scoop.co.nz — Gates was on the board of directors of VoteHere, a strange little company that was the biggest elections industry lobbyist for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). VoteHere spent more money than ES&S, Diebold, and Sequoia combined to help ram HAVA through. And HAVA, of course, was the bill sponsored by Bob Ney that put e-voting on steroids
Nov 10, 2006 View in Crawl 4
Closed AccountNov 10, 2006
The book is available for free on their website. Blackboxvoting may not be the most savvy outfit but they have been in there watching and outing these sh$%bag companies (Diebold Sequoia, etc) from the very start.
junkNov 10, 2006
Any proof of who you voted for that you can take out of the polls could be used as proof of who you voted for to someone interested in buying votes. Understand the problem here? I see personal voter receipts mentioned as a remedy to vote fraud every time this topic comes up. We have anonymous ballots for a reason.
jonnydobadNov 10, 2006
I agree, a system with a paper trail would be best. I don't really understand why this hasn't been done for all e-voting but I would favor e-voting in its current state over hanging chads, complaints about the clairity of the voting cards, or the media circus of the 2000 election in Florida.
bryaneddsNov 10, 2006
Good old revolving door...
masgradaNov 10, 2006
I'd wager that they figured for a handicap by the poll numbers and the swing during the election was even greater than they thought.
littlebylittleNov 10, 2006
And you Scio's should learn from your leader on your current tactics:[Wiki] In a lecture he made on 19 July 1966, L. Ron Hubbard expressed concern about the possible abuse of the SP label in respect of those who are otherwise good citizens and contribute to civil society:You should upgrade your idea of what an SP is. Man, meet one sometime! A real one! A real monster.... Well, in all the time we've been around here we only had one SP that I know of. One real SP that was on staff.... And I don't know of another single SP that we've ever had on staff. Isn't that interesting. You see all these SP orders and so on... Don't throw it around carelessly, because this is an--a very exaggerated condition, SP. [12]
jonnydobadNov 10, 2006
You are connected to corporate America, you own stocks. There are valid reasons that people with over $1 million in liquid assets tend to get elected. 1) They have proven that they have managed to attain some degree of success (in most cases, although trust fund babies like Kerry, the Kennedy's, and the Rockefeller's haven't always proven it. I am not mentioning them because they are democrats, only because they are the three political leaders that I can think of that never really did anything in the business world. I am sure others can and will name some republicans). 2) They have the money to pay for a portion of their own campaigns. This gets the ball rolling so they can raise more money to fund the rest.If you aren't "connected" to something than you must not do anything and be a drain on society. If you have a job, ever had a job, ever went to school and actually talked to anyone, you are connected to something or someone. Friends are connections, business relationships are connections, stock ownership is a connection.If all you do is drive to the store, buy gas and own a Toyota then you have already answered why you will never be elected.
jonnydobadNov 10, 2006
"the fact is, democrat or republican, these nominees are people who are highly driven successful people with alot of contacts"These are the poeple that have always run every country in the world. First of all you have to be driven to stand up to a political battle, especially with all of the smear tactics that go on. Why is this a problem? The only problem I see is that the average politician is not representative of the average American because they tend to have more wealth. This has always been the case and always will be. As much as people hate Cheney, I respect what he has done with his life (take politics out of the equation for a minute). He was born dirt poor and is a result of the American dream. He went from being dirt poor to being a wealthy man that is Vice President. Regardless of how you feel about his politics or how he achieved his wealth he has shown that people can go from the bottom to the top.I, for one, would like it if more politicians had the same perspective on life as people like Cheney (again, take politics out of it). He has seen life from both sides, the bottom and the top (yes I also worry about his ties to big business, but less so than the conspiracy thoerists). Many politicians were born into wealth, they are the ones that I really worry about . They have no perspective on life. I wish more people that made it on their own would be involved in politics, most just don't want to deal with the garbage of running for a position. Smear campaigns deter most respectible people from even wanting to run for office. Why give up their success in order to be involved in a corrupt system full of name calling?
ark7Nov 11, 2006
This is hilarious. Democrats won, handily, and they're STILL throwing around conspiracies about electronic voting machines. Hey geniuses, if you want to cast doubt on these companies, then why the f**k should anyone accept the validity of these latest election results?