• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Vote Flipping

BenBurch said:
Of course.

This is why Obama needs to win by a huge margin; The fix is in and we need to win by much, much more than can be fixed.
Click to expand...
Actually, no. I just realized that it's because a lot of people don't necessarily know how to use a touch screen. I have to dredge up the article that I found but apparently some touch screens do not work in any intuitive manner which was the article I was reading warning voters about. It only registers the vote once you lift your finger off the screen. Hence if you drag your thumb across it the screen will not register the correct vote. I wouldn't say it's stupidity because no one thinks that touch screens work that way.
 
technoextreme said:
Actually, no. I just realized that it's because a lot of people don't necessarily know how to use a touch screen. I have to dredge up the article that I found but apparently some touch screens do not work in any intuitive manner which was the article I was reading warning voters about. It only registers the vote once you lift your finger off the screen. Hence if you drag your thumb across it the screen will not register the correct vote. I wouldn't say it's stupidity because no one thinks that touch screens work that way.
Click to expand...

Well, no...that's why it's called a touch screen, not a drag screen. That, and there are just too many possibilities for confusion if the phrase drag screen were to be misunderstood. :p
 
fezzic said:
I don't know how paper trails are supposed to help out or prove. Even if the machine printed a receipt that showed how I 'voted' how the heck can I be sure that the machine isn't lying to me.
Click to expand...
I used an electronic voting machine in the state primaries. It doesn't actually give the voter a piece of paper, but rather, there's a roll of paper (similar to a supermarket checkout printout) contained within it. One you've confirmed the votes you want to cast, the printed paper scrolls past a (sealed) window, showing you what votes you've cast. But the paper stays with the machine.
 
defaultdotxbe said:
the flaws in the systems are not the conspiracy theory, the conspiracy theory is the notion that they were designed that way with the intention of giving the election to the republicans
Click to expand...

I guess it's just coincidence that the flaws favor the GOP.
 
Back in 2000 everyone was complaining that we were still using old fashioned paper ballots and not something hi-tech. Now that is happening and everyone is complaining about a lack of a paper trail?:boggled:

Make up your mind people!
 
Travis said:
Back in 2000 everyone was complaining that we were still using old fashioned paper ballots and not something hi-tech. Now that is happening and everyone is complaining about a lack of a paper trail?:boggled:

Make up your mind people!
Click to expand...

Oh, it gets better then that...and as a Californian you should remember.
Back in 2003,during the Gray Davis recall election ..the one that resulted in Ahrnuld becoming the Guvanator...the ACLU sued to have the election postponed six months so that all paper ballots in Cal could be replaced by a more modern system. They actualy got a lower court ruling in their favor but it was overturned by a upper court after a huge public outcry.
But NOW the ACLU seems to be screaming about how easy corrupted the same system they sued to have put in place is.
Look, all instances of voting irregularties should be investigated. But some Dems seem to be totally paranois and are buying into Wack CTs.
Not to mention the Dems are not without sin in this department.
 
The other thing that gets is that if it is so obvious 2000 and 2004 were stolen, why did the DNC itself give up the fight? I mean in 2000, they simply sued over which way to count the votes. And some of the Dems on the Supreme Court sided with Bush. The Democratic party itself never made any real accusations of fraud.

2004, they simply accepted getting robbed.

Does that seem odd to anyone else?
 
To be fair, I think that A LOT was questionable about what happened in Florida in 2000...and I think the Dems should have pursued it to the end just to see what really happened.
But 2004 in Ohio...not so much. I find the evidence there for a plot very thin. I am not denying that irregulaties occured and they should be investigated, but I don't see them as enough to decide a election, as what happened in Florida in 2000.
 
technoextreme said:
It only registers the vote once you lift your finger off the screen. Hence if you drag your thumb across it the screen will not register the correct vote. I wouldn't say it's stupidity because no one thinks that touch screens work that way.
Click to expand...

I would expect touch screens to work the same way that windows-based operating systems work. Pushing a button doesn't activate it, it only activates when you release the push on the same button you pushed in the first place.

Is that what was going on here?
 
dudalb said:
To be fair, I think that A LOT was questionable about what happened in Florida in 2000...and I think the Dems should have pursued it to the end just to see what really happened.
But 2004 in Ohio...not so much. I find the evidence there for a plot very thin. I am not denying that irregulaties occured and they should be investigated, but I don't see them as enough to decide a election, as what happened in Florida in 2000.
Click to expand...

I followed this very closely in 2004--the one that got me off thinking electronic voting was a problem was a report that showed that the biggest discrepancies in the exit polls happened in counties that DIDN'T have the machines in question. There were no particular polling anomalies in the touch-screen voting counties.
 
I decided to use paper ballot instead of touch-screen. There wasn't a line for the paper ballot booths.
 
CurtC said:
I would expect touch screens to work the same way that windows-based operating systems work. Pushing a button doesn't activate it, it only activates when you release the push on the same button you pushed in the first place.

Is that what was going on here?
Click to expand...
the touchscreen i used activated on first touch, dragging had no effect

i actually found it surprisingly responsive, and very accurate, there wasnt a line behind me so i actually played with it for a 5 minutes, trying to produce "vote flipping" results and wasnt able to get anything

this was a kind i used http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/10/29/us/29ballot.650.jpg apparently made by a company called [FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Sequoia[/SIZE][/FONT]
 
Elizabeth I said:
Well, no...that's why it's called a touch screen, not a drag screen. That, and there are just too many possibilities for confusion if the phrase drag screen were to be misunderstood. :p
Click to expand...
Ummm.... No. Read better. Some touch screens only register you lifting your finger off the screen. It's backwards and unintuitive.
 
Last edited:
technoextreme said:
Ummm.... No. Read better. Some touch screens only register you lifting your finger off the screen. It's backwards and unintuitive.
Click to expand...
i think that may be more the software behind it than the screen itself, on my windows mobile pda touching and holding the screen works similarly to a right-click, so because of that it doesnt register a normal tap until you remove your finger

as i said previously though, the touch screen i used registered on first touch
 
Nice to see that not all conspiracy theorizing is dead around here; the black box voting stuff is every bit as retarded as 9-11 Troof. Bev Harris and Brad Friedman are sophisticated versions of Sofia Shafquat and Steven Jones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom