Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Programmer admits to creating vote rigging software in 2000's US election.
www.wimp.com ^

Posted on 10/13/2010 11:54:40 AM PDT by Cowgirl

http://www.wimp.com/votesoftware/


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electionfraud
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last
Does anyone know more about this? This programmer says he wrote a program for rigging election machines for Tom Finney in Florida.
1 posted on 10/13/2010 11:54:43 AM PDT by Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

mark


2 posted on 10/13/2010 11:55:48 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Bless and Protect Our Men and Women in Uniform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcmuffin

Feeney ping


3 posted on 10/13/2010 11:56:59 AM PDT by NonValueAdded ("It's amazing, A man who has such large ears could be so tone deaf" Rush Limbaugh 9/8/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

they just can’t get over 2000 ....omg!!!


4 posted on 10/13/2010 11:58:49 AM PDT by tatsinfla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

just one programmer? it’s an easy thing to do, I’m surprised there’s only one.


5 posted on 10/13/2010 11:59:16 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

My brother created a Tornado Stopping Machine in the 4th grade.


6 posted on 10/13/2010 12:01:12 PM PDT by earlJam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

This needs to be stopped. This MUST be a priority of the Con-gress after this election. NO electronic voting. WE are going to let another bunch of elections slip by and destroy this country.


7 posted on 10/13/2010 12:02:29 PM PDT by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

Yeah? Who was the programmer working for at the time that he’d have access?


8 posted on 10/13/2010 12:02:31 PM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded; Cowgirl; moder_ator

clint curtis= KOOK, bonafide.
Waste of bandwidth thread...


9 posted on 10/13/2010 12:02:40 PM PDT by mcmuffin (Keep your powder and tobacco dry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl; Guenevere; M Kehoe; lysie

Well, well, well. I am not at all surprised.


10 posted on 10/13/2010 12:02:40 PM PDT by Jemian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

ROFL. yer funny


11 posted on 10/13/2010 12:03:07 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla

It’s not 2000 that they’re harping on. It’s Ohio in 2004...

Watch the video...


12 posted on 10/13/2010 12:03:23 PM PDT by Skip Ripley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl
He should have done something about the butterfly ballots. All those old bats who can track 10 bingo cards simultaneously were flummoxed by a simple punch card.


13 posted on 10/13/2010 12:04:21 PM PDT by edpc (It's Kräusened)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: camle

I’m confused, didn’t Tom Feeney get elected in 2002? Didn’t this video say the 2000 election?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Feeney


14 posted on 10/13/2010 12:05:12 PM PDT by SideoutFred (B.O. Stinks...it really does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

I created a computer version of Battleship that ran on an ancient IBM 1620 when I was in high school. But in the version where the ships could move, they always sailed off the grid. Never could get that bug fixed.


15 posted on 10/13/2010 12:05:30 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

OK, so he created the software, but has no knowledge of whether it was used. My BS detector is pegging....


16 posted on 10/13/2010 12:06:00 PM PDT by freebilly (No wonder the left has a boner for Obama. There's CIALIS in soCIALISt....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jemian

Index.


17 posted on 10/13/2010 12:07:04 PM PDT by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

Everything he said is accurate as far as the technology.


18 posted on 10/13/2010 12:07:13 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edpc

Even rabbis who can read one langauge left to right and a different language right to left had difficulty (rolling eyes all the way around eh).


19 posted on 10/13/2010 12:07:41 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

http://www.clintcurtis.com/about.asp
He’s running for congress in California this year


20 posted on 10/13/2010 12:07:52 PM PDT by libertarian27 (Ingsoc: Department of Life, Department of Liberty, Department of Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl
Curtis ran against Feeney in the 2006 election and may have motivation to smear Feeney. Feeney has claimed that he has no recollection of even meeting Curtis; that he could not have engaged in such a scheme because Palm Beach County did not even consider obtaining touch screen machines until after the 2000 election; and that although Curtis wrote a book in the summer of 2004 accusing Feeney of a wide variety of misconduct, Curtis did not mention the alleged scheme to commit vote fraud in the edition published prior to the 2004 election. (St. Petersburg Times link here: Conspiracy?)
21 posted on 10/13/2010 12:08:08 PM PDT by One_who_hopes_to_know
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

This is why I have advocated that you have the opportunity to view your votes printed on a roll of paper through a window to verify that the votes are recorded correctly. If it is right, you finalizes the votes. If it is wrong, you go to the judge immediately (before the votes are added to the totals electronically) and both you and he open the window and X out and initial all the votes and you get a do-over.


22 posted on 10/13/2010 12:08:55 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

Ouch


23 posted on 10/13/2010 12:08:55 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (All hail Prince Skid-mark, Barack Hussein Obama, constantly soiling himself and our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl
I'm not thrilled with this particular item, though, since it gives Clint Curtis motivation to lie:

In 2006, Curtis ran unsuccessfully against Feeney for the United States congressional seat in Florida's 24th congressional district.[2] He ran again in 2008, losing in the Democratic primary to eventual winner of the seat, Suzanne Kosmas.

24 posted on 10/13/2010 12:10:13 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

Seems Bush won the election even after the months spent counting every hanging chad and there was. This is such BS, it’s obviously after the 2004 election when Kerry almost took Ohio. What you are looking at is a bunch of crybaby Dems trying to do anything to keep Bush out for 4 more years.


25 posted on 10/13/2010 12:10:18 PM PDT by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

How bout something more recent? (oct 5th 2010)

http://www.annarbor.com/business-review/university-of-michigan-student-hacks-into-washington-dc-online-voting-system/index.php


26 posted on 10/13/2010 12:10:18 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl; mcmuffin

Video of some guy’s testimony in some sort of “under oath” forum who said then Florida State Speaker Feeney asked this guy to “design code to rig an election.” Says his speculation on Feeney’s motive was to determine if it could be done and “to prevent you guys from cheating them.” They also asked his “expert” testimony if the discrepancy in Ohio between results and election polling [which we know is highly scientific /s] was “proof” of fraud. He said “yes.” Nothing said that establishes this guy’s bona fides beyond him being “a programmer.”


27 posted on 10/13/2010 12:10:30 PM PDT by NonValueAdded ("It's amazing, A man who has such large ears could be so tone deaf" Rush Limbaugh 9/8/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

That explains why my Tornado Amplifier was only marginally successful.


28 posted on 10/13/2010 12:10:51 PM PDT by RobinOfKingston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Sounds as if a programmer could bypass that though. It could show you what you did, but then swap the vote on the way to electronically recording it.

At any stage of the process, it can be changed. If it shows it to you, so what? You say, yep that’s right, and it goes on to record the vote differently.


29 posted on 10/13/2010 12:11:31 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (All hail Prince Skid-mark, Barack Hussein Obama, constantly soiling himself and our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

ah, the 1620. memories ...


30 posted on 10/13/2010 12:11:59 PM PDT by NonValueAdded ("It's amazing, A man who has such large ears could be so tone deaf" Rush Limbaugh 9/8/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl
it was those darn shiny objects.


31 posted on 10/13/2010 12:12:36 PM PDT by McGruff (I Love the Smell of Desperation in the Morning. Smells like Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

“If there is a significant difference between the exit polls and the vote, that is evidence of fraud.”

Come on! That’s just ridiculous. Is that the US Congress at its best?? My, my. Time for some real change.

We have seen exit polls in Sweden, US, UK, Israel, Switzerland all miss their mark (and that’s just some examples). Polling is not an exact science. Does the “computer engineer” not know that?


32 posted on 10/13/2010 12:13:44 PM PDT by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

My CS teacher said it was called the 1620 because that is when it was manufactured.


33 posted on 10/13/2010 12:16:03 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SideoutFred

i didn’t hear that. he was mistaken that you could simply look at the source code to determine whether the program was crooked or not. you need to verify that that particualr source code is, in fact the code running on the machine at the time.
you’d have to take the source code, compile it fresh, and checksum it against the executable to see if the numbers match. even then, checksum programs themselves can be manipulated to show whatever you want.
at the risk of sounding lika a tinfoil advocate, when you consider what is at stake, the process really isn’t that difficult - detection is.
you’d need a verifiable paper trail. and a program can just as well tally a vote one way, while printing it out the other. you’d need to save every paper record, and be able to verify that each paper ballot is what the voter selected.


34 posted on 10/13/2010 12:16:05 PM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

It is easy to program cheats in, but difficult to program in inked out X’s and people’s initials. The final tally would always be what is on the paper and the paper totals should always equal the number of people who physically voted.


35 posted on 10/13/2010 12:19:09 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
"This is why I have advocated that you have the opportunity to view your votes printed on a roll of paper through a window to verify that the votes are recorded correctly"

most people won't take the time to verify this, unless the votes arenn't tallieduntil after this is verified. the easiest way would be to have the voter fill out a paper form, then feed the form into a counting machine. the paper stays with the machine. touch screens are easy to manipulate, and just because the paper says you voted for candidate A doesn't mean that that who got the increment.

36 posted on 10/13/2010 12:19:41 PM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

P.S. It is easy to erase electronic bits, but not so easy to erase the printed paper.


37 posted on 10/13/2010 12:20:25 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl
Programmer admits to creating vote rigging software in 2000's US election.

"...in the opinion of most independent observers, this is the single most confusing, bewildering, incipherable document ever produced. To begin with, how do you know which side to vote on? [ holds it up on one side ] Is this right-side up? [ flips it over ] Or is this right-side up? The ballot doesn't say. And what's with all these confusing names? Bush. Gore. Buchanan. Nader. And confusing party affiliations. Democrat. Republican. Reform. Here's one called "Green". And here's more names. George. Patrick. Albert. John. John. There's two different Johns. I mean, who on earth could figure this out.

But to really understand how confusing this ballot is, you have to take a closer look. Here it is. [ close-up is shown ] Now, for the love of God, what are all these dots? And these arrows? If you look closely, you will see that tips of the arrow points to a dot...but the shaft of the arrow points back to a name. So how do you vote? Do you circle a candidate's name? Do you underline it? Or do you write it on the arrow? Or underneath? Or maybe it's the dots. Do you write the candidate's name on the dots? They seem sort of small. Maybe just his initials. Or do you color in the dots? If so, in what color? Maybe you scratch the dots with the edge of a penny. Or lick the dots. Again, this ballot does not spell it out. I went to Harvard - I couldn't make heads or tails of this. [ puts ballot away ]

Just imagine what it was like for the most vulnerable residents of Palm Beach. [ holds up photo ] This is Esther Rosenthal. Esther Rosenthal is age 92, a Democrat all her life. Esther left her nursing home Tuesday morning intending to vote for me! Totally bewildered by this ballot, she ended up voting for the Libertarian candidate, and switching her long-distance service to Sprint. [ holds up next photo ] Okay.. Sidney and Reesa Mandel, age 87 and 85, ate their ballot! [ holds up next photo ] While Rachel Goldensten, age 96, mailed hers to Barbra Streisand..."

-- A Message From The Vice-President Of The United States
As heard on Saturday Night Live, November 11, 2000

38 posted on 10/13/2010 12:20:51 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Posting news feeds, making eyes bleed, he's hated on seven continents")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy
There are NO significant programs written by ONE GUY! ! ! !

A voter compilation program would be a project with 10 different oversight and proofing phases.

This "testimony" is pure BULLSH!T and the "programmer" should lose his sack as the original meaning of "testify" intended.

OFF WITH 'EM! ! !

39 posted on 10/13/2010 12:21:20 PM PDT by Huebolt (It's not over until there is not ONE DEMOCRAT HOLDING OFFICE ANYWHERE. Not even a dog catcher!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Its hard to take blogs seriously so here’s a recent story about a UofM professor and some students hacking the DC internet voting tial.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/debonis/2010/10/hacker_infiltration_ends_dc_on.html


40 posted on 10/13/2010 12:21:23 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy

Whenever someone is taking an exit poll, I tell them different than I voted.


41 posted on 10/13/2010 12:21:50 PM PDT by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

So, what kind of program did he use to keep people from punching the right holes in their cards with the stylus?


42 posted on 10/13/2010 12:23:53 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

I posted this because Dems are known for their cheating.
Between them and the media, I wonder what will happen this fall. Every election year the cheating gets worse.


43 posted on 10/13/2010 12:24:27 PM PDT by Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Huebolt
"A voter compilation program would be a project with 10 different oversight and proofing phases.

unless it is your intention to skew the results. with the chances of success high, and the chances of detection low, and the prize enormous, it isn't a matter of if, but when.

44 posted on 10/13/2010 12:25:25 PM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla
they just can’t get over 2000 ....omg!!!

They're just gearing up for the chorus of "Republicans stole all the November 2010 elections". You know we're going to be hearing that for the next 2 years.

45 posted on 10/13/2010 12:30:16 PM PDT by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: camle

I agree with you

I am a 25 year programmer- if i thought about it i could design a valid electronic voting machine but it WOULD REQUIRE keeping all paper ballots, so you could run them all through again to make sure the totals match

You have to set up all kinds of checks to verify correct processing

I would also add a unique barcode- so anyone could go online to verify their vote was exactly as it was supposed to be (you would keep a stub or something with a matching barcode)

The bottom line being that if there is a glitch, you can run the paper ballots all through again and again


46 posted on 10/13/2010 12:32:30 PM PDT by Mr. K (Job #1 of next Congress- DEFUND THE LEFT (#2 repeal obamacare))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dan(9698)

I have never been asked to take an exit pol, but I would do the same as you do.


47 posted on 10/13/2010 12:33:17 PM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (Remember in November. Clean the house on Nov. 2. / Progressive is a PC word for liberal democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
The final tally would always be what is on the paper and the paper totals should always equal the number of people who physically voted.

Until, that is, a few days have gone by after the vote and the RATs (now knowing how many they need, and how many voters failed to show up at the polls) "find" more boxes of paper ballots that were "misplaced". When that happened in the past, did anyone compare the tally of physical voters with the number of total ballots? I think not!

48 posted on 10/13/2010 12:33:25 PM PDT by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty too! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: edpc

All those old bats who can track 10 bingo cards simultaneously were flummoxed by a simple punch card.

LOFL!!! How funny is that! And, true.


49 posted on 10/13/2010 12:47:20 PM PDT by Bitsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: camle
unless it is your intention to skew the results. with the chances of success high, and the chances of detection low, and the prize enormous, it isn't a matter of if, but when.

Perhaps, but all programs I've been involved with ALWAYS had a gigo test where one put in data and knew what the output should be. In one case, we had 15 different data sets which had been analyzed and the output HAD to match or someone had some 'splainin to do.

Of course, anything is possible, some things are just unlikely.

Occam's razor is: Would a democrat lie, or is a huge organization corrupt and are 25 or 30 professional programmers able to keep a secret?

I think democrats lie, steal, cheat, and sodomize each other and wild animals.

50 posted on 10/13/2010 12:50:59 PM PDT by Huebolt (It's not over until there is not ONE DEMOCRAT HOLDING OFFICE ANYWHERE. Not even a dog catcher!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson