[IP] "Buried" Voter Fraud Theories
Begin forwarded message:
From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: November 12, 2004 2:12:53 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: "Buried" Voter Fraud Theories
David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Steven Cherry <s.cherry@xxxxxxxx>
Date: November 12, 2004 10:27:20 AM EST
To: "David J. Farber" <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: NY Times to Bloggers: Calm down!
Dave,
In two articles today, the NY Times tells those of us concerned about
the 2004 election process that there's nothing here to look at, just
move along.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12theory.html>
Vote Fraud Theories, Spread by Blogs, Are Quickly Buried
<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12evote.html>
Mostly Good Reviews for Electronic Voting
(For IP, if you desire)
Dave:
We are fighting for a democratic election. Period.
We are trying to find a way to save or recover this election due
to the deficiencies and lack of recourse that resulted from the
mass implementation of black box voting devices.
The election failed. There's no myth to the fact that black
boxes violate the electoral process. What we want is an
investigation into the consequences of the failure of the
electoral process due to the use of black box voting technology.
Openness, public scrutiny and recourse are necessary elements of
a valid electoral process, are what makes elections work, by
assuring faith in the conduct and outcome, deterring fraud in
advance, and providing recourse to correction in response to
failures. The use of black box voting technology thoroughly
subverts the validity and integrity of the electoral process.
We've been duped by misconceived notions of automating accuracy,
giving up on the established means for assuring the reliability
of the electoral process.
The Help America Vote Act was the instrument of the failure.
NASED was the negligent agency. Their failure to assure the
principles of public scrutiny and recourse through an incorrect
reliance on automating accuracy instead, is what caused the
collapse in faith in the integrity of this election.
There was not a lot that was *regular* about this election. You
can't have an election where the process is not open to scrutiny
all along the chain, and where you have no recourse to a recount
as a way of assuring and correcting the election's validity.
We don't need proof of vote tampering. We need the media to do
its job. To say that an electoral process that lacks public
scrutiny and recourse is somehow acceptable and normal, is fraud.
The election process that was established and conducted for 2004
was a failure. We have to demand a valid electoral process, even
if it makes no difference in the outcome. That means no black
box voting, and openness, verifiability and recourse built into
the process all along the chain, exactly how it has always been
supposed to be, whether with traditional mechanical devices or
electronic devices. Please work together to reverse the
undermining of electoral process through black box technology,
regardless of whether it will change the outcome of the election.
Seth Johnson
--
[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc
I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication.
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so
far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in
ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/