November 02, 2006

Hacking Democracy

Coming a couple days after All Hallow's Eve, HBO has released the scariest horror movie ever wrapped up in the plot of an unsolved whodunit. Hacking Democracy goes behind the scenes of the theft of the 2000 election in Florida's Volusia Co., and in 2004 in Ohio. It reveals that the Kerry campaign knew that the optical scan counting in New Mexico was rigged, with every single area counted on optical scan, regardless of demographics, going for Bush. I wish he'd fought it out, but maybe he knew something else we don't about how the cards were stacked.

Watching the untraceable hack of the machines, truly disturbing. But this at least restores my faith in the good judgement of the electorate itself.

Update: At Pandagon, a review of the documentary brings up the point that this is a nonpartisan problem and wonders again why Kerry didn't stand up over irregularities and vote suppression.

Posted by natasha at November 2, 2006 10:31 PM | US News | Technorati links |
Comments

Perhaps this is why Karl Rove is acting so confident about the upcoming election -widespread fraud... very scary thought.

Posted by: sfgf at November 3, 2006 09:22 AM

[LINK] Who Cares What You Think: The Movie

Posted by: Richard Bottoms at November 3, 2006 12:27 PM

Nice, Richard.

Posted by: Mary at November 3, 2006 09:37 PM

I sat and watched Hacking Democracy and cried. Fraud is frightening. Now we are forcing our fraudulent ways on the rest of the world, sometimes killing many to have our evil represented.
I don't know how to fix this problem without created total disaster for our Country.

Posted by: Ed at November 5, 2006 07:27 AM

When you watch the "smoking gun" test of 8 votes in the last 20 minutes, notice the following:
----when the machine is turned on, memory is misspelled as memroy
----when the final vote count is revealed as 7 yes to 1 no, memory is spelled correctly
----when they replay this final vote count later for emphasis, the final vote count is 7 yes to 1 no, memory is misspelled as memroy

I can only conclude that the test shown in the documentary was not scientifically valid.

Posted by: walt at November 5, 2006 08:00 AM

To walt: Its funny, how we humans will grab onto a sliver of irregularity and grab it to verify a belief. Because of one misspelled word, your going to discount the entire theme?

Thats your right. But a sign of an active mind are questions. More appropriately, ask yourself why do you believe that the voting machines are not rigged?

I don't know if this true or not, but at least i'm now trying to investigate whether it is or not - you should do the same. Personally, i really hope they're not rigged, but the mere fact they CAN be tampered with goes against the core of what this country stands for.

Posted by: RD at November 5, 2006 08:28 AM

To walt: Look again at the following screen shots from this documentary.

http://img296.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshot20061106002850zv6.png

http://img215.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshoox3.jpg

http://img246.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshotv0.jpg

http://img246.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshowa1.jpg

http://img133.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshowc2.jpg

http://img82.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshots5.jpg

http://img329.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hackingdemocracysnapshouy3.jpg

You will see that the error in question is consistent and that you are referring to a different part of the printout. The part you are referring to obviously is where they would have to type in the "election naem" (sp) they were doing at the time, so this does not show any error in the testing.
Just someones typo. Another example of mankind's imperfection.

Posted by: Neutral at November 6, 2006 01:10 AM

It's obvious that neither party cares what we the public might think of the system....
They all sat around for 6 years looking complascent and worrying about when they could escape from Washington DC.
None had a desire to fix anything.
Ask Rep. Conyers how much support he was able to muster while fighting for the integrity (or lack of) from the Ohio polls.

Posted by: Boggs at November 6, 2006 11:46 AM

I'll take a stab at answering the excellent question posted by RD, why does Walt not believe the machines are rigged? Assuming he's not just covering for someone, I think he and people like him are just plain scared to believe it. At some point he's probably put his faith in either the political system or technology or corporate America and can't get his head around the fact that all three let him down...Or maybe he's just an idiot.

Posted by: Todd at November 13, 2006 11:23 PM