Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Group(s): Add to My Group
January 10, 2008 at 00:00:01

View Ratings | Rate It

Alarms Should Go Off Whenever the Discrepancies Between the "Official" Results and the Polls Can't Be Explained

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg

Tell A Friend

By andi novick (about the author)     Page 2 of 4 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

– In Georgia, polls going into the election showed Dem. Senator Max Cleland with a 5% lead over Rep. Saxby Chambliss (who also had a 100% approval rating from the Christian Coalition). Cleland lost to Chambliss 46 to 53 %, an incredible last-minute 12 point swing . And in the governorship race, polls right up to the election showed Roy Barnes, the incumbent Democratic governor, leading by 11 points. Amazingly Barnes lost the governorship to the Republican, Sonny Perdue, 46 to 51 per cent, a swing of 16 percentage points! The press failed to point out that Georgia had became the first state in the country to conduct an election entirely with touch screen voting machines and that the entire election was run, not by the government, but by Diebold.

– In Colorado, a Zogby poll just before the election put Democrat Tom Strickland leading Republican Wayne Allard with a comfortable 5 point lead. Allard, who also happened to have one of those 100% approval rating from the Christian Coalition, experienced another miracle come from behind victory, winning by 70,000 votes. Diebold touch-screen machines were used in a number of counties, collectively accounting for over 750,000 votes.

–In Alabama, Democratic incumbent Gov. Don Siegelman had won the governor's race, but the Republican National Committee's regional director determined that a faulty chip was at issue. After a new chip arrived, the Republicans were the victors. Governor Siegelman claimed the results were changed on the electronic machines after poll watchers left.

– In Nebraska, Republican U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel ran against Democrat Charlie Matulka and won in a landslide. As his Website says, Hagel "was re-elected to his second term in the United States Senate on November 5, 2002 with 83% of the vote. That represents the biggest political victory in the history of Nebraska." What the media had neglected to point out is that in both 2002, as well as 1996, 80% of the votes in Nebraska were counted confidentially not by the government, but by computer-controlled voting machines supplied, controlled and purchased from Hagel’s own company, ES&S. Said the Democratic challenger Matulka, "They can take over our country without firing a shot, just by taking over our election systems."

Random anomalies? Remarkable coincidences? Consider these facts:

– When Hagel first ran for the U.S. Senate in 1996, his own company's computer-controlled voting machines showed he'd won stunning and unexpected victories in both the primaries and the general election. The Washington Post said Hagel's "Senate victory against an incumbent Democratic governor was the major Republican upset in the November election." A Gallop Poll had put Hagel in a dead heat with Democratic Ben Nelson, but unexpected popularity with African-American and Native American precincts, communities that had never before voted Republican, accounted for the first Republican in 24 years to win a Senate seat in Nebraska.

– Not only Senator Hagel’s ES&S, but all electronic voting is done by Republican-controlled machines. Diebold and Sequoia are both owned by prominent Republican Party donors and a smaller company, Triad, also a Republican contributor, was responsible for counting half of Ohio’s 88 counties in 2004 and was found in the Conyers report to have been involved in fraudulent activity).

– In August, 2003 Wally O’Dell, the CEO of Diebold and a major donor to the to the Bush campaign invited friends to a Bush/Cheney fundraiser at his home in Ohio with an invitation that read: "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year".

– In the summer of 2003, more than a year before the 2004 election, Representative Peter King (R., N.Y.) stated in an interview: "It’s already over. The election’s over. We won". Asked how he knew that Bush would win, he answered, "It’s all over but the counting. And we’ll take care of the counting."

In Florida in 2000, a life long Republican computer programmer swore in an affidavit that he’d been asked by GOP legislator Tom Feeny to create a computer program that would undetectably alter vote totals. His employer told him the program was needed to control the vote in south Florida and that therefore he needed to conceal the source code.

 

As Thom Hartmann queried in his piece, The Theft of Your Vote is Just a Chip Away, 7/30/03: Maybe it's true that the citizens of Georgia simply decided that incumbent Democratic Senator Max Cleland, a wildly popular war veteran, was, as Republican TV ads suggested, too unpatriotic to remain in the Senate, even though his Republican challenger, Saxby Chambliss, had sat out the Vietnam war with a medical deferment.

Maybe, in the final two days of the race, those voters who'd pledged themselves to Georgia's popular incumbent Governor Roy Barnes suddenly and inexplicably decided to switch to Republican challenger Sonny Perdue.

Maybe George W. and Jeb Bush, Alabama's new Republican governor Bob Riley, and a small but congressionally decisive handful of other long-shot Republican candidates around the country really did win those states where conventional wisdom and straw polls showed them losing in the last few election cycles, but computer controlled voting or ballot-reading machines showed them winning.

Perhaps, after a half-century of fine-tuning exit polling to such a science that it's now used to verify if elections are clean in Third World countries, it really did suddenly become inaccurate in the United States in the past few years and just won't work here anymore. Perhaps it's just a coincidence that the sudden rise of inaccurate exit polls happened around the same time corporate-programmed, computer-controlled, modem-capable voting machines began recording and tabulating ballots.

Perhaps..........

The 2004 Presidential Election

Bush went into this election with extremely high disapproval ratings. The national turnout in 2004 was the highest since 1968, when another unpopular war had swept the ruling party from the White House (the high turn out, which historically favors Democrats, in fact was reflected in many elections, for eg. the Democrats took back the statehouses in Montana, Colorado and North Carolina, all three of which Bush miraculously won). Throughout the nation statistical improbabilities became common place.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Make voting safe, verifiable, secure, trustworthy and accountable

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

ElectionTransparencyCoalitition.org

Andi Novick Election Transparency Coalition, www.etcnys.org, http://nylevers.wordpress.com/

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Book Recommendations for "Election Reform"
The Election After Reform: Money, Politics, and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (Campaigning American Style)
by Michael J. Malbin

$34.95
Lowest New Price $28.52

Number of pages: 304
Publisher: Rowman

Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation (Brookings Series on Election Administration and Reform)
by R. Michael Alvarez

$26.95
Lowest New Price $14.50

Number of pages: 255
Publisher: Brookings Institution Press

Campaign and Election Reform (Contemporary World Issues)
by Glenn H. Utter

$55.00
Lowest New Price $27.50

Number of pages: 371
Publisher: ABC-CLIO

Election Reform: Politics and Policy
by James W. Ceaser

$27.95
Lowest New Price $20.85

Number of pages: 336
Publisher: Lexington Books

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
22 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

note about Chuck Hagel and wikipedia by Better World Order on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 1:53:21 AM
good job! by Joan Brunwasser on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 7:25:05 AM
Who's vote counts by tjb on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 7:56:43 AM
TPM quotes Zogby saying vote was explainable by Richmond Gardner on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 8:23:11 AM
Another Analysis by PrMaine on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 8:38:39 AM
But this does nothing to explain the paper ballot/exit poll by Ivan the Terrible on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 3:28:55 PM
HCPB Results differ from Computer tabulated results by Rady Ananda on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 9:28:32 PM
About the Alarms by Bob McCarty Writes on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 8:36:35 AM
You're only explaining predictive polls not exit polls/paper by Ivan the Terrible on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 3:35:46 PM
nice to be by Rob Kall on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 6:18:34 PM
this guy is not believable by Better World Order on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 6:51:10 PM
How hard can it be? by Mr M on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 8:53:12 AM
Litany of Shame by John Sanchez Jr. on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 9:48:58 AM
THE "I COUNT CORPS" -- Sign up to take back our elections by andi novick on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 11:23:35 AM
Why no investigation? by ibrahim turner on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 3:24:00 PM
Keep your eye on the top by GatorVol on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:51:23 PM
This apparent Diebold Bump or Diebold Bounce for Hillary is by Ivan the Terrible on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 3:51:22 PM
Poll Voting Should Be our Verification Procedure by Dom Jermano on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 5:44:36 PM
Voting/Polling by August Adams on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 7:12:38 PM
Fantastic, well-sourced, comprehensive piece by Rady Ananda on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 9:41:48 PM
Yup by John Burik on Saturday, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:58:02 AM
Yes, hand count by John Burik on Saturday, Jan 12, 2008 at 3:51:17 PM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum