in the event of a later recount.

Lock box? Recount?? Aaarrgggghhhhh!!!

Bill "2000 flashback" S.

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:49:32 GMT, "B i l l S o r n s o n"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Or it's possible (and now verified) that Kerry operatives "leaked" the "good
news" to those all-too-anxious to hear it. Yet another dirty trick to try
to discourage swing-state Bush supporters from voting.

Surely that would be more calculated to stop Kerry voters, and the
Bushies would be out in droves to try to undo the damage?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Just zis Guy said:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:49:32 GMT, "B i l l S o r n s o n"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Or it's possible (and now verified) that Kerry operatives "leaked"
the "good news" to those all-too-anxious to hear it. Yet another
dirty trick to try to discourage swing-state Bush supporters from
voting.

Surely that would be more calculated to stop Kerry voters, and the
Bushies would be out in droves to try to undo the damage?\

Nope, doesn't work that way. (Look at West FL '00 when Gore was projected
winner before polls closed.)

Bill "people love (and will back) a winner" S.

B i l l S o r n s o n said:

dgk said:

I, and many other folks, stated before the election that the only way
to know if the machines were cheating was to see if the vote count
differs from the exit polling. It did. The exit polling looked very
good for Kerry, and the voting went the other way.

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

Or it's possible (and now verified) that Kerry operatives "leaked" the "good
news" to those all-too-anxious to hear it. Yet another dirty trick to try
to discourage swing-state Bush supporters from voting.

Not to mention, of course, machines with votes on 'em before the polls even
opened.

Bill "Bush was behind at 6:59 AM in Philly" S.

Well if we had a paper trail then we would know. But who blocked the
paper trail? It sure wasn't our side. We knew they would cheat, and I
think they did.

Where is the paper trail? Don't change the subject, don't tell me that
votes were in before the machines opened. Where is the paper trail?

B i l l S o r n s o n said:

dgk said:

I, and many other folks, stated before the election that the only way
to know if the machines were cheating was to see if the vote count
differs from the exit polling. It did. The exit polling looked very
good for Kerry, and the voting went the other way.

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

Or it's possible (and now verified) that Kerry operatives "leaked" the "good
news" to those all-too-anxious to hear it. Yet another dirty trick to try
to discourage swing-state Bush supporters from voting.

There were several other problems. At least one batch of forms was
said to have left "Terrorism" off the list of selections as Most
Important Issue. This might explain why "Moral Values" topped the
list.

Exits were never meant to predict the outcome, but simply explain that
outcome.

Since the actual vote matches pre election weekend polls VERY closely,
it is obvious the exits were off.

Quoted message said:

Not to mention, of course, machines with votes on 'em before the polls even
opened.

Counties with more registed voters than there were living,
non-fictional adults. ("Cartoon characters for Kerry!"😉.

dgk said:

B i l l S o r n s o n said:

dgk said:

I, and many other folks, stated before the election that the only
way to know if the machines were cheating was to see if the vote
count differs from the exit polling. It did. The exit polling
looked very good for Kerry, and the voting went the other way.

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted
for Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit
polling methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was
tampered with.

Or it's possible (and now verified) that Kerry operatives "leaked"
the "good news" to those all-too-anxious to hear it. Yet another
dirty trick to try to discourage swing-state Bush supporters from
voting.

Not to mention, of course, machines with votes on 'em before the
polls even opened.

Bill "Bush was behind at 6:59 AM in Philly" S.

Well if we had a paper trail then we would know. But who blocked the
paper trail? It sure wasn't our side. We knew they would cheat, and I
think they did.

Where is the paper trail? Don't change the subject, don't tell me that
votes were in before the machines opened. Where is the paper trail?

Dude, the Dems had ten /thousand/ lawyers ready to disperse throughout the
country at every /hint/ of cheating. Give it up already...

Bill "results were clear and clean" S.

Quoted message said:

dgk [email hidden]

wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

One problem is that I don't really know if we lost fairly. We feared
for over a year that the opposition would rig the machines, which are
made by Republican leaders. Being a computer programmer, I know just
what they could have done. Hey, every 20th Kerry vote gets changed to
a Bush vote. Who would know?

----snip----

Alternatively, every 20th Bush vote could be changed to a Kerry vote but absent
any evidence that they were, your "point"- such as it is- is, well....
pointless.

Quoted message said:

How could anyone oppose a receipt, a paper trail, that can be observed
by the voter? The only reason for opposing such a system would be so
that cheating is impossible to detect. The opposition to such a system
makes me very suspicious.

---snip---

Does the phrase "secret ballot" sound familiar?

Quoted message said:

I, and many other folks, stated before the election that the only way
to know if the machines were cheating was to see if the vote count
differs from the exit polling. It did. The exit polling looked very
good for Kerry, and the voting went the other way.

---snip---

So you trust polls over a vote count conducted under the eyes of election
judges both Democrat and Republican?

Quoted message said:

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

---snip---

It's also "possible" that Kerry was a deep cover double agent of a conspiracy
designed by GMC's Cadillac Motor Division to enslave the American public and
force us all to but land barge SUVs. Unlikely but "possible".

Regards,
Bob Hunt

dgk says...

Quoted message said:

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

The Dim's party platform: vote for us or you are stupid, A.K.A. how to
make friends and influence people. Keep it up, it worked like a charm
this time against a weak and vulnerable Bush. Should work even better
next time against someone who doesn't have any baggage.

VBadJuJu <none@> says...

Quoted message said:

Counties with more registed voters than there were living,
non-fictional adults. ("Cartoon characters for Kerry!"😉.

I'm no Kerry supporter, but having more registered voters than adults
residing in a county is common, because voter registration lists don't
get purged of the dead and those that move. Of course, this just enabled
the Kerry drive to get out the dead and illegal alien vote. In the 2000
election, an obviously leftist judge ordered the polls in St. Louis to
be open an additional 3 hours and the downtown voting precincts to be
open till midnight because of a voter complaint. It was discovered later
that the name given on the complaint was from a dead person. The Jesse
Jackson machine made thousands of phone calls to get out the word for
the new hours and Al Gore went on the radio to do the same.

dgk <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

Or afraid that they would be physically attacked if they admitted to
voting for Bush. There were plenty of examples of Bush supporters
having tires slashed, being boo'ed in line, etc. If it weren't for
the fact that I currently live in one of the most republican counties
in America, I might have felt the same. I know I would have felt that
way, had I been questioned where I used to live, and might have lied
to a pollster to prevent anyone from coming after me or yelling at me.

I think the real answer though is that the exit polls made some
assumptions about sample weighting that have been true in the past,
but were not true this time around. Republicans have never done a
massive get out the vote drive like they did this time around; usually
thats only the Democrats field of play. Pollsters can't weight
something they've never seen before.

"Hunrobe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

dgk [email hidden]

wrote in part:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How could anyone oppose a receipt, a paper trail, that can be observed
by the voter? The only reason for opposing such a system would be so
that cheating is impossible to detect. The opposition to such a system
makes me very suspicious.

---snip---

Does the phrase "secret ballot" sound familiar?

I'm not certian what dgk had in mind but having a paper trail does not
require the renunciation of the secret ballot.

-You vote on the electronic machine.
-The machine records and transmits your vote.
-It also spits out a printed ballot with your vote recorded; much like a
lottery ticket
-This also gives the voter the opportunity to verify their choice.
-This ballot is put into a ballot box
-If there is any question about the vote the ballot boxes provide a
non-electronic audit trail and method to recount and scrutinize the votes
without the issues of overvotes, undervotes, hanging chads and what not.

Who voted for whom is not recorded.

--
'They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot.' -joni mitchel

(rwwff) said:

dgk <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

It's possible that folks were embarrased to admit that they voted for
Bush, I sure would have been. It's possible that the exit polling
methodology was wrong. It's possible that they vote was tampered with.

Or afraid that they would be physically attacked if they admitted to
voting for Bush. There were plenty of examples of Bush supporters
having tires slashed, being boo'ed in line, etc. If it weren't for
the fact that I currently live in one of the most republican counties
in America, I might have felt the same. I know I would have felt that
way, had I been questioned where I used to live, and might have lied
to a pollster to prevent anyone from coming after me or yelling at me.

I think the real answer though is that the exit polls made some
assumptions about sample weighting that have been true in the past,
but were not true this time around. Republicans have never done a
massive get out the vote drive like they did this time around; usually
thats only the Democrats field of play. Pollsters can't weight
something they've never seen before.

I'm going to say it again because it seems not to have penetrated
well. I keep getting "well, Democrats did this..". Not the point. Both
sides have cheated in the past.

Computerized voting is a wonderful thing. Touch screens are great. The
problem is, there is no way of knowing, short of receipts being
printed, that the software is not making mistakes, intentional or
otherwise. Touch screens, in particular, present a calibration problem
to insure that the area on the screen is correctly correlated with the
candidate.

It was NOT Democrats who produced these machines, they were produced
by a company owned by Republicans, whose head, campaign chairman for
Bush in Ohio, promised to deliver the state for the Bush.

Now if that was a Democrat, you wouldn't feel a bit apprehensive if a
close election tipped to the Democrat? Especially since there is no
way of knowing if he did cheat?

What is the objection to printing receipts? The voter looks at the
receipt through a windows, and oks the vote and the receipt drops in a
bin to be saved for a recount if needed, or just spotchecked to verify
that the vote total is the same as the program output.

I can only think of one objection, and that is a desire to cheat.