Archive for the 'voting machines' Category

The voting machines

It seems someone is writing a book about them. Worth supporting.

Plane crashes that make you say hmmmmmmm

Coinky Dink

You silly tinfoil hat-wearing people will of course try to make me think there’s a connection between this and this – or possibly even this:

Cheh asks for Sequoia Voting Stystems source code

Cheh Presses Sequoia on Voting Machines

After the Nov. 4th general election, Cheh said she’s determined that there are irregularities that suggest systemic problems in the software. She’s now pressing the company that supplies the equipment to comply with a previously issued subpoena.

Cheh wants the company, Sequoia Voting Stystems, to turn over the source code for the software, and plans to take up the issue in tomorrow’s 10 a.m. hearing on voting problems in the John A. Wilson Building.

Well done Cheh.

The Georgia Debacle 2008 Edtion

Excellent reporting from attydave.

Voting machines elect one of their own

The Onion on our times.

Ohio 2004

Odds of Bush win in Ohio ’04 1/9600, at best

I thank you for broaching the topic, but my conscience compels me not to thank you for the brevity with which you are treating the topic.

According tNational Election Data Archive at (NEDA), the odds of Bush winning Ohio in ’04 was no better than 1/9600, and as high as 1 in 16 million.

I dare you to contact NEDA, and run your argument past them. You might convince me if you got the mathematicians and statisticians at NEDA to agree that the poll results you mention somehow are of greater significance than exit poll data. Until you do that, you’re not going to convince me that the Presidential election wasn’t stolen in 2004, via Ohio.

The Gun is Smoking: 2004 Ohio Precint-level Exit Poll Data Show Virtually Irrefutable Evidence of Vote Miscount

Six Percent of Ohio’s polled precints Show Virtually Impossible Vote Counts, and Over 40% Show Improbable Vote Counts, Given Their Exit Poll Results. The Patterns Of Ohio’s Discrepancies Are Consisten With Outcome-Altering Vote Miscounts.Ohio’s exit poll discrepancy pattern includes three precincts with virtually impossible outcomes and an unusually high number of precincts with significant discrepancy.1
· 6% of Ohio’s precincts each have virtually zero chance (less than one in 15,000) of occurring
due to sampling error, given their Kerry official vote count.2 Even if the “within precinct
discrepancy” (WPD) is adjusted for all the precincts to remove any possible effect due to Kerry
voters completing more exit polls, the probability of obtaining Ohio’s exit poll discrepancies are
virtually impossible.3
· Over 40% of Ohio’s polled precincts have discrepancies having less than a 5% chance of
occurring, given the official vote counts.4 The expected number of such precincts in a sample of
49 precincts would be five such precincts, not the 20 found.
· Ohio’s exit poll discrepancies, when plotted against precinct exit poll share show a pattern that is
consistent with vote miscounts that benefited Bush, and
· The pattern of Ohio’s exit poll discrepancies cannot be explained by random sampling error or
partisan exit poll completion rate differences.


Ohio’s precinct-level exit polls over-estimated Kerry official vote by an average 5.8%. The overall
discrepancy between exit poll margin and official vote margin was double that, 11.7%.
On June 6, 2005 The Election Sciences Institute (ESI) with Mitofsky12 released a report on the Ohio
precinct level exit poll data purporting to rule out vote fraud as the cause of the discrepancies. The (ESI)
report entitled “Ohio Exit Polls: Explaining the Discrepancy” by Susan Kyle, Douglass A. Samuelson,
Fritz Scheuren, Nicole Vicinanza, Scott Dingman and Warren Mitofsky, concluded:
“…the data do not support accusations of election fraud in the Ohio Presidential election of 2004”.13
ESI’s premise is that if there were vote fraud, then the 2004 exit poll discrepancy would be correlated
with Bush vote share increases from the 2000 election. Finding no such correlation, ESI ruled out vote
fraud as an explanation of the exit poll discrepancies.14 ESI’s method of exit poll analysis was included
on October 14, 2005, in a presentation by Warren Mitofsky to the American Statistical Association fall
conference in a talk entitled “The 2004 U.S. Exit Polls”.
In an October 31st paper, NEDA mathematically proved that ESI’s and Mitofsky’s analyses were
incorrect because many counterexamples exist to its basic premise.15 In other words, NEDA proved
mathematically that ESI’s and Mitofsky’s analysis of Ohio’s and national exit poll data is of no
analytical value and no conclusions about the presence or absence of vote fraud can be drawn from

The ESI report had made no attempt to explain or mathematically analyze the actual 2004 exit poll
discrepancies and the ESI report was missing key data. To date, Mitofsky and ESI have provided no
explanation for the exit poll discrepancy that is supported by data and analysis

A history of election auditing (1975 – 2008) is here:…

Also, there’s enough up-to-date coverage of vote fraud issues at to make anybody puke….

There are none so blind as those who will not see

Chris Bowers

I won’t miss statements like “Republicans will just use voting machines to steal the election anyway.” Such statements irritate me because of both their fatalism and general lack of proof. While I have no doubt that such statements will continue even if Democrats when a 100 seat majority in Congress, they will be less frequent. Kind of hard to argue that Republicans just steal all elections through voting machines when Democrats have such enormous majorities.

The fact is that voting machines must be programmed weeks ahead of the election. The Mark Foley scandal broke at the last minute, after the machines had been programmed. Assuming the machines are rigged, it would have to be very narrowly rigged. If you steal too many votes it is conspicuous, so you have to calibrate it very closely. A last minute political catastrophe throws everything off.

Thank heaven for the army of techies and election integrity activists who have tracked this issue. Lefty blogosphere has been wose than useless.

DC Voting machine follies

Outcome of Election Unchanged, According to Officials, Despite Thousands of ‘Phantom’ Write-in Votes…

Tyon’s tunnel, it’s not over until its under

We're on Track!

Our informational fundraiser is this Monday, July 28th at Marco Polo Restaurant, Vienna at 7:30pm. Political speakers and attendees will include State Senator Chap Petersen, Hunter Mill Supervisor
Cathy Hudgins, Dranesville Supervisor John Foust, as well as a
host of other officials and candidates for public office.
Come show your support and hear the latest news on our efforts.
You must RSVP by Sunday, July 27, 2008 to
Find out more


Maryland voting machines. again.


Ok, this is a developping situation. Polling places are intermittedly open and closed in Montgomery County, and election judges are refusing to follow the direction of the board of elections. They are not willing to come in to a centralized location with their voting machine memory cards, because the roads are icy and they are tired and underpaid. I don’t know about Prince George’s.

This is a messed up situation considering the serious problems in 2006. Returns that we know of in Montgomery, which are Donna’s base, are simply hugely advantageous for Donna. The campaign is furious and negotiations are happening. Last cycle there were substantial irregularities in Donna’s base precincts, due to, you guessed it, undertrained and underpaid polling workers. It’s horrible out and people are very cold and tired. Normally in a situation like this police would get the ballots and bring them to the board, but there aren’t enough police because of the bad weather.

Lawyers are fighting. This is a problem in ‘only a handful of precincts’, but the board of elections won’t tell us which ones. I don’t mean to overdramatize this, it doesn’t look as bad as it was last cycle considering that there really is a good reason for the problems (weather).

I’m guessing that Donna has probably won the race but we don’t know right now and we may not know until tomorrow morning.

… The board of elections has alerted a judge about the possibility of a need for court intervention so that sheriffs would be ordered to go to the judges and secure the materials, both the machines and the memory cards. Intuitively, the board is hoping that the threat of this action will get them to cease and desist their ‘rebellion’.

It’s just silly.

The time to do something about the voting machines is before election day.

Vote Trust Maryland