Hacking Voting Machines

[TF Admin]

Patches and AR15 from Mississippitalks.net get the credit for finding this one:

How to Hack a Diebold Voting Machine. It's unbelievably easy!

www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/how-to-hack-a-diebold-vot_b_26301.html

Does anyone know what voting machines Lee County is looking at?

TF

[King Rat]

I looked at that blog site and it appeared to me to be a place for liberals to bash republicans. Voter fraud has always and will always exist and I find it laughable that the posters on that site seem to think that only republicans do it.

Of course, to a liberal ANY vote for a republican constitutes fraud, I guess.

[zipzam]

cpurdon said:

Of course, to a liberal ANY vote for a republican constitutes fraud, I guess.

overall, i won't argue that KR. then again, hard core republicans treat the dems the same.
that's a problem with most voters... they vote "party line" no matter what, and think it's the "other party" that's just "plain wrong".

then again, much of that IS the fault of repubs and dems. they dang sure vote (typically) straight down "party lines" when voting on any "big" issue.

sorry, i got off topic and rambled...
on voting machines, yep, i have no doubt they get hacked. it's NOT a perfect system (and i dunno the perfect system). i highly doubt reps or dems are "more guilty" than the other.

i do wonder how many votes are scammed away to keep a 3rd party from getting the needed 5% to get funding...

[King Rat]

The voting machines don't have to be (and Diebold says they shouldn't be) wired to the internet or to a phone line. The safest way is to transfer the votes to a flash card then take that card back to the courthouse where a PC accepts the data and tallies it.

But I wonder which is more likely to occur: Someone hacks into the electronic voting machine and changes the votes (requires a combination of intelligence and corruption); or, some good ole boy or girl working the polls waits until no one is looking and stuffs the box with a bunch of those paper ballots then checks off people on the list who didn't come in and vote? The later scenerio has been a tradition and requires zero intelligence.

[rutrow]

IF Diebold voting machines do not have a paper trail, computerized accounting for everything placed into and taken out of that computer, votes and all things otherwise, then they do not need to be in our election process. There have been serious questions regarding voter fraud using these machines.

I would dare say that no more than the amount of people who vote, we should go back to hand count. It is not that hard to do.

[King Rat]

The Diebold machines DO have a printer option but it costs extra and some states don't want to fork over the extra cash.

Hand counting? Remember 2000? Florida? Democrats trying to manufacture votes for Gore? No thanks.

[King Rat]

Election time is approaching so the topic of confidence in our new electronic voting machines is very interesting. Yesterday I listened to JT & Dave on SuperTalk MS and found myself disagreeing with their stand on this issue. They offered the viewpoint that the voting machines is taking the process away from our local pollworkers. The machines count the votes instead of eighty-five-year-old Sally Mae who wears cokebottle glasses and tends to forget things from time to time. Or away from ole Bobby Bubba who makes sure to stuff in a few extra ballots for his dead friends. Or away from Billy Bob who stuffs the box in exchange for a pint of Jack or some fresh gravel on his driveway.

Nope, computers don't lie unless they are programmed to do so. At least the new system narrows down the threat of fraud to the programmers (who are certified) of the machines. No doubt there will be a dishonest one from time to time but the notion put forth by some that our old outdated paper system was honest is just plain wrong.