I personally think it’s a good idea, especially if there is an anonymous “ballot ID” where you can look up your vote as registered at headquarters to ensure it made it all the way through with integrity. But there are a lot of secret-ballot voting theorists who think that allowing any sort of paper trail per voter leaves them open to intimidation.

You don’t need testimony as proof. We need proof as proof. You don’t. You already believe. You are a true believer already, regardless of what comes out in court from now on.

What part about this do you not get, Oz?

The BEST thing we have is testimony from various whistleblowers and I’ve already directed you where to look.

Whistleblowers are people who can testify in court as to what they saw going on or what they themselves were doing or ordered to do.

When you say it cannot be proven, you have just ensured that there can be no whistleblowers. No evidence, no eye witness means no whistleblowers. Whistleblowers are valuable because they can testify and be a witness legally.

You cannot have your whistleblower and your “can’t be proven” declamations both, Oz.

A Lot of weird stuff happened in Florida in 2000

This is essentially the summarization of why you believe as you do. This is not even a credibility issue anymore.

Because election rigging can’t be proven, Deanna.

The BEST thing we have is testimony from various whistleblowers and I’ve already directed you where to look. I’ve posted a link to Clint Curtis’ testimony from Dec. 2004, but there are also videos of interviews with Stephen Spoonamore and Chris Hood.

Hacking Democracy, which is curently on HBO, has examples of how elections can be hacked and why it’s impossible to detect.

We only have testimony of people like Clint Curtis, which, as I’ve said, I’ve already posted..

A Lot of weird stuff happened in Florida in 2000 (which I posted one small instance, which was mentioned in the Washington Post immediately afterwards) and in Ohio in 2004 and and a fed court case is currently underway. Mike Connell is dodging a subpeona, but maybe when he testifies, we’ll have more proof.

But I’m guessing that you dont see testimony as proof? I dont know what else you want.

There is a lot happening regarding voter supression and purges, however, and, in addition the the Brennan Center’s recent findings, I provided links of news stories. The New York Times article is beign criticized by voter activists, but it shows, at the very least that purges which “may be illegal” are a concern. I posted another article from CBS regarding a law suit currently underway.

In addition to all of this, students and African Americans are being plied with disinformation.

I can’t list a bunch of links because when I do that, my posts get eaten.
But, as I said, Robert Kennedy Jr has an article coming out next week and promises to lay out the scams currently underway.

I’ll post that as soon as it comes out and, while I dont expect you to blindly believe him, you can get an idea where and how to investigate such concerns even further.

You decry partisanship and then claim that the GOP is engaged in wider election fraud than the Democrats.

When asked for evidence to support your portrayal of Republicans and conservatives as the main participants in voter fraud and hacking, you cite articles and opinion pieces that:

- don’t provide any documentation or hard evidence of your claims, just allegations, OR
- actually state up front that real voting problems are not intentionally being caused by either party.

You clearly expect us to take these sources that aren’t supporting your claims as proof of your claims and when we don’t, you tell us to go out and search the web to find all of this proof that you says exist.

Ozzie, if there really is all of this evidence out there that supports your claims, why can’t you produce it? Surely given the fact that there are “20 stories per day on GOP shenanigans,” you would have ready access to it. You’re the one who has been doing “all of this reading since 2000″ so why do you need to tell us to go do the searching? I would think you would have all of this evidence at your fingerprints but no – we are supposed to go on an expedition hunt ourselves.

I’m not posting on this thread any further. I’ve made my stance clear. In the face of overwhelming documentation that proves that left-leaning individuals and groups are engaged in massive voter fraud, I, as a conservative, am willing to support efforts that strengthen the accuracy of voter registration rolls as well as reduce the chance of vote rigging or hacking, because even though there is no documented evidence that it has occurred, the potential is there and it must be guarded against.

I am willing to do this because I want Americans of all political leanings to feel confident that their vote was counted. I am so thankful for the right to vote, I cherish that right, and I want it to mean something.

Ozzie – do yourself and your country a favor and stop making claims you can’t support. If you are worried about voting machine hacking, then simply say, “Hey – some have made claims that hacking has occured. Computer programming experts believe that the system we have now is vulnerable. Why don’t we support efforts to reduce that potential in the future?” If evidence emerges that proves the claims were correct, then join the rest of us in supporting the prosecution of those who are guilty.

In the meantime, why not join the rest of us in supporting efforts to reduce the number of documented cases of voter fraud? Your arguments will be a lot more credible if you do.

Deana

Substituting Republican and Democrat with your team is no better than what you decry. Just because you portray others as faulty does not make you any better simply because you see others as bad.

Ymar, Hacking goes undecteced.

So we have a demonstrable claim that is unprovable, like I said. You cannot prove it but you believe in it nonetheless. Dan Rather anyone?

The arrogant belief that you and your compatriots have this magical intelligence that allows you to detect the undetectable is no way to solve actual problems. Why? Because you don’t even know what you are doing. You have this vague idea of a problem but you cannot detect it in its details with full out proof. So you just muddle through and talk about election stealing, in general, and call people who don’t agree with you as being partisan.

Others here seem to understand and share legitmate concerns regarding the process, while I could post article after article, and you’d not see it.

Others here are far more tolerant of BS political and propaganda operations than I am. That’s what you don’t see, in addition to evidence of election hacking.

If Obama is behind in the polls and the exit polls suggest a McCain win, and all of a sudden, out of the blue, we have a President Obama, you might be onto something.

People would have to be pretty pathetic to buy into exit polls as the decider of who gets to win an election. Talk about your hive mind bee hive mentality, Oz.

Are the peole at ACORN fixing the polls, too?

Exit polls don’t decide elections, so why should people invest money and time to cheat on them? To maybe convince people like you that Bush didn’t win over Kerry? Not worth it.

Again – I’m not saying that it isn’t or can’t happen – it just requires some unlikely human behavior over the long haul. But I do agree that we should be vigilant about the potential for that abuse.

You cannot be vigilant once you have locked your mind on a personal pet theory and are now required to do everything you can to defend it, like Oz here has done concerning the 2000/2004 elections.

To be “vigilant” means to pay attention for new threats. You cannot do that once you have selected a position that you will have to defend. Then you will be too busy fighting and defending to watch for new threats. Your mind will have closed to new avenues and new data, for if such new things contradict your cherished beliefs, then you must do as Oz did with the New York Times and select what you want to believe and reject what you don’t like.

That is the New York Time’s assessment, Deanna. Others see it differently.

Finally we have a place that Oz differs from her sources. Of course, the differences are only when they refuse to support Oz’s prejudices and statements. Coincidentally.

You would be amazed at the number of whistleblowers who’ve come forward.

You have no idea how to recognize a real whistleblower from a Dan Rather manufactured one, Oz.

I agree that Democrats have engaged in voter fraud, but I believe that the GOP has engaged in election fraud on a much wider scale.

That’s the justification for having biases, prejudices, and what not while calling everybody else partisan, I suppose.

Pure nihilism. The US does the same bad things as Al Qaeda, but since the US has more power than Saddam and Al Qaeda combined, we must fight the US first and foremost.

I decry the kind of partisanship that prevents people from looking at the bigger picture or investigating anything that goes agsint the “My team is best!” mantra.

I agree that Democrats have engaged in voter fraud, but I believe that the GOP has engaged in election fraud on a much wider scale.

If you want to investigate this, I gave you three names you can look up on YouTube, and I’ll repeat them: Clint Curtis, Stephen Spoonamore and Chris Hood. You can watch interviews with them and hear testimony by them, etc.

You can also look up information regarding Mike Connell and hacked elections.

Ozzie – did you even read the article that you use as evidence that hacking has already occurred? – Deanna

Which article are you referring to? The New York Times article was on purging and I read it, along with articles criticizing it for not going far enough.

Robert Kennedy Jr wil have a piece on this in Rolling Stone next week, but, since he is partisan, I don’t expect you to blindly believe him.

But maybe you can read it and then use the information provided to investigate things for yourself?

I have been reading about this since 2000 and am convinced that elections have been compromised and that the threat to our democracy is very real.

You dont have to believe me or trust me, amd I’m not trying to change your mind.

If you want to see for youself, however, I’ve offered suggestions on places to start.

In one of your earlier comments in this post, you said, “There are at least 20 stories a day, chronicling various GOP shenanigans.” (This from someone who decries partisanship.)

Now you are saying, ” . . . every day there are at least 20 stories that deal with hacking, purging and other problems.”

So let’s do the math: that equals approximately 1,200 stories in the last two months alone that serves as “evidence” of purging and hacking.

Out of all of that supposed evidence, you provide links to three or four of articles or opinion pieces. But with the exception of one link, you cite stories that only address purging, which you now admit is legal and necessary and, according to a source that YOU CHOSE TO USE to supposedly support your claim, is not being done by one particular party and is not being done intentionally. (And if the NY Times does not support your claims, then why did you use it as a source??)

Ozzie – did you even read the article that you use as evidence that hacking has already occurred?

I did. And I noticed something. Again and again, the article mentions:

- POTENTIAL vulnerabilities in the system
- how system vulnerabilities COULD cause voting irregularities
- how system design WOULD make it possible for hacking
- how a hacker COULD infect the memory chips

That is NOT proof that hacking has already occurred, Ozzie. And, as Mike D. pointed out, exit polls that differ from voting results are not proof of hacking.

It would be much more honest and sensible to argue that because of the vulnerabilities in the systems, it is important to support efforts that promote transparency in the voting process so that these vulnerabilities are not exploited. That is why I would be completely comfortable with something like what Mike D. outlined.

The idea that Republicans are the only ones who are engaged in, as you put it, “shenanigans,” is not supported by evidence. In fact, overwhelming documentation exists that proves that left-leaning groups across the country are engaged in voter fraud. Evidence that those on the right are engaged in hacking? Skinny at best.

And yet, you have conservatives on this blog who are more than willing to support efforts that not only reduce voter fraud but also the potential for hacking.

Why do I get the feeling that you are not nearly as enthusiastic about supporting efforts to prevent ACORN-like voter fraud?