Programmer Testifies About Rigging Elections With Vote Counting Machines

[merrily]

41. WOWZA. Where to begin?

Let's get non-substantive technicalities out of the way at the outset, just for ships and grins: Your Reply 39 is to a post I made last July. Yesterday, I linked to my July reply on this thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1091&pid=1916 Replying to me yesterday on yesterday's thread would have made infinitely more sense than replying to a post on a July 2015 thread. Also, contrary to your Reply 39 on a July thread, my July post was a reply, not an OP.

Both in July and yesterday, my post was about Congress's not having gotten rid of voting machines or ensured checking of source code. That was clear from both the context of the threads in which my post (or a link to it) appeared and from the contents of the post itself. My post never even obliquely referred to a bill about "an audit of 3% of precincts: that is "done by hand counting paper ballots in precincts, and comparing to the electronic totals, which supposedly ensures "approximately 68-70% of vote accuracy" which Congress failed to pass in any event. Nor did I post a thing about Florida or California. Yet, you berated me at length for failing to mention the work done in Florida and California and the work done to fail to pass an audit bill in Congress, which my post had less than zero reason to mention. (As an aside about audits, +hand counts were done in some Massachusetts precincts in connection with the recent primary, no thanks to the U.S. Congress. However, while the hand counts (like the exit polls), favored Sanders, Clinton was declared the winner and that has not changed, so ..... )

FYI: I do not equate Congress's not passing a bill with Congress's fixing any problem to any degree. That being so, I have no clue why you or anyone else would reasonably expect anyone to google anything before "daring" to post that Congress did nothing about either doing away voting machines or ensuring the source code of voting machines would be checked. That is so clear no one would google it, let alone spend the time required to check every hit such a google would turn up.

My post was correct as to what it stated. Also correct, according to your own Reply 39: Despite all the whining about stolen elections, esp. Presidential elections, Congress took no action between January 2007 and January 2011 that has made stealing elections any harder---and here we are at another Presidential election. Not that Presidential elections are not the only important elections that took place between January 2007 and January 2011. The Massachusetts special election that put Scott Brown in the Senate in 2010, before the ACA was finally adopted, is only one such election that leaps to the mind of this Bostonian. I have no clue why you assert that having a Democratic president in office for the past almost 8 years meant we did not have to worry about voting machines in 50 states.

You seem to have taken my (correct) July post reply incredibly personally. I have no idea why. Nothing about saying Congress failed to fix the problem insulted you or anyone else personally, unless maybe you were Speaker at the time in question--and even then.... However, because of the nature of your post, I really don't care to continue this discussion further, especially on thread from last July. Bottom line: we are still in the same boat in which we were in 2000 and and we did not need to be.