[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ale] Its over. Maybe

Subject: [ale] Its over. Maybe
From: jimpop at yahoo.com (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Fri Nov 5 00:29:45 2004
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <1099537241.5108.8.camel@blue> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

That same article also identifies a second mfgr of voting systems, this
clearly disputes those that ignorantly claim that Diebold has a monopoly
on voting systems.

-Jim P.

On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 22:55 -0500, Pete Hardie wrote:
> /. had an article that claimed that if only one from from every voting
> machine had been set to a particular candidate (Dem/Rep), the 2000
> election would have been an uncontested win for that candidate. 
> Imagine how easy it would be to rig an electronic voting machine
> program to do that?
>

Follow-Ups:
- [ale] Its over. Maybe (monopolies and Nevada)
  - From: aaron at pd.org (aaron)
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: jkinney at localnetsolutions.com (James P. Kinney III)
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: esoteric at 3times25.net (Geoffrey)

References:
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: jcf at primeharbor.com (Chris Farris)
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: esoteric at 3times25.net (Geoffrey)
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: jimpop at yahoo.com (Jim Popovitch)
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: drifter at oppositelock.org (Sean Kilpatrick)
- [ale] Its over. Maybe
  - From: pete.hardie at gmail.com (Pete Hardie)

Prev by Date: [ale] Its over. Maybe
Next by Date: [ale] Its over. Maybe
Previous by thread: [ale] Its over. Maybe
Next by thread: [ale] Its over. Maybe (monopolies and Nevada)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread