E. voting machine logic

Dem Victory Punctures E-Voting Conspiracy Theories (From Information Week)
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
Nov 10, 2006 at 08:11 PM ET

Sure, there were problems with e-voting systems during Tuesday’s elections. But all in all, they worked. What’s the proof? The Democrats won big.

Among the various e-voting conspiracy theories prior to the midterm elections were allegations that one of the biggest suppliers of the systems — Diebold — would rig voting because of supposed ties between the company and the Republican party.

Well, if Diebold or anyone else rigged, hacked, or tampered with any of those systems to skew the outcome, they didn’t do a very good job. Or maybe e-voting hysteria is just like the Y2K panic.

Like I said, sure there were problems — including voters inconvenienced by delays and some whom unfortunately weren’t able to vote at all. And I’m not predicting that there won’t be problems, hacking, or rigging-schemes in the future. But like our democracy, e-voting isn’t perfect, but it works.

What do you think? Is e-voting a success?


It is this kind of logic that just floors me.  It is because I didn’t see it, it didn’t happen — kind of logic.  It is like standing outside and because you didn’t get wet you walked back inside and say it hasn’t rained at all today.  The only way to prove that electronic voting machines worked is to compare the electronic voting machines to exit polls or to paper ballots in the same districts.  That is the only way to truly prove your hypothesis.  Anything else is simply conjecture.  Just because your opponent won, doesn’t mean that you didn’t try to stuff the ballot box.  It simply may be a case that you didn’t stuff the ballot box with enough votes or that your opponent was better at cheating than you were.My suggestion is that this author needs to go back to eighth grade and take a course on logic.

Maureen Dowd – Rummy, W, Vice and Gates

From today’s NYT:

Poppy Bush and James Baker gave Sonny the presidency to play with and he broke it. So now they’re taking it back.

They are dragging W. away from those reckless older guys who have been such a bad influence and getting him some new minders who are a lot more practical.

In a scene that might be called “Murder on the Oval Express,” Rummy turned up dead with so many knives in him that it’s impossible to say who actually finished off the man billed as Washington’s most skilled infighter. (Poppy? Scowcroft? Baker? Laura? Condi? The Silver Fox? Retired generals? Serving generals? Future generals? Troops returning to Iraq for the umpteenth time without a decent strategy? Democrats? Republicans? Joe Lieberman?)

The defense chief got hung out to dry before Saddam got hung. The president and Karl Rove, underestimating the public’s hunger for change or overestimating the loyalty of a fed-up base, did not ice Rummy in time to save the Senate from teetering Democratic. But once Sonny managed to heedlessly dynamite the Republican majority — as well as the Middle East, the Atlantic alliance and the U.S. Army — then Bush Inc., the family firm that snatched the presidency for W. in 2000, had to step in. Two trusted members of the Bush 41 war council, Mr. Baker and Robert Gates, have been dispatched to discipline the delinquent juvenile and extricate him from the mother of all messes. Continue reading