Comments on: Diebold Wants Documentary Off The Air

By: Donklephant » Blog Archive » Hacking Democracy

Donklephant » Blog Archive » Hacking Democracy — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 19:27:36 +0000

[...] Not just 10 minutes, not just half…but the entire documentary that Diebold tried to get banned. [...]

By: Dennis Cook

Dennis Cook — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 21:31:14 +0000

We will need to pay more attention to independent exit polls (if there is such a thing in the media these days) and their correlation with what the electronic voting machines report at the end of the day. Some difference is to be expected, but we should have good statistics on the magnitude of that difference from previous elections. If the voting machines show too much of a difference, or multiple precincts show a strong bias in the same direction we have serious cause to invalidate that state’s election results.

By: African American Political Pundit

African American Political Pundit — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 21:27:04 +0000

[...] Thank You donklephant.com for providing information on Diebold Wanting Documentary Off The Air. [...]

By: Dave F

Dave F — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 17:33:10 +0000

IN the Diebold code that was examined three years ago was a provision to switch entire blocks of votes to another candidate, then to ERASE the audit logs so that the move of votes would be invisible. Why would such code even be written? In a state on the east cost in 2004 friends of mine tried to vote for Kerry, only to see their vote disappear in front of them. They tried repeatedly to vote for Kerry but could not get their vote to stay there. In desperation they voted for Bush, and the vote stayed on the screen. 2004 was stolen by the machines. We have US Senators who were elected by the machines with no provision for public audits. The only way to keep tabs on the machines is to require the ID of the CPU to be saved along with the vote tallies and that those IDs to be reported at every step of the way. Audits of election results must be public. The source code used by the manufacturers in their balloting machines and upstream machines must be public. Paper ballot trails are fine but the numbers can be juggled in the machines regardless what is reported on paper. I would also place mandatory criminal penalties on any person found to have manipulated a balloting machine or its upstream machines. I am Republican, but the danger of the electronic balloting machines threatens the very foundation of a democratic republic!

By: David I

David I — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:20:12 +0000

Not only is it appropriate to let the program go on the air but, the people of the United States need to wake up to the reality that their democratic form of government is threatened by ANOTHER effort to privatize critical functions of government. We never had these serious doubts about the integrity of the ballot counts until these corporations got involved in the electoral process. Let’s go back to paper ballots and the old mechanical volting machines.

By: Ashley Simmons Hotz

Ashley Simmons Hotz — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 02:55:25 +0000

Bev Harris has worked long and hard to prove that these machines are unworthy of our Democracy, and has backed up her claims repeatedly with solid documentation. On the other hand, Diebold has repeatedly proven itself to be a company that cannot be trusted. Why should we continue to entrust Democracy to machines owned and run by partisan Republicans? Let the program air!