Posted on 08/17/2004 11:11:24 AM PDT by marron
Interview of Luis Enrique Palacios of SUMATE organization:
The organization Sumate has serious doubts that the results given out by the National Electoral Commission reflect the will of Venezuelans. Luis Enrique Palacios explains their theory.
The sample presented by the OAS and the Carter Center to verify the "No" victory agrees with that of Sumate, but at the same time you suspect fraud. How do you explain this contradiction?
"The electoral process has two phases. In the first phase, the citizen expresses his will, and this is registered physically in a slip of paper that is deposited in a box. The second phase is where they do the count and transmit it. Our figures and those of the observers only agree in the second phase, which is the sum of a sample of written results from each table."
In what part of the process do you believe the results could have been altered?
"In what we call the first phase. This is when the citizen votes directly on the touch screen machine. The accusations of fraud indicate, for example, that they would choose 'Yes', the paper slip issued by the machine was marked 'Yes', but the software recorded 'No'."
How do you come to the conclusion that the figures from the vote don't agree with the real vote?
"Because we did very serious polling, with specially trained people, at the poll exits, at 300 voting centers, and our results, at the great majority of locations, differed from the official results. For example, at a school in Monagas state, our projections showed 65% voting 'Yes', compared to 37% according to the official results. There is a great difference."
What would be the easiest way to clarify whether or not there was fraud?
"The best way would be for the parties involved to agree on how to take a sample, within a margin of error of 1% that should be sufficient. Obviously to do that it would be necessary that, with representatives of the civic organizations and the observers, they open the boxes that contain the votes and compare them with the results."
The opposition has complained since the referendum was announced that there would be fraud. Didn't you foresee the technical alteration of the machines?
"This was all done very quickly. On many occasions we asked for an audit of the machines, but in the end we could not even review the software."
"It can't happen here" Florida PING.
The government bought into the company that built and programmed the machines. That is a fact that should have raise alarm bells, and did, but there was nothing anyone could do about it.
The opposition parties were not allowed to audit the machines.
This should be a warning to us. There is a move to replace "inaccurate" punch cards with electronic software-based machines. In a world where you can trust your opponents, that would be fine. We don't live in that world.
A victory for the communists in Latin America.
One can only hope that it's an outlier.
if vote(1) then papertrail candidate1
if candidate1counter .gt. 5 then
candidate1counter = 0
candidate2votes = candidate2votes + 1
else candidate1counter = candidate1counter + 1
candidate1votes = candidate1votes + 1
Else if vote (2) then papertrail candidate2
candidate2votes = candidate2votes + 1
Else Invalidvote
candidate2 will win every time, and the "paper trail" will be intact, and when compiled nobody will ever catch this.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.
PEN TO PAPER VOTING ONLY!!!!
The warning should have been Jimmy Carter's involvement.
Their goose is cooked.
They're going to be leaving in droves.
L
i've been told that there is a good system in Canada although I have never seen it.
Every voter gets a booklet, each page contains the list of candidates for each slot - the voter checks the checkbox for the desired candidate, then puts each page into a slot in the wall marked for each office. Behind the wall are a bunch of bluehairs with tally sheets, who tally each ballot as it comes in. There is a rep from each major party and an observer.
When the polls close, they all compare notes. if there is any descrepancy between parties, the paper ballots are recounted by hand.
Within 10 minutes, the results are known.
simple, reliable, fast and accurate, not to mention cheap.
I don't get it. In Fla a black man on his way to vote sees a policeman and it becomes pure evidence of a stolen election in the eyes of democrats.
In venezuala they have drive by shootings at the polls and Jimmy Carter declares it a clean election with no problems.
Oh? But could the voters match the slips of paper each to the correct hole?
Yes. . .technology is a wonderful thing.
After the 'Democrat, self-induced debacle' in Florida; one might reasonable think; that rather than bringing a 'higher technolgy' to the 'chad challenged' - that they would rather, take a giant step backward and engage a 'a simple x' to mark the candidate on a paper ballot.
Do think, in areas where problems are always anticipated. . .'the vote often, vote early' MO; or the 'challenged chad' symdrome. . .GIVE them a PENCIL. . . & PAPER. . .
Someone fooled Jimmy Carter? HA! What a sour, bitter old man. Anyone who thinks otherwise should read "A Matter of Character" by Ronald Kessler. I'm only half way through it but the references I've read so far show how Hillary! was following in Carter's footsteps in her dispicable treatment of the White House staff and Secret Service.
"GIVE them a PENCIL. . . & PAPER. . ."
Thats the way we vote in this township. Just like the old scholastic apptitude tests. Fill in the oval completely. Its multiple choice obviously.
Works for me. . .
that would be far easier to correct than problems with electronic voting
This is the best way to keep our votes free and "tamperproof". I do not trust electronic voting and computers counting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.