Vote for Rommey comes up Obama


#1

Joan Stevens was one of several early voters at the polls on Monday. But when Stevens tried to cast her ballot for president, she noticed a problem.Upon selecting “Mitt Romney” on the electronic touch screen, Barack Obama’s name lit up.
It took Stevens three tries before her selection was accurately recorded.

http://www.marionstar.com/article/20121031/NEWS03/310310009/Problem-found-board-elections?gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

Okay this is the second instance I have read about that a voting machine somehow votes for Obama. Fraud is in the air


#2

It also happened down here in Texas…
They said it was not “set right”…YOU THINK???[LEFT][/LEFT]


#3

I double-checked mine here in NC. It came up right…Romney. Everything else was right too.
Purrs,
Tigger


#4

I read all the excuses. They didn’t impress me.

Where’s the FEC? Busy taking all these ‘voting irregularities’ as seriously as these members and directors on the Board of Elections are?
It’s FRAUD! Is that it happens to be a FELONY too scary for them to investigate or prosecute?


#5

As someone who spent a 25 yr career in IT and has worked as a software/hardware/network engineer, can write code from the machine level up, I can see not easy mistake being made that if you touch screen or whatever input you use to vote for X that Y get the vote, UNLESS IT WAS DONE ON PURPOSE!!!

Corrupt code rarely results in the wrong answer but still works properly, it does not happen that way, corrupt code means it ain’t working, be it boot up or not print etc, but you do not get a wrong answer unless someone did something to make that happen and knew what they were doing to insure the machine continued to work properly.


#6

So, iow, the FEC isn’t catching the culprits because they don’t WANT to.


#7

Anyone who’s ever been a programmer knows that bugs like that happen in any application all the time.


#8

RARELY will code execute when corrupt and only give a wrong answer, yet still be executing properly, possible yes, but it would have to be done INTENTIONALLY! In fact that is the basis for those who write malware. To get the code to do something not intended and NOT freeeze, lockup or crash. You have to be doing on purpose. While it could be possible a corruption might, MIGHT occur, but to have a TREND like this across the US, sorry, don’t happen that way.

You do not hit ‘print’ and watch ‘MS Word’ open, you do not vote for x and get z, sorry!!!


#9

That kind of thing happens all the time, especially in touch-screen applications where the software might not even be at fault. I would go so far as to say that most people who have used touch screens can likely recall times when something like that has happened.

Oh God, if only that were true. How many hours would it have saved me? If the code is invalid, yes, the application will crash. But if the code is in correct syntax even though you’ve made a mistake, then the application will continue happily along executing your badly written code and giving you unintended results.

But, since they say they’ve been using some of these machines for ten years or more, if I had to guess, I would bet on a problem with the input device.


#10

Good lord. All I can ask is how come no order ever came out wrong when ordering merchandise via a touch screen at J.C. Penny’s?

'Nuff said?


#11

I happen to agree with 17Oaks. A college programming student could program a voting machine. Hell, I haven’t even taken any programming courses, and I could come up with a rudimentary design.

if (OBAMA){
obamavote++;
return 0;
}
else if (ROMNEY){
romneyvote++;
return 0;
}
else{
return 1;
}

It really is that simple. The fact that voting machines CAN mess up means they are overly complicated and need to be open source and audited.


#12

Yeah, right, and I’m a rocket scientist.
Bugs like that can happen on purpose much easier.


#13

Touch screens were invented in the 60’s by IBM, they were the rage back in the latter part of the 80’s but fell flat due to the unnatural way of working on a computer from a chair and desk by reaching up to the screen.

The tech is very mature, very accurate, its can made inaccurate very easily by some one who wants to.

I have developed in a touch screen interface and have a good understanding of how it works and how code executes. In fact I would put money that 90% of the folks on here have used software my team developed, if not more. Software does not come and go, if there is a bug, the bug remains, it does not self repair, it may not be there all the time because a ‘call’ may not always be there. Such as you can print on every printer except the one in your office, then you find out of the 10 printers you can print to on your floor on the one in your office is a brand X. But here we are talking about voting for Romney and the vote is being cast for Obama. Were this a unique event on a few voting machines in one county in one state or on a certain brand of machine etc we blame Bush, Global Warming or bad code, but in this case I see no, NO legitimacy for trying to pass this off as just some random bug in the code…


#14

Isn’t that exactly the case? How many times is this known to have happened, and on what platforms?

This is the same claim the Dems made in '04. Anyone remember this?

Diebold Voting Machine Owner Committed to give Votes for Bush
Published on Thursday, August 28, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer

COLUMBUS - The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio told Republicans in a recent fund-raising letter that he is “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.”

The Aug. 14 letter from Walden O’Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc. - who has become active in the re-election effort of President Bush - prompted Democrats this week to question the propriety of allowing O’Dell’s company to calculate votes in the 2004 presidential election.

O’Dell attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush benefactors - known as Rangers and Pioneers - at the president’s Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month. The next week, he penned invitations to a $1,000-a-plate fund-raiser to benefit the Ohio Republican Party’s federal campaign fund - partially benefiting Bush - at his mansion in the Columbus suburb of Upper Arlington.

The letter went out the day before Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, also a Republican, was set to qualify Diebold as one of three firms eligible to sell upgraded electronic voting machines to Ohio counties in time for the 2004 election.

continued: Diebold Voting Machine Owner Committed To Give Votes To Bush in 2004


#15

So far it seems to have happened in Ca, Tx, Oh, but have been spotty on the news today.

While your Diebold post is I guess relevant to something not sure what as:

  1. its dated 28 Aug 03

  2. I know of no discrepancies in Diebold voting machines

You have been struggling for some time now to convince us you are some kind of IT expert, well you are not, you did not even get past the common sense level, now you gave us near 10 year quote like that means something.

Ok folks, get ready, everything else has failed look for the RACE CARD…


#16

Yeah, bet it’s the same software that has been on the machines since they came out, and it’s just now malfunctioning? And the way it is “malfunctioning” is highly suspect. Back when the Diebold machines were getting implemented all over the place, several were found (brand new!) to already have a number of votes logged on them. We’ve had a poster here - he still stops in occasionally - who claims that the Republican party tampered with a lot of them, but if that were true, and was a known fact, the MSM would have been all over them. Of course, there won’t be much said about this “problem.”


#17

Voting machines used by as many as a quarter of American voters heading to the polls in 2012 can be hacked with just $10.50 in parts and an 8th grade science education, according to computer science and security experts at the Vulnerability Assessment Team at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois. The experts say the newly developed hack could change voting results while leaving absolutely no trace of the manipulation behind.

Diebold voting machines can be hacked by remote control - Salon.com

Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems) admitted in a state hearing Tuesday that the audit logs produced by its tabulation software miss significant events, including the act of someone deleting votes on election day.

Diebold Admits Systemic Audit Log Failure; State Vows Inquiry | Threat Level | Wired.com

The logs are at the core of an investigation that the California secretary of state’s office is conducting to determine why the GEMS tabulation system deleted 197 ballots from the tallies of one precinct in Humboldt County during the November 4 general election. But instead of providing transparency into what occurred on the system, the GEMS logs have so far only baffled state investigators. Deputy Secretary of State Lowell Finley has referred to the logs as “‘Greek’ to anyone other than a programmer.”

Voting Machine Audit Logs Raise More Questions about Lost Votes in California Election | Threat Level | Wired.com

In January and February 2004, a whistleblower named Stephen Heller brought to light memos from Jones Day, Diebold’s attorneys, informing Diebold that they were in breach of California law by continuing to use illegal and uncertified software in California voting machines.


#18

Wrong. Unlike you, I’ve not made any claims of being an expert. All I said was that anyone who’s done much programming (read: even a novice like me) should know that bugs like this can happen. You’ve claimed to be an expert. You’ve said that 90% of us have used software you developed. That seems like a bold claim, even hard to believe. Especially when you’re saying things like, “To get the code to do something not intended and NOT freeeze, lockup or crash, you have to be doing on purpose.” I would expect someone who programmed software that 90% of us use would know that it’s possible to get unintended results from code without causing a fatal error. But hey, maybe you meant to say something else there, right? I’m not going to do what you just did and call you a faker.

Now if you want to get back to talking about voting machines and statistical trends: How many times is this error known to have occurred, out of how many cast votes?


#19

The DNC seems really desperate to me.


#20

Crickets…