stevepal
stevepal's JournalJudge suggests the KS legislature might need to take up where Clarkson has been stopped.
Beth Clarkson, the tireless Ph.D. statistician who works for NIAR at Wichita State, has been trying for years now to be allowed to see the paper so she can check into why the vote tallies in KS tend to favor Republicans as the size of the voting population increases, the opposite of what is normally the case. Kris Kobach, whose cross-check schemes and voter suppression tactics have established a pattern for Republicans across the country, would prefer perhaps not to be forced to put up with a democratic system but rather to find ways to be endorsed by easily hacked or maliciously programmed voting machines and thus be assured of victory.
Ms Clarkson, to my mind, is one of the true patriots in the country today. Here is the Wichita Eagle article about her Tuesday court confrontation in regard to her suit.
http://www.kansas.com/opinion/editorials/article174439541.html
Here's Beth Clarkson's own site, where she will very soon undoubtedly have an article about Tuesday's event. She would be happy for any donations I'm sure and she is certainly worthy of being helped.
showmethevotes.org
I wish Hillary would stop bashing Bernie and talk about one topic in particular on her tour.
What is that issue?
THE VOTING MACHINES!!!!!!!! With voter suppression coming in a close second.
I personally believe that Bernie won MA during the primaries and a RECOUNT using hand-counted ballots would have shown this to be true. And by the way, the paper ballots were available since MA uses opti-scan and keeps the paper in case a recount is called for.
I also believe strongly that Hillary won the election if the votes had been counted fairly in the northern states. If PA, for example, or WI or OH or any of the northern states which supposedly went for Trump had been required to VERIFY THE VOTE thru a hand-counting of the paper we'd have a different president now and it would be Hillary. And she would have made a very good prez as well and would already have done way more than what Trump has done.
Why O why won't the politicians talk about the obvious??? In MA e.g. in the primaries if the figures I've seen are correct, in the 3% of the precincts that hand-counted the paper, Bernie won by 17%, but in the state as a whole he lost by about 3% or so. Any statisticians want to figure the chances of this happening? And by the way according to Jon Simon, the 3% sample in the state is perhaps slightly more CONSERVATIVE than the rest of the state so don't claim that the sample isn't a good one.
Also in the election as a whole I believe now PA doesn't even use paper. I could be wrong, but I believe they voted this time on completely unverifiable touch screen computers. WI's election officials are crooked and have been for a couple decades now. I'd bet plenty of money that Hillary won WI if it were possible to have a hand count of paper in WI. There's a good chance she won in OH as well if the vote could be recounted using paper.
But not a peep from Hillary OR ANY OTHER POLITICIAN about our absolutely unverifiable election system and the fact that these computers are "trivially easy" to hack or rig or maliciously program or what not. I have no doubt at all that the vote count in a number of states was rigged or hacked, maybe by the Russians but potentially by anybody with a little computer savvy as hackers proved just recently when they hacked into a number of voting systems during a convention of hackers using information publicly available about the machines being used to count the vote in specific states.
But don't hold your breath about this happening in our lifetime.
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Dec 2, 2016, 05:27 AMNumber of posts: 109
