BBV - If crooked, and you could rig just 15 counties, which ones?

Suppose you could select just 15 counties/big cities, to affect the 2004 election. Which would you pick?

Considerations:

- This isn't just for president. It's for control of congress.
- Would you concentrate on swing states? What are the swing states?
- Would you concentrate on places with the most suspicious election officials? Which ones?
- Would you focus on places who are planning to buy voting machines? Which places?

Thank you for playing. I'll let you know who wins the next visit from the secret service. (:hi: Hi, Agent Mike.) And no, we aren't planning to do it, what we are doing is looking at which areas need extra monitors.

Bev Harris

Fuck you very much for your warm kind hearted concern

BTW did Bush seduce you the same way he did the Iraqis

ouch:

El Paso co Texas.

where we just threw out our Diebold machines Friday! Great work!!

places where the current elected officials don't fit conventional wisdom.

For example... a red state with a blue senator - but can't do this where the blue senator is quite popular (for example... Bayh is popular in Indiana and running against an unknown - tamper here and it would be recognized... however for the governor's race... (helps with further redistricting - not that indiana is key - just using this as an example)... a switch to red would not seem so unusual.

That is - go for where the current situation appears to be an anomoly - and thus the reverse outcome appears as a "correction" rather than suspect.

I would go for governorships and statehouses where the redistricting game ala texas can be replayed... and thus where the lead in congress based on redistricted seats becomes even more impossible to overturn.

Is Cook Co. Illinois

The republicans are about to loose their Senate seat and as downstate Illinois tends to be more republican, this would deliver Illinois to the republican senate canidate as well as shrub.

all one has to do is watch the bogus polling data that shows "oh-it's-so-close", or "50-50".. Maybe their bogus polls will end up biting them in the ass.. :hi: Hi Mike:hi:..

The possibilities are endless.. If the Rob Georgia plan worked when people who weren't even supposed to win, DID..then it's a piece of cake..

How delicious.. Dueling Hackers :)

if BBV can be hacked by the Republickins then it can be hacked by some teenager from Sweden and CNN will be proud to announce that the new president is Brittany Spears.

it is not the "hackability" that is in question there(although, I assure you, that bag 'o WinCE bugs is emmenantly hackable), it is the fact that is is just so damnably manipulable in the service of a wanted end. For starters, if the wanted secure, they wouldn't have based the system on WinCE, which is for handhelds. Second, they wouldn't have based their databasing on Access, which is a joke.

It is a tool for the theft of an election. Nothing more.

But, you knew that and we know you knew that. Just another...well, don't wanna piss off a mod, now do I?

WinCE = Windows for Consumer Electronics (not necessarily portables) and has been used in embedded systems other than consumer electronics, including ATMs, etc.

Basing anything on access is just asking for trouble (from data loss, if nothing more sinister)

These guys are just lame.

will be accessible from the outside, and with all the talk about it, do you think there is a challenge now in the secret hackers world, to do just that? I mean, these guys and girls do have wars and challenges among themselves (i.e. some of the code signed virii that say "your last virus sucked" type stuff)

How big of a challenge do you think this is in the international hackers union?

I highly doubt they'd have the capability to do anything except denial-of-service attack the machines and possibly bring them down for a while, and I think that even this is unlikely. (Anybody who tried it would surely go to jail for a looooooooong time.) That's scary enough, but I don't think there's any danger of them altering vote totals and the like.

What really needs to be repeated, over and over again, is that having these, or any kind of machine that contains sensitive information, connected to the public internet without any sort of firewall or other protection is a HUGE MISTAKE.

AFAIK, nobody has yet demonstrated a vulnerability in these systems that would be exploitable by a remote user to change vote totals. I am aware of *many* uninformed rantings and *much* willfully stupid gibberish on this topic, but have seen no real evidence from the security community itself.

and soon.

Query:
Are you inferring that evidence of such a vulnerability will be presented, or are you implying that there will be some blatant obvious thieft in an upcoming election?

and official information.

In Diebold and Sequoia. You can get in the DB and change vote totals.

Yes, with physical access to the machine for a reasonable period of time. No computer-based system is ever going to be invulnerable to that, which is why we need to eliminate "pure" electronic voting immediately. It isn't required that the provider of the system be aiding this effort. It can happen with any system, which is why this whole Diebold thing is a red herring. In the end, it doesn't matter what the intent of the provider of the system is. Technology can be broken, and it's a hell of a lot easier to write a vote-stealing script and distribute it remotely than it is to have your evil minions working in every precinct in America. I wasn't necessarily implying that there's no possibility for this sort of vulnerability, only that I've not been convinced of the *current* existence of it by anything I've read. So far, the only thing I'm convinced of is that Diebold has absolutely no goddamn business writing code for any system which handles any information which is important to me.

I would look for a large city in Texas, perhaps Seattle or Portland out west, a large city in Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh or Philadelphia, another in NY, perhaps something like Buffalo, of course, Palm Beach or Jacksonville Florida, perhaps Louisville, KY, and St Louis MO and Minneapolis, MN.... Whatever counties those might be in?

The other big city, Lexington has Votronic.

I'd go for the quiet Dem counties, like Palm Beach County, and trump up as many of their votes as possible. And I'd add Bush votes in the primarily Republican counties along the I-4 corridor and Panhandle. I think that's how they're going to do it.

That way would make more sense.

last October and noticed that the counties that had old fasioned ballots did not go for recall mine LA county went against it 53% but ones that had BBV went for recall like 70 or 80%:argh: I wish they would go back and look at that election again statistically and they would probably find out it was supposed to be Gov Bustamante! Just like it should have been President Gore right now! <><>

By the way Thanks for your outstanding work Bev from the bottom of our collective hearts!:yourock: Back here in California

Palm Beach, Broward, Dade; FL
Franklin, OH
What are the two largest counties in MO?

:kick:

Start with states with Senatorial elections, if you're looking to keep the Senate Republican-controlled (which they HAVE to, in order to pack the courts). This would seem to leave out Michigan, because neither of our senate seats is up this time. BUT...

The second criteria would be to pick swing states where the "swing" is caused by a *nearly* equal balance between the concentrated Democratic votes in a few densly packed urban areas and a widespread Republican vote in "outstate" areas - This probably would make Michigan worth the effort anyway, along with Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania, which do have Senate races. Possibly Colorado as well, although I'm not familiar enough with the electorate there to be sure whether it fits the criteria.

Turn a small percentage of the Democratic votes in the "concentrated" Dem areas to Republican votes. The Dems would still have to carry those areas - everybody would know it was bogus if they didn't - but the added Repub votes would be enough to tip the state-wide elections - gov, senator, attorney general, etc, and the Presidential electoral votes into the Republican column.

Using these criteria, I'd look at Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Chicago, maybe St. Louis, and as somebody mentioned, definitely Palm Beach and Volusia counties in Florida, and N'awlins.

For your reference, here's a link to all the senate contests in 2004:
http://www.worldhistory.com/wiki/U/U.S.-Senate-election,-2004.htm

And a link to dailykos's review of the Senate races
http://www.dailykos.com/special/senate

For quick reference, the senate contests and the current office holders are:

Alabama - Shelby (R)
Alaska - Murkowski (R)
Arizona - McCain (R)
Arkansas - Lincoln (D)
California - Boxer (D)
Colorado - Nighthorse Campbell (R)
Connecticut - Dodd (D)
Florida - Graham (D)
Georgia - Miller (D)
Hawaii - Inouye (D)
Idaho - Crapo (R)
Illinois - Fitzgerald (R)
Indiana - Bayh (D)
Iowa - Grassley (R)
Kansas - Brownback (R)
Kentucky - Bunning (R)
Louisiana - Breaux (D)
Maryland - Mikulski (D)
Missouri - Bond (R)
Nevada - Reid (D)
New Hampshire - Gregg (R)
New York - Schumer (D)
North Carolina - Edwards (D)
North Dakota - Dorgan (D)
Ohio - Voinovich (R)
Oklahoma - Nickles (R)
Oregon - Wyden (D)
Pennsylvania - Specter (R)
South Carolina - Hollings (D)
South Dakota - Daschle (D)
Utah - Bennett (R)
Vermont - Leahy (D)
Washington - Murray (D)
Wisconsin - Feingold (D)

races where the incumbent party is the opposite of current expected electoral outcomes (e.g., Florida seems to be trending more and more GOP than it used to... so it wouldn't be "surprising" were retiring Senator Graham's seat to turnover).

Using that parameter (from your list)

Zell Miller's seat in Georgia
Byron Dorgan's seat in North Dakota
Fritz Holling's seat in South Carolina


I would also look at state legislator's around the country that are currently dem controlled but by a close margin - for the new GOP redistricting gambit. Governorships come into play with that scenario as well. This would be done, like in Texas, to increase the number of "safe" gop seats in Congress.

unless it plays into the statewide races, because it would disperse their efforts. Technically, the districts won't get redrawn until after the 2010 census, and while I'm not ruling out a Texas-style effort to redraw districts anyway, it's a lot harder than just making sure they control the state lege's by 2010 - and they're going to want to concentrate on keeping the senate and keeping bushit in office this time around.

They could make an effort on the Gov races though - although most of them are four year terms, and they'd have another shot before the census anyway) as long as a state fits the other parameters for keeping the Senate/Presidency this time around.

Jackpine Radical had it right on in the post below.

Where it concerns the Senate, you don't have to overturn a race in a county that should go to a Democrat, you only have to keep the spread narrow, if other, larger counties might go Republican.

Cumulative votes mean way more and it's harder to catch and detect, because it looks like the counties did what was expected, just not with as much "enthusiasm."

As for the Senate:

Arizona - McCain (R)
I might look here for the possibility of a Dem that is more GOP than McCain. I don't know who is running or how popular McCain is in Arizona. We all know what a Zell Miller type can do. FYI, I think more and more that McCain's loss to Bush in the primaries was not just due to smear tactics. McCain should be all over the BBV issue because it likely helped cost him his chance at the presidency. And note that you are drawn away from the potential of vote manipulation by the attention paid to the smear campaign. Kind of like Florida where we were channeled to the chads while the optical scan did its own thing.

California - Boxer (D)
I would presume they will unseat Boxer if they can. Isn't it Bill Jones, former CA Secretary of State and Sequoia consultant who is running against her? Sequoia is headquartered in California, I think.

Connecticut - Dodd (D)
I'd rather see a Jim Jeffords than Dodd reelected. One of the architects of HAVA and signed the recent letter with McConnell, Hoyer, and Ney, protesting the move to voter verified paper ballots. Dodd has hobnobbed with the big world corporate types for years, right along with Hagel.

Georgia - Miller (D)
You know that Georgia will go GOP unless the Dem running is another Miller. Just something about how their voting systems work.....

Louisiana - Breaux (D)
Breaux is almost as good as a GOP person. Look for this go go either way, unless Breax isn't running again, with virtually no difference.

Maryland - Mikulski (D)
Yep, they'd want to get rid of Mikulski.


Nevada - Reid (D)
Not a headliner, but one I'm sure the GOP would like to see gone. Put up a fuss about Yucca Mountain.

Oklahoma - Nickles (R)
They gotta keep people like Nickles in to carry out the agenda.

South Carolina - Hollings (D)
Could be an important seat. It would help keep the south. Would be great if the Dems could get a foothold here again.

South Dakota - Daschle (D)
Don't know if they'll want to get rid of Daschle. He's been so ineffectual as the Senate Democratic leader.

Vermont - Leahy (D)
Yep, would want Leahy to go.

Washington - Murray (D)
Murray isn't a big issue for them but they'd certainly like her gone. Uphill battle for Nethercutt, who's only popular or much known on the East side of the state. And he's certainly stuck his foot in his mouth a lot. However, watch what happens in King County and Snohomish. He doesn't have to win those if he wins in the Eastern part of the state and is very close in the western counties. Couple western counties tend to swing GOP. The race is not out of reach for Nethercutt but I would suspect that Murray would have to carry almost none of the East side and Nethercutt be very, very close on the West side. If the election pans out like that, recounts all over in order.

Wisconsin - Feingold (D)
Definitely they'd want Feingold to go.


Pick the states where they could most likely pull off some creative vote tallying, then pick the senators that are thorns in their sides.

Otherwise, look for electoral votes.

Where it concerns the Senate, you don't have to overturn a race in a county that should go to a Democrat, you only have to keep the spread narrow, if other, larger counties might go Republican.

Cumulative votes mean way more and it's harder to catch and detect, because it looks like the counties did what was expected, just not with as much "enthusiasm."

Note, I'm not sure if this was meant as a reply to me or to Salin, since this is kinda what I said... (only not as clearly ;) ) A "surprise upset" would be examined closely, but an expected Dem victory that was, maybe, 10% less than expected might give enough Republican votes in the *statewide* races to flip THEM into the Republican column. And, as I said above, I really think they'll concentrate on those for this election.

Hi Bev and Hi Agent Mike :spank:(don't you have any shame?)

All of us are thinking like Democrats. We are intelligent and creative. Our brains are wired differently.

They are wired "straight up and down ." IMO they will go at this in a straight forward way,they will focus on the close races.

They also believe that they own the world. That said, they know that we are on to their game this time so they will be a little more careful(even they know we will be watching Florida.)

I don't think they will try it in California now. You have made the issue so high profile here! Today an 86 year old lady from Pasadena told me about the BBV!


Have Agent Mike tell them that we know exactly who they are and how they are going to do their dirty work. Mike them that we have a PLAN that is Security Tight, Secret Clearance. Mike tell them that you are trying to get a lead on the PLAN and you just can't unlock the DI BEV CODE!

Keep um guessing and keep us informed.
We are here for you 24/7.


:loveya:

Push WI into Bush territory & take out Russ Feingold.

I have no idea if Milw. presents any such opportunities in terms of voting equipment or organization, but it presents a helluva biggie in that it sits on top of 10 elecrtoral votes & a VERY annoying senator.

Edited to add:

You wouldn't even have to carry the county to accomplish this--just maked the vote somewhat less Democratic, thus covering up the shenanigans perfectly, since everyone will be looking for normally-Dem counties that went Repug.

http://milwaukee.indymedia.org/en/2004/04/200893.shtml

Especially read the last article of what ES&S pulled in Marion County in Indiana with illegal software on Optical Scan machines sold by ES&S.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Are you a paid shill for voting machine mfgs?

EDIT: BTW if you trust them...you haven't been paying attention.

have done zero research on the BBV issue.

Wow, I never expected that. ;)

And the Easter Bunny.

And anything Faux "News" tells you.

And anything Ann Coulter tells you.

Well, we know what Nazi Filth you are now and we are watching.

Fuck with Free America at your own peril, Bushevik.

We see you. We known you. You have been here before in 1922 Russia, in 1933 Germany, in 1978 Cambodia, and almost everywhere the Bushevik have sabotaged voting around the world.

You have to till the ground and wait for the polls. I would concentrate on no more than two states. That's all it takes. It would have to be where R's have complete control of government. Governor of course. And Attorney General. And a corrupt state Supreme Court.

Florida is the first stop, but the State Supreme Court might try to mess things up for the junta again. Ohio is next. PA is third, but a D Gov might throw a monkey wrench in things.

But as said, it only takes 15 counties. Florida is a given, I think. Outside Pittsburgh would be second.

and I'd esp look for the ones that've already had some suspicious voting patterns in place. I guess you've got most irregularities documented somewhere on blackbox voting.com.
I'd also look at the states that are being hyped as "close" or "tie" such as Ohio and Penn.
They might try for swing states that have the biggest electoral wins. They might wait until the last minute, and see which counties are the least likely to be monitored+ have the closest "polling" #s. For some reason Tn comes to mind, since they had so many similar irregularities as Fla (in 2000), including disenfranchising black voters and intimidating them at the polling place. Can't remember which counties were involved, but they would likely repeat history only vary the swing states.

St. Louis County (MO) Extra votes for Kerry, MO likes to send rethuglicans to Congress for some reason.

Maricopa County (AZ) Isn't AZ supposed to be an important state? Phoenix contains a treasure trove of votes.

Also, Orange County, CA, to teach those freeps a lesson about what it feels like when your vote isn't counted.:evilgrin:

African American voters already being ripped off.

See Palast's new article in The Nation. Excellent stuff.

Vanishing Votes

by Gregory Palast
Published in the May 17, 2004 issue of The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040517&s=palast

On October 29, 2002, George W. Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Hidden behind its apple-pie-and-motherhood name lies a nasty civil rights time bomb. ]

~~~~~~~~~~~

Overall, if I were going to steal D votes, I would decrease the D vote in strong D areas. If you have a strong R area, you can't increase it a lot without getting to be real obvious (90% R would look a bit fishy).

I have suspicions that in 2002, Hispanic areas were ripped off. For instance, in San Antonio, the vote totals came in REAL late. There was a big disparity between a Republican polling bunch and a Hispanic polling bunch, in how they figured the Hispanic vote went statewide in Texas -- like maybe a 20% difference! Republicans keep claiming that they're winning a bigger majority of the Hispanic vote.

I would watch those boxes real carefully. With issues of language, INS fears, citizenship, etc., it is easier to intimidate at least some members of that demographic group.

I have a gut bad feeling about Colorado based on very little except the state's oil potential and the presence of corporate DoughLord Philip Anschutz.

~~~~~~~~~~~

One more thing. Bev, don't leave home without this! It's a very interesting series of maps of the US, goes way beyond blue state/ red state. Just one more thing to think about.

http://www.makethemaccountable.com/misc/Maps.htm

I thought we were referring to using BBV against the freeps. Oops. But you do have an extremely valid point.

:kick:

States

Ohio
Pennyslvania
Florida
Iowa
Missouri
Georgia
Oregon
California
Michigan
New Hampshire
Arkansas
Tennessee
Kentucky
Minnesota

===================================================

Just look in those states for the juciest places to stuff or block ballots, such as Bushevik-controlled minority areas.

Busheviks LOVE to prey on the weak and powerless, so start there.

But the three states that I think the most tampering will go on in, in order:

Ohio - remember, Wally declared for all to see he would deliver it to *. I believe he will no matter what it takes...NO MATTER WHAT IT TAKES...in particular...look at the rust belt counties, although they traditionally go Dem...WATCH Montgomery and Hamilton Co. and watch Franklin County hard...also Jefferson County as suggested before. This state, if Wally had to roll the dice and pick one, in my mind, Ohio is it.

Florida - one word - Jeb...also, practice makes perfect

California - two words - Governor Schwarzeneger(SP)

Footnote: My first official welcome to Agent Mike. Have a great day (you troll)

here is an uninformed (and maybe kind of dumb)theoretical scenario.

If I were Karl Rove, I think I would first choose counties in states that had a fairly substantial number of electoral college votes, and that also had close Senate races, and which also had hard core evoting advocate republican SoS's similar to Blackwell in Ohio, or possibly even not real bright Democrat SoS's. I would find out which counties had the highest concentrations of evoting machines in these states, and try to spread the altered votes among some of these counties so as not to draw too much suspicion. If I can possibly kill 2 birds with one stone by guaranteeing a states' electoral college votes and a republican senatorial victory in that state, this would be my first option. I think Florida and Missouri would be at the top of this list, and maybe I'd shoot for Pennsylvania. Maybe Washington, also, if SoS Reed can stall the evote issue until 2006.

I would probably consider cheating in Ohio despite the fact that incumbent GOP Senator Voinovich will probably win fairly easily, because Ohio has a substantial number of electoral votes and is historically critical to victory in the Presidential election. Other states I might try to cheat in because of probable close margins of victory in the 2004 Presidential election would be New Mexico, Iowa, Oregon, and Wisconsin.

It is doubtful that Democrats are going to win a majority in the House of Representatives, so I would mainly concentrate on close Senate races, because that is where the risk of losing the republican majority lies. Of course, close Congressional races in districts where evoting fraud will already be occurring can also be thrown as a bonus. And I might target particularly troublesome Democratic Reps or Dem Reps in key districts if the circumstances were right.

My next step would be to examine the closest Senate races in non-swing states, preferably that have republican SoS's, and find out which counties are using evoting machines and also have republican county officials that would play ball. Depending on the number of evoting machines in use in these states, and favorable county circumstances, I would consider cheating in the Senate races in Oklahoma, Louisiana, Illinois, North Carolina, Colorado, Georgia, and Alaska.

Because of the suspicion cast on evoting by recent controversy, I would have, in most cases, certain favorable pre-existing conditions in the areas where I would do my dirty deeds. In order to determine the most effective and least risky precincts in which to "modify" election results for , I would get a complete list of counties using evoting machines from my friendly republican voting machine manufacturers, and also a list of elected officials for each county. I would then do a comprehensive statistical analysis of all relevant information in order to determine areas where evoting fraud will be most effective, least detectable, and most easily covered up.

Even if caught committing vote fraud in some circumstances, it will take a massive effort to prove that this fraud occurred. Republican legislators, republican election officals, and republican owned voting machine manufacturers will attempt to block every effort by citizens groups and Democratic legislators from investigating and overturning fraudulent elections, and the courts are pretty much stacked with republican friendly conservative justices. The biggest concern at this time is the possibility that Democrats may somehow succeed in getting enough public and legislative support to get statewide moratoriums placed on electronic voting until after the 2004 election.
Everything possible is being done to insure that Democrats are not successful in achieving this goal, including attempts by the Secret Service to gather information on and harass voting activists.

Hi, Agent Mike.:hi: Why don't you join us and blow the whistle on your bosses? You would go down in history as a real American hero. Or are you one of the bad guys too? Read this:

Title: Republicans Walk Out Of Fed Hearing On Voting Machines
Source: Rense.com
URL Source: http://www.rense.com/general51/paap.htm
Published: Apr 13, 2004
Author: Lynn Landes

As the battle over voting machines rages across the country, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights met on Friday, April 9th, to examine the Integrity, Security and Accessibility in the Nation's Readiness to Vote". Two scientists and four representatives of civil rights organizations were invited to brief the Commission.

But, before the panelists had a chance to share their views, three Republican commissioners and one (notably conservative) Independent commissioner walked out, ostensibly over a personnel dispute. But, others are not so sure.

It appears that voting technology is a topic that the Republican leadership wants to tightly control. It is without doubt that Republicans own most of the companies that manufacture, sell, and service voting machines. And President Bush and the Republican Congress appear determined to control and limit oversight of the elections industry. The Bush Administration has stacked the Election Assistance Commission with supporters of paperless voting technology, while the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) got walloped with a $22 million budget cut in fiscal 2004, which means that NIST will have to cut back substantially on its cyber security work, as well as completely stop all work on voting technology for the Help America Vote Act.

With no mandatory federal standards or certification in place and no funding available, the Bush Administration and Republican-controlled Congress have ensured that their friends in the elections industry maintain control of voting technology and, in effect, election results.

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=45602

Here is some easy access info:

2000 Prez election state by state margin of victory.

http://www.bipac.net/page.asp?g=AFPA&content=Election_2004_presidential_margins&parent=BIPAC

Red state blue state map.

http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~sara/html/mapping/election/map.html

Daily Kos Senate race analysis

http://www.dailykos.com/special/senate