Did Bush steal two elections by using Diebold machines?

Question

I think current research shows that Diebold voting machines are unreliable, easily hacked, have no paper trail and could easily be reprogrammed to refect any total for any candidate.

Answer 1

Ya.

- Two memory cards were uploaded from Volusia Couny's precinct 216, the second one was loaded sometime close to 2am in the morning. It automatically replaced the first card's results and reduced Gore's total by 16,022 votes and added several thousand votes to Bush plus a variety of minor candidates;
- Both memory cards loaded into the system clean and without errors, indicating (contrary to the official line) that they were not faulty;
- After the error was noticed the original card was reloaded and the mistake was rectified;
- The error was introduced in such a way that the total number of votes remained unchanged (again something that could not happen by chance.);
- According to the technical boffins, the chance of the memory card being corrupted and still passing the checksum error test are less than 60,000 to 1;
- The technical managers at Diebold Election Systems considered it a reasonable possibility that the second card was part of deliberate conspiracy to rig the election results

Answer 2

Although this contention has been wildly spread as a rumor, no actual evidence has been presented to support that it occured. The conspiracy exists purely in the minds of the left who cannot except that people just were not happy with their platform and thus did not vote for it. This conspiracy tries to give the impression that MR. Bush and his friends are all powerful. It ignores the fact that there are powerful men and women on both sides of the aisle. Do you honestly believe given the level of dislike in Congress and the media for Mr. Bush that if these contentions were factual the truth wouldn't come out? If so, then you have a dim view of the intelligence level of the Democratic Party in general.

The left wing believes that because they hate Mr. Bush so much that there is no way anyone could like him and therefore no way he could win the votes required. What they fail to take into account is that the large majority of Americans do not share their views and absolute hatred. The majority of Americans are moderate in their views. They may lean to one side or the other, but in the end they vote their hearts. In the first election Mr. Gore might have won if Florida voters could have actually read the ballot properly. In the second election people voted on one primary issue which was security. The simple fact is that Mr. Bush made the majority feel safe, and Mr. Kerry didn't. No great conspiracy here.

People will believe what they must believe to make themselves feel better about those elections and their outcomes. It will not change the outcome and continuing to hold to wild theories without actual facts just damages the credibility of the American electoral system in the eyes of the world. Liberals appear to be liberals first and Americans second. They place more power in the agenda than in national pride. This fact makes me sad because I love this country and the people who inhabit it, even the most extreme of liberals.

Sitara: I have worked in the tech sector for over 10 years dealing with both hardware and software. Trust me the impossible happens everyday and usually at the worst possible time. You want to talk imposibilities check out the odds of winning the lottery and yet people do.

Answer 3

Don't be silly. Bush didn't steal two elections by using Diebold machines. He stole the elections by striking eligible democrats from the voter rolls in Florida (2000); trying to reduce the black vote in Ohio by saying that the voter registrations were completed on the wrong thickness of paper and therefore were invalid (2004); by putting more voting machines in affluent, usually republican districts; by creating over 10 hour line-ups in some of the poorer, and generally democratic, districts.

Oh, and he used Diebold machines.

Answer 4

frequently, i'm skeptical of conspiracy theories. contained related to manipulation of digital vote casting archives, i've got seen better than sufficient to make me very worried that, sure, an election could be rigged. there are countless information helping the hypothesis that some elections have already been desperate by potential of digital archives manipulation. Diebold grabs the headlines, of course, because of its proprietor making the regrettably public promise to do each and everything he would desire to to insure Bush became President. yet i don't think Diebold is uniquely liable to digital manipulation. one element is definite: government has a vested activity in reassuring us the vote casting technique is honest and precise. It would not look too anxious concerning to the growing to be skepticism and cynicism interior the physique politic. according to probability maximum remarkable of all is the undeniable fact that the Democrats -- for sure the sufferers of the alleged manipulations -- do not look fascinated or worried in any respect. Leaves room for a great style of hypothesis approximately why it rather is.

Answer 5

Yes, that's how Bush won. Look at the popular vote in 2000...

Answer 6

Kind of makes you wonder why the dems would give 'em the ok in the first place don't it !

Answer 7

yes. and mr bush will also become first 2nd termed president to be a gay as discovered.

Answer 8

Please spare me the ignorance. When it comes to voter fraud and rigging elections everyone with a knowledge of history knows that's how the democrats win.

Answer 9

wlill the crying and moaning ever end?