PDA

View Full Version : how bush stole florida...again


Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 03:56 AM
Presidential Elections - AP
AP
Electronic Voting Machine Woes Reported

58 minutes ago


By RACHEL KONRAD, AP Technology Writer

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - Voters nationwide reported some 1,100 problems with electronic voting machines on Tuesday, including trouble choosing their intended candidates.

The e-voting glitches reported to the Election Protection Coalition, an umbrella group of volunteer poll monitors that set up a telephone hotline, included malfunctions blamed on everything from power outages to incompetent poll workers.

But there were also several dozen voters in six states — particularly Democrats in Florida — who said the wrong candidates appeared on their touch-screen machine's checkout screen, the coalition said.

In many cases, voters said they intended to select John Kerry (news - web sites) but when the computer asked them to verify the choice it showed them instead opting for President Bush (news - web sites), the group said.

Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way Foundation, which helped form the coalition, called the summary screen problem "troubling but anecdotal."

He and other voting rights advocates said the disproportionate number of Democrats reporting such problems was probably due to higher awareness of voter protection coalitions.

"Overall, the problems of outright voter intimidation and suppression have not been as great as in the past," Neas said.

But the reports did highlight computer scientists' concerns about touch screens, which they say are prone to tampering and unreliable unless they produce paper records for recounts.

Roberta Harvey, 57, of Clearwater, Fla., said she had tried at least a half dozen times to select Kerry-Edwards when she voted Tuesday at Northwood Presbyterian Church.

After 10 minutes trying to change her selection, the Pinellas County resident said she called a poll worker and got a wet-wipe napkin to clean the touch screen as well as a pencil so she could use its eraser-end instead of her finger. Harvey said it took about 10 attempts to select Kerry before and a summary screen confirmed her intended selection.

Election officials in several Florida counties where voters complained about such problems did not return calls Tuesday night.

A spokesoman for the company that makes the touch-screen machines used in Pinellas, Palm Beach and two other Florida counties, Alfie Charles of Sequoia Voting Systems Inc., said the machines' monitors may need to be recalibrated periodically.

The most likely reason the summary screen showed wrong candidates was because voters pushed the wrong part of the touch screen in the first place, Charles said.

He said poll workers are trained to perform the recalibration whenever a voter says the touch screen isn't sensitive enough.

"Voters will vote quickly and they'll notice that they made an error when they get to the review screen. The review screen is doing exactly what it needs to do — notifying voters what selections are about to be recorded," Charles said. "On a paper ballot, you don't get a second chance to make sure you voted for whom you intended, and it's a strong point in favor of these machines."

The Election Protection Coalition received a total of 32 reports of touch-screen voters who selected one candidate only to have another show up on the summary screen, Cindy Cohn, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a coalition member.

David Dill, a Stanford University computer scientist whose Verified Voting Foundation also belongs to the coalition, said he wouldn't "prejudge and say the election is going smoothly just because we have a small number of incident reports out of the total population.

"It's not going to be until the dust clears probably tomorrow that we have even an approximate idea of what happened," Dill added.

Lee-Waters' Boy
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:01 AM
i dont see the big deal...the summary screen gives them a chance to correct their votes. and 32 reported cases? lol keep trying

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:16 AM
LWB, as much as you would like for America to be a dictatorship, in a DEMOCRACY, every single person entitled to vote for the man they want to vote for. not just the people you argee with.

and you are clearly an idiot who knows nothing about evoting hacking.

independent reports should how a 9 year old can hack a paperless evoting machines and cast thousands of votes.

and guess what? without a paper trail there is NO WAY to track just how many people this has happen to. hell there is no way to track if any one evote is legit.

faboozadoo15
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:21 AM
how does this show that bush stole florida?
come again... he's up by 350,000 votes in the state...

Steam
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:22 AM
Bush rode the good publicity from his work following the hurricanes to this win.

Never before has someone benefitted so much from natural disasters and tragedies.

Well, except for Michael Moore.

~RedRose~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:24 AM
Jiggly .... get over it ...... this is pathetic :rolleyes:

Lee-Waters' Boy
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:25 AM
yes
everyone is entitled to their vote
and your article talks about people voting, if the machine messes up, being able to fix it thanks to the summary screen
maybe if your article had a better point to it you might get more objective reactions

bw2082
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:27 AM
I hope you didn't steal Volcana's story for tomorrow :tape: ;)

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:44 AM
how does this show that bush stole florida?
come again... he's up by 350,000 votes in the state...

simple, one person can cast 400,000, 600,000, or really any number of votes needed as i have said before, without a paper trail, there is really no way to prove that any one e-vote is legit. the problem underscored, in the article is that there is no recount, no way to know that anyone one evote is legit.

if you feel you love bush enough to not care about the election process. go on about your bussiness, but if you care about a fair process, you should really know how evil evoting machines are. and almost all independent scientist agree. here just a sample of all the known problems with evoting:

http://ecoustics-cnet.com.com/Computer+scientists+slam+e-voting+machines/2110-1028_3-5384946.html

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115891,00.asp

faboozadoo15
Nov 3rd, 2004, 04:50 AM
Bush rode the good publicity from his work following the hurricanes to this win.

Never before has someone benefitted so much from natural disasters and tragedies.

Well, except for Michael Moore.
wtf are you talking about? people benefit from such things ALL THE TIME.
if people are going through a difficult time and someone helps them out, it bodes well for them.
pure genius

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 05:12 AM
So basically someone can cast 400 000 votes for Kerry. So maybe without the electronic problems, Bush would win Florida with a 750 000 difference instead of 350 000.

YES!! that means that NOT ONE vote in any district were there is evoting means anything. can not be tracked. can not be validated.

whats worse, is that trained hackers can DELETE votes.

so say 150,000 votes were cast for bush or kerry, someone can go in and erase those votes and put 150,000 in the nader camp.

do some research on evoting, i have always said evoting = pure evil.

plus,

only in WTAworld does "FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - Voters nationwide reported some 1,100 problems with electronic voting machines on Tuesday, including trouble choosing their intended candidates." get read as only 30 some poeple had problems.

njguido11
Nov 3rd, 2004, 05:15 AM
keep pulling for strings.

cheesestix
Nov 3rd, 2004, 05:15 AM
simple, one person can cast 400,000, 600,000, or really any number of votes needed as i have said before, without a paper trail, there is really no way to prove that any one e-vote is legit. the problem underscored, in the article is that there is no recount, no way to know that anyone one evote is legit.

if you feel you love bush enough to not care about the election process. go on about your bussiness, but if you care about a fair process, you should really know how evil evoting machines are. and almost all independent scientist agree. here just a sample of all the known problems with evoting:

http://ecoustics-cnet.com.com/Computer+scientists+slam+e-voting+machines/2110-1028_3-5384946.html

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115891,00.asp

But how does your article prove that Bush benefitted? :rolleyes:

Bacardi
Nov 3rd, 2004, 05:17 AM
Jiggly, want to move to another country with me?
I'm telling you, it will be wise to get out of here and leave this place to the rats. :lol:

cheesestix
Nov 3rd, 2004, 05:17 AM
YES!! that means that NOT ONE vote in any district were there is evoting means anything. can not be tracked. can not be validated.

whats worse, is that trained hackers can DELETE votes.

so say 150,000 votes were cast for bush or kerry, someone can go in and erase those votes and put 150,000 in the nader camp.

do some research on evoting, i have always said evoting = pure evil.

plus,

only in WTAworld does "FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - Voters nationwide reported some 1,100 problems with electronic voting machines on Tuesday, including trouble choosing their intended candidates." get read as only 30 some poeple had problems.

So why don't you PROVE how it this article justifies your title???? :rolleyes:

How did Bush steal the election? :rolleyes:

Flaws in the system can only help Bush? :rolleyes:

JohnPratt
Nov 3rd, 2004, 05:53 AM
Again, Amen to cheesestix --John

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:20 AM
So why don't you PROVE how it this article justifies your title???? :rolleyes:

How did Bush steal the election? :rolleyes:

Flaws in the system can only help Bush? :rolleyes:


seriously, for someone who makes a habit of avoid facts you like to ask for alot.

you have the iq of a small child, thats why i posted the article so thats with an iq above your 25 can read it. shows point by point who evoting is UNTRACKABLE without a paper trail.

so i ask you, where is the paper trail to show that ONE person using these florida voting machines voted for bush.

the point is that asking for proof is a moot point. and thats how the leaders of the GOP and makers of these evoting machines wanted. they have been asked by many a scientist to add a paper trail and REFUSED.

kind of like your bank refusing to let you see a statement. you just have trust thier word, you get no record of any action, therein.

scary?

you bet.

cheesestix
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:29 AM
you have the iq of a small child,

Shows how much you know. :lol:

Look up the definition of IQ. If I remember correctly, it's the measure of someone's intelligence relative to their age. E.g. 100 is average, 140 is genius, 70 is retarded.

So a "small child" could have an IQ of 180, just as a grown man can have an IQ of 180.

So what's your point? :rolleyes:

thats why i posted the article so thats with an iq above your 25 can read it. shows point by point who evoting is UNTRACKABLE without a paper trail.

so i ask you, where is the paper trail to show that ONE person using these florida voting machines voted for bush.

You said "bush stole florida". Prove it! The burden of proof is on you, not me! I never said that 1 person did vote for Bush on those machines, but you're implying that not 1 person did. And you're saying Bush stole Florida. So prove it!

Justeenium
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:35 AM
LWB, as much as you would like for America to be a dictatorship, in a DEMOCRACY, every single person entitled to vote for the man they want to vote for. not just the people you argee with.

and you are clearly an idiot who knows nothing about evoting hacking.

independent reports should how a 9 year old can hack a paperless evoting machines and cast thousands of votes.

and guess what? without a paper trail there is NO WAY to track just how many people this has happen to. hell there is no way to track if any one evote is legit.
I always thought you were a retard, but now I know you're actually retarded.

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:36 AM
Shows how much you know. :lol:

Look up the definition of IQ. If I remember correctly, it's the measure of someone's intelligence relative to their age. E.g. 100 is average, 140 is genius, 70 is retarded.

So a "small child" could have an IQ of 180, just as a grown man can have an IQ of 180.

So what's your point? :rolleyes:



You said "bush stole florida". Prove it! The burden of proof is on you, not me! I never said that 1 person did vote for Bush on those machines, but you're implying that not 1 person did. And you're saying Bush stole Florida. So prove it!

read, i already did. one person can cast 350,000 votes. if you dont like it call the e-voting machine makers and ask for a paper trail. do yourself a favor and read up on evoting.

as for your iq of 25, notice if you will that i didnt what age. so you would have the iq of a 4 year old. now if you want to argue that the average 4 year old has a iq of 180. well. :tape:

cheesestix
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:40 AM
read, i already did. one person can cast 350,000 votes. if you dont like it call the e-voting machine makers and ask for a paper trail. do yourself a favor and read up on evoting.

as for your iq of 25, notice if you will that i didnt what age. so you would have the iq of a 4 year old. now if you want to argue that the average 4 year old has a iq of 180. well. :tape:

Okay, so one person can cast 350K votes. Couldn't a Kerry voter game the system just as easily as a Bush voter?

Anyway, you said that Bush stole Florida? PROVE IT!

You may have proven that it can technically be done, but you haven't proven that any Bush voters rigged the election. PROVE IT!

Why is it so hard for you to understand? PROVE IT!

Show me where ONE Bush voter cast a vote multiple times.....not that he CAN do it, but that he DID do it. PROVE IT!

~RedRose~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:44 AM
Jigglypuff your digging ur own hole

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:46 AM
I always thought you were a retard, but now I know you're actually retarded.

i love how not a one of you has taken on the task of proveing the validity of evoting machines.

by the way, you CAN take my post a show point for point how i am wrong (like producing a paper trail for example, or proving the experts i sited early as wrong), but see that would require that you know what you are talking about. you are not very good at that. understanding anything beyond your passion for sucking GWBs dick.

see, the reality is that evoting machines as they stand are a threat to democracy. this is a known fact, this is why a number of florida districts decided not to use them. this is why much the union has neld back the implamentation and use of them. when it comes down to it, as i said earlier, individual votes dont count. just one trained hacker can undo voting for an entire state. and can effect and through a national election. this is something that has been reported and known for a year now.

you williness to say that is ok if the votes of an entire states are played with by one person as long as the guy you like wins is really scary, and not really very democratic or american.

~RedRose~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:49 AM
This wouldn't be an issue for you if the person you wanted to win had won, I bet Jiggly ..... and dont try to tell me it wud .... Im not believing a word of it.

cheesestix
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:57 AM
i love how not a one of you has taken on the task of proveing the validity of evoting machines.

by the way, you CAN take my post a show point for point how i am wrong (like producing a paper trail for example, or proving the experts i sited early as wrong), but see that would require that you know what you are talking about. you are not very good at that. understanding anything beyond your passion for sucking GWBs dick.

see, the reality is that evoting machines as they stand are a threat to democracy. this is a known fact, this is why a number of florida districts decided not to use them. this is why much the union has neld back the implamentation and use of them. when it comes down to it, as i said earlier, individual votes dont count. just one trained hacker can undo voting for an entire state. and can effect and through a national election. this is something that has been reported and known for a year now.

you williness to say that is ok if the votes of an entire states are played with by one person as long as the guy you like wins is really scary, and not really very democratic or american.

Okay, evoting machines are evil! :rolleyes: Whatever! :rolleyes:

Now PROVE how Bush used them to steal the election!!!!!!

Show us an instance where ONE Bush voter voted multiple times!

And while you're at it, prove to us that NOT ONE Kerry supporter did the same thing!

You can't prove any of it. Yet, you're quick to claim that Bush stole Florida....WITH NO PROOF!

Wigglytuff
Nov 3rd, 2004, 06:59 AM
Okay, so one person can cast 350K votes. Couldn't a Kerry voter game the system just as easily as a Bush voter?

Anyway, you said that Bush stole Florida? PROVE IT!

You may have proven that it can technically be done, but you haven't proven that any Bush voters rigged the election. PROVE IT!

Why is it so hard for you to understand? PROVE IT!

Show me where ONE Bush voter cast a vote multiple times.....not that he CAN do it, but that he DID do it. PROVE IT!

see this why i mean that you have the IQ of a 4 year old. go back read the thread before you start going on. i have already said that yes one person can cast any number of votes in ANY direction. he stole the election because you have an election based on faulty evoting machines with no evidence of anything really and is claiming victory when in fact it is completely unknown what the hell happened.

only someone as stupid as you would say that 1,100 reports of evoting problems related ofcourse to these f-ed machines dont constitute as proof of problems with machines or of sign of corruption.

and your stupidity and ignorance, the reality is that you are argue a point, (that evoting is flawless or unhackable or that one person could not cast 350,000 votes) all of this has already been prove to be the case. here are just a few links again:

http://ecoustics-cnet.com.com/Computer+scientists+slam+e-voting+machines/2110-1028_3-5384946.html

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115891,00.asp

i dont know how many times you going to want this. i think that you want a paper trail for machines for which the problem is that there is none. just because you like sucking GWB's dick, doesnt, again, justife ignoring just clear and solid scienticfic research and from such amazing sources as pc world and cnet.

~RedRose~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:02 AM
Jigglypuff .... how do you know Bush is behind it .... how do you know that the alleged "fixed" voting machines were exploited in the way you claim? Huh?

Stop being stupid, you are fighting a losing battle, typical that as soon as something small came out you would try and make it something big.

cheesestix
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:06 AM
see this why i mean that you have the IQ of a 4 year old. go back read the thread before you start going on. i have already said that yes one person can cast any number of votes in ANY direction. he stole the election because you have an election based on faulty evoting machines with no evidence of anything really and is claiming victory when in fact it is completely unknown what the hell happened.

only someone as stupid as you would say that 1,100 reports of evoting problems related ofcourse to these f-ed machines dont constitute as proof of problems with machines or of sign of corruption.

and your stupidity and ignorance, the reality is that you are argue a point, (that evoting is flawless or unhackable or that one person could not cast 350,000 votes) all of this has already been prove to be the case. here are just a few links again:

http://ecoustics-cnet.com.com/Computer+scientists+slam+e-voting+machines/2110-1028_3-5384946.html

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115891,00.asp

i dont know how many times you going to want this. i think that you want a paper trail for machines for which the problem is that there is none. just because you like sucking GWB's dick, doesnt, again, justife ignoring just clear and solid scienticfic research and from such amazing sources as pc world and cnet.

When did I ever say that evoting machines were flawless or unhackable?????

All I'm saying is that you need to PROVE that Bush stole the election or retract your claim.

You proved that EVOTING MACHINES ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO FRAUD, but you haven't proven that ANY fraud was perpetrated by Bush or his supporters!

Where was all of this outrage over evoting machines BEFORE the election? :rolleyes:

Like Ayla said, had Kerry won Florida, you wouldn't be complaining!

Are you just ignorant or something? I don't think I can spell it out anymore clearly for you.

PROVE THAT FRAUD WAS ACTUALLY PERPETRATED, NOT JUST THE POTENTIAL FOR FRAUD!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

njguido11
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:07 AM
Wow it amazes me how you cant just admit defeat. It must be a shock to most who frequent this board but guess what, THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTRY DOESNT AGREE WITH YOU. im sure this is a wake up call for some but tomorrow is just another day. To be honest most of you seem to do nothing but post on this board so I dont see how ur lives are so FREAKIN horrible. Thank god Bush won and no signs of gloating celebrities tomorrow

Brian Stewart
Nov 3rd, 2004, 08:16 AM
Well, at the risk of going "Oliver Stone" here, a look at some basic facts make things look awfully suspicious.

First, there was great uproar against the electronic voting machines before the elections. The articles linked to are just a couple of examples.

Then there is the very suspicious composition of the machines. No paper trail to double-check votes, and provide hard evidence of how people voted. And the use of propreitary operating software, which the manfacturers would not allow anyone to examine.

Then there is the man whose company made and installed these machines. He is an ardent Bush supporter who has explicitly said he would do anything he could to help Bush win.

There are the complaints themselves. People are calling in complaining that attempted votes for Kerry were being displayed as votes for Bush. But no one called in to complain about an attempt to vote for Bush resulting in an erroneous display.

Finally, the exit polls. Exit polls are very scientific and tend to be extremely accurate. Many a time a network has called a race for a candidate, based on exit polls, even though early results would show the opponent with a huge lead. By the time all votes are tabulated, they turned out correct. In this case, the vote tabulations in Florida and Ohio were way out of line with the exit polls. Something doesn't jibe. Some folks were trying to pin the blame on the polls themselves, but there is another possibility. Maybe the voters did vote as they said, but maybe the votes weren't counted that way. It's similar to what happened in 2000. Exit polls showed Gore winning Florida. But, somehow thousands of Gore votes wound up with Patrick Buchanan. And even then, when a full manual recount of Florida was done after the election, it showed Gore with more votes in Florida.

So, even if Bush gets credit for Ohio, and thus the Presidency, there are going to be questions about the legitimacy of this election. Even moreso than 2000. Volcana expected Bush to steal the election, as did some family members. Given all of the hard facts, I find it very hard to disagree with them. And this is from a moderate Independent.

Sam L
Nov 3rd, 2004, 08:20 AM
Well, at the risk of going "Oliver Stone" here, a look at some basic facts make things look awfully suspicious.

First, there was great uproar against the electronic voting machines before the elections. The articles linked to are just a couple of examples.

Then there is the very suspicious composition of the machines. No paper trail to double-check votes, and provide hard evidence of how people voted. And the use of propreitary operating software, which the manfacturers would not allow anyone to examine.

Then there is the man whose company made and installed these machines. He is an ardent Bush supporter who has explicitly said he would do anything he could to help Bush win.

There are the complaints themselves. People are calling in complaining that attempted votes for Kerry were being displayed as votes for Bush. But no one called in to complain about an attempt to vote for Bush resulting in an erroneous display.

Finally, the exit polls. Exit polls are very scientific and tend to be extremely accurate. Many a time a network has called a race for a candidate, based on exit polls, even though early results would show the opponent with a huge lead. By the time all votes are tabulated, they turned out correct. In this case, the vote tabulations in Florida and Ohio were way out of line with the exit polls. Something doesn't jibe. Some folks were trying to pin the blame on the polls themselves, but there is another possibility. Maybe the voters did vote as they said, but maybe the votes weren't counted that way. It's similar to what happened in 2000. Exit polls showed Gore winning Florida. But, somehow thousands of Gore votes wound up with Patrick Buchanan. And even then, when a full manual recount of Florida was done after the election, it showed Gore with more votes in Florida.

So, even if Bush gets credit for Ohio, and thus the Presidency, there are going to be questions about the legitimacy of this election. Even moreso than 2000. Volcana expected Bush to steal the election, as did some family members. Given all of the hard facts, I find it very hard to disagree with them. And this is from a moderate Independent.
Brian, I feel it too. And you know what, it's funny how close this election felt and yet it's not even 24 hours and everyone is certain Bush has won? I smell something fishy.

~ The Leopard ~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 09:35 AM
Oh get a life, people. I'm as upset as anyone about the outcome of this election. Four more years of extreme right-wing government in the US is bad for the whole world. OTOH, there's a fair bit of clutching at straws in this thread. Do what you can to change the way people think about policy, because right now they are thinking narrowly and selfishly; don't whine about voting machines.

flyingmachine
Nov 3rd, 2004, 10:12 AM
Jigglypuff: Please clam down. I know people you are up set. But many people in this forum feel up set too.

faboozadoo15
Nov 3rd, 2004, 10:16 PM
Brian, I feel it too. And you know what, it's funny how close this election felt and yet it's not even 24 hours and everyone is certain Bush has won? I smell something fishy.
florida was never close after 20% of tyhe votes had been counted, and kerry was losing ohio from the moment 30% of the votes were counted. people were duped into thinking that the remaining ballots could make up for hundreds of thousands of votes. i went to bed knowing bush was president, i just didn't know when.

faboozadoo15
Nov 3rd, 2004, 10:19 PM
Finally, the exit polls. Exit polls are very scientific and tend to be extremely accurate. Many a time a network has called a race for a candidate, based on exit polls, even though early results would show the opponent with a huge lead. By the time all votes are tabulated, they turned out correct. In this case, the vote tabulations in Florida and Ohio were way out of line with the exit polls. Something doesn't jibe. Some folks were trying to pin the blame on the polls themselves, but there is another possibility. Maybe the voters did vote as they said, but maybe the votes weren't counted that way. It's similar to what happened in 2000. Exit polls showed Gore winning Florida. But, somehow thousands of Gore votes wound up with Patrick Buchanan. And even then, when a full manual recount of Florida was done after the election, it showed Gore with more votes in Florida.

#1 exit polls favor the challenger. people who are more vocal about their candidate will influence exit polls.
#2 the silent majority... people don't always want to discuss their ballot.
#3 exit polls do not favor conservatives.

Justeenium
Nov 3rd, 2004, 10:26 PM
Brian Stewart, the actual result in Florida was within the margin of error of the data compiled by the exit polls.

~RedRose~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 10:50 PM
Brian, I feel it too. And you know what, it's funny how close this election felt and yet it's not even 24 hours and everyone is certain Bush has won? I smell something fishy.

Maybe you should take a bath.

JohnPratt
Nov 5th, 2004, 01:53 AM
seriously, for someone who makes a habit of avoid facts you like to ask for alot.

you have the iq of a small child, thats why i posted the article so thats with an iq above your 25 can read it. shows point by point who evoting is UNTRACKABLE without a paper trail.

so i ask you, where is the paper trail to show that ONE person using these florida voting machines voted for bush.

the point is that asking for proof is a moot point. and thats how the leaders of the GOP and makers of these evoting machines wanted. they have been asked by many a scientist to add a paper trail and REFUSED.

kind of like your bank refusing to let you see a statement. you just have trust thier word, you get no record of any action, therein.

scary?

you bet. hey just a side note: who's stupider? I think the person who thinks small children have small IQ's. Do you know what an IQ is? Apparently not. The IQ of a person doesn't change the older he/she gets. Learn what an IQ is, and THEN talk about how stupid people are if you want to. Thanks. --John