Cheap Magazines | Loans | Car Insurance | Credit Cards | Credit Cards
Granny Steals The Election.... Pass it on! [Archive] - PCMech Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Granny Steals The Election.... Pass it on!


audiyoda
11-30-2000, 02:32 PM
Got this in e-mail this AM--

We can measure the distance between Earth and the moon to a quadrillionth of an inch. We have computers that compute a zillion times a second. We can transplant hearts, transplant hair and clone sheep. But in Palm Beach County, Florida, whose zip code is one of the five highest per-capita incomes in America, they choose their president with a hole-punch voting machine that looks like an eighth grade shop-class project. You would think this Mecca of Blue-Haired Millionaires could afford a better voting booth than Fred Flintstone uses. Why would these super-rich grannies accept such a hideously flawed voting system that is blatantly inaccurate and subject to massive fraud?

Ahh ... you're catching on. This Flintstone voting system is ripe for cheating. And nobody cheats like the Democrats. Over the past 40 years, almost every case of significant voter fraud involves Democrats. Nixon lost in 1960 because Mayor Daley commanded 8,000

Democrats to rise from their graves and vote for Kennedy. In California, Loretta Sanchez stole the election from Bob Dornan with a combination of blatant fraud and Clinton's slick INS move that created instant voters from illegal immigrants. Philadelphia and Miami each saw such incredible fraud that elections were actually overturned. This November, bums in Milwaukee were bribed to vote Democrat with cigarettes. Hundreds of Marquette University students happily voted multiple times, encouraged by poll supervisors.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands serving in the military didn't even get ballots. And in Palm Beach County, Florida, Gore received almost one vote for every registered Democrat, a statistical probability equal to finding ice cubes floating in with the tide. This isn't a local phenomenon. It's part of a nationwide campaign. We now know the entire protest in Miami Beach was planned, orchestrated, and executed by national Democrat operatives. Democrat phone banks actually started calling Palm Beach rank-and-file before polls closed, urging them to "protest." These supposedly confused voters parading themselves before the cameras were actually long-time Democrat party activists. The same snazzy seniors who play Bingo with atomic clock accuracy, pick the lotto with precision that would honor Werner Von Braun, then hustle a few hours of shuffleboard, suddenly became disoriented and couldn't punch a hole in a piece of paper.

Let us debunk a few myths. Palm Beach has happily used the hole-punch system for over 30 years. Pat Buchanan? He got 3,000 Palm Beach votes because 17,000 registered third-party voters live there. And this "confusing" ballot was approved by the Democrats who run the county system. This ballot was also "approved" by 10-year-olds at a Virginia elementary school, Unanimously selecting Al Gore in a mock test. Which means these whining seniors are either intellectually inferior to fifth graders or extremely dishonest. But they did their job, helping orchestrate hand recounts in Democrat districts.

Since punch-card voting machines have a 5% inaccuracy, honest hand counts will produce a greater number of Democrat votes. Of course, hole-punching and hand-counting is wide open to fraud, and the more time goes by, the more opportunity to be naughty. Count on Gore's army of lawyers to relentlessly recount-the-recount until eyes are blurry, hands are bleeding and a Gore lead is created. Then, they will declare victory and demand we immediately "move on" without re-counting Republican districts. Another stolen victory.

Meanwhile, Republicans harrumph and grumble, fumbling the ball once again. Grudgingly, Democrats must be given credit. When facts don't add up, they manipulate opinion. When the Constitution overrides opinion, they are masters of the judiciary. When the judiciary fails, they trump everything with good ol'- fashioned cheating. And cheating thrives in chaos. Thus, the Palm County Democrats are happy to use a Rube Goldberg contraption to tally their votes.

And you can count on this: despite this hideous voting process, it will remain unchanged for the next election. The worst aspect of this tragedy isn't the willingness of Democrats to ruin America with their socialist dream, but Republicans ineptitude and unwillingness to fight back. Democrats understand they won't win every battle. But when the fighting is close, their willingness to go for the throat with any tactic necessary gives them a distinct edge. In the meantime, a bunch of Wisconsin college kids punched 20 ballots apiece, illegal aliens and dead folks around the country voted, soldiers couldn't vote, and a bunch of blue-haired old fogeys in Florida have out-maneuvered our best honest election efforts. Perhaps someday, Republicans will learn Democrats don't just play hardball. They conduct war.

SARGE
11-30-2000, 03:53 PM
And the preacher said, "AMEN".

Kubie
12-01-2000, 10:30 PM
As the dem's illegalities have occured over time, people havn't said too much. But when they are put all together in one letter, it is really sad that Americans still support them. Then again, maybe the dem's supporters aren't real Americans.

kraken
12-01-2000, 11:07 PM
Audiyoda
"Since punch-card voting machines have a 5% inaccuracy, honest hand counts will produce a greater number of Democrat votes."

If there are inaccuracies in the primitive punch system used by the most technologically advanced nation in the world, it is not due to a single party but to both. 5% inaccuracy is unacceptable to any person who wishes their vote to count. To say a particular subgroup of personages will always benefit from the inherent falacies of a particular system is ludicrous. The palm beach fiasco was based not on the primitive punching system, but on the confusing butterfly ballots that do not line up with the correct markings.

It is objectionable having learned that the civilisation that the western world is based upon (not invented by) cannot do legitimate ballots that are accurate.

Either candidate will be a lame duck as neither will be able to prove to the majority that they are legitimate. It is only in the frustration of the length of time taken that the majority want to see a resolution.

The inability of either party to TRUST in the system that has evolved, only proves that the "greatest civilisation on Earth" is merely a brawling pack of animals.

audiyoda
12-03-2000, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by kraken
If there are inaccuracies in the primitive punch system used by the most technologically advanced nation in the world, it is not due to a single party but to both. 5% inaccuracy is unacceptable to any person who wishes their vote to count. To say a particular subgroup of personages will always benefit from the inherent falacies of a particular system is ludicrous. The palm beach fiasco was based not on the primitive punching system, but on the confusing butterfly ballots that do not line up with the correct markings.

First, I am but the messanger, not the originator -- I premised my post by saying "Got this in e-mail this AM--". But, as the writer of the message said: "Since punch-card voting machines have a 5% inaccuracy, honest hand counts will produce a greater number of Democrat votes." This is true because of that 5%, there would be more votes for a Democrat in a Democrat-saturated community. But statistically, the percentage of votes for Democrats and Republicans would also follow the trends of the 95% accuratly counted.

Second, you are talking about a ballot that was:
[list=1]
Created by the Democrats.
For 2 weeks prior to the election this ballot was available for review by all within the community.
Followed state law by listing the parties on the ballot in the order in which they recieved the most votes in the 1996 Presidential election.
Used at least once in the same manner in 1996, 97, 98, and 1999 in those counties.
The arrows DID correctly point to the correct hole to be punched. Even the Florida Supreme Court agreed with that.
[/list=1]

-Craig

kraken
12-04-2000, 01:20 AM
Sorry should have been an open statement.

One person one vote. That vote should be counted and voting systems should be as accurate as possible.

The current argument that hand counting is flawed and open to corruption is just another way of saying we don't trust any one.

We have our own little corruption enquiry going on here in OZ about votes. Payments made to independants for preferences done by both sides of politics. Democracy will be lost forever unless the people can make sure that those in power have no way to corrupt the voting system.

The confusing butterfly ballots favor the republicans as those with less understanding tend to vote democrat (in my understanding of your political parties). You would be amazed at how much reporting of your elections is done down under.

It will always be a question of which side is less corrupt.

troysvihl
12-04-2000, 12:48 PM
.

troysvihl
12-04-2000, 10:41 PM
I keep hearing about this 5% number, but here does this 5% number come from? I highly doubt it's 5%. You show me a study that proves the rate is 5%. (and an impartial study, not just a poll of voters in Palm Beach; that's not impartial)



>>The confusing butterfly ballots favor the republicans as those with less understanding tend to vote democrat (in my understanding of your political parties). You would be amazed at how much reporting of your elections is done down under.<<


don't buy all the hype Kraken. the ballot wasn't that confusing; it's just being drummed up by the Dems in order to get some political mileage out of it. I highly doubt that many people mistakenly voted for the wrong candidate.



>>The current argument that hand counting is flawed and open to corruption is just another way of saying we don't trust any one.<<

So? What's your point?
I don't understand this statement. Are you inferring that machines should not be used b/c it might make people feel untrusted? (Who cares?)

The whole reason we use machines is so that the human error is minimized. Hand counting is not more accurate than machine counting. period.

[Edited by troysvihl on 12-05-2000 at 12:44 AM]

bob
12-05-2000, 11:37 AM
"/The whole reason we use machines is so that the human error is minimized. Hand counting is not more accurate than machine counting. period.

/"

Nope.
The older machines are used because of cost - ONLY.
The newer voting machines are needed.

Bet you would want a hand count if your final exam was rejected by a machine and you failed to graduate from college - or high school - or whatever.....

kraken
12-05-2000, 11:51 AM
The most complex and versatile machine on this planet is the Human being. This remarkable machine can differentiate between fully punched chads and dimpled chads.

When your vote count is so close that the margin of error is reached, this wonderful device will be able to give the most accurate count available. While a single unit may be slow, by placing them in parallel with error checking (second unit verification) you can be guaranteed of your results.

The election of officials is based on the will of the people. All methods available must be used to ensure that this will is acknowleged.

The method used to vote must be made to the lowest common denominator. This is to say that it must be as simple as possible so that the original intent of the voter can be correctly acknowleged. Butterfly ballots do not fit this criteria. (I know that they have been used before but the margin of error was not reached)

I don't buy into hype and I go by what I see. The vision and the description of the process concerning this particular ballot was enough to show that it was not the simplest method that could have been used.

I find it amazing that partisan officials are actually in charge of election results.

troysvihl
12-05-2000, 12:26 PM
sorry, i'll never buy into that.



>>I find it amazing that partisan officials are actually in charge of election results.<<

as opposed to who? everyone is partisan to some extent of another. I'd much rather have two partisans from opposite sides of the spectrum than one person who claims to be impartial.

kraken
12-05-2000, 12:43 PM
Here in OZ we have what is Known as thw AEC (The Australian Electoral Commission). This is a public service branch that has clear guidelines based from the constitution as to how elections will be carried out. They are in charge of all aspects dealing with elections. No elected officials are involved and they have various methods for verifying results. It is an indepentant body not associated with any political party.

If you read the line that you quoted you would notice that I said "partisan Officials" as in political appointees. The official in Florida responsible for election announcements and decisions is a card carrying Republican who campaigned for the republicans in Florida. Her decisions cannot be seen as unbiased because of this.

Officials and employees of the AEC can in no way associate themselves with any political party on fear of instant dismissal and possible prosecution.

SARGE
12-05-2000, 08:22 PM
Kids all over the country were given the ballot and told to select Gore. They passed. If dingbats can play 10 bingo cards at once, then a ballot should be easy. If they're that confused, they don't belong in the booth.

kraken
12-06-2000, 12:36 AM
Sarge
Democracy is about the will of ALL. Even the "dingbats".

How would you like it if someone or some group said that your thoughts are worthless.

We all share this planet and everyone has an opinion of worth. We all disagree with each other but it is important that our particular thoughts remain valid.

Kids cant vote for that very reason that they are easily led, it is only as an adult that we can choose to be led.

SARGE
12-06-2000, 08:06 PM
If you're too dumb to understand a ballot, you're obviously not bright enough to be making an "informed decision". Of course, if you're scared by lies and bribed by a few packs of smokes and told which # to punch, you can probably find #2 on ballot. No thought goes into this vote.

If multi-marketers call hundreds of old folks and ask, or suggest, that you may have voted wrong, it gets you wondering, "well sonny, now that you mention it, maybe I did". Nitwits.

troysvihl
12-06-2000, 08:13 PM
that's how i feel sarge. when i hear voters down there talk about how they were confused, i simply don't believe them. i think they're lying in order to try to get a new vote.


the ballot isn't that confusing. there's a clear arrow pointing right to the correct hole.

kraken
12-07-2000, 09:05 AM
By the definition of not bright enough to make an informed decision, then is goes to say that the only people who should vote are those who are informed enough to understand all the implications.

It is hereby announced that all people with an IQ below 140 shall be declared "nitwits" and their right to vote shall be withheld until such time as they can prove that they have an understanding of the implications of their individual vote.

The only exceptions are those of the millionaire class who obviously understand things to a higher degree because they can prove by their net worth that they understand.

SARGE
12-07-2000, 10:13 AM
Sounds good to me. About as fair as a mass registration of non-English speaking immigrants, then busing them to the voting places and "kindly" nudging to vote #2, vote #2. They don't have a clue who #2 is, but have been told he gives $ to folks who need it. Geez.

kraken
12-08-2000, 02:58 AM
gazumped.

well said sarge even though I dont share the sentiments. We will always find examples to the negative, I prefer to look to the positive.

Even *smart* people can be made to look like fools when they don't understand a situation.