I don't understand why there hasn't been a constitutional challenge to the no paper trail e voting process. States such as Florida have a law allowing a recount. But how can you conduct a recount when in the case of electronic voting there is no paper trail to count. It seems to me that the lawyers needed to be involved in getting injunctions to prevent the use of the Diebold machines before the election took place. It's not too late to do that before the next election cycle. Marta
>I think there is a greater danger in the short term in just
>accepting this election as a done deal than there is in demanding an
>official investigation, some sort of Congressional hearing. Allowing
>this election to go unchallenged just makes it all seem a normal
>part of the election process. The problem is that the individual
>consequences to questioning the outcome are going to be pretty high.
>Since most people already accept the results as valid anyone who
>questions this will be label a marginal figure from this point
>forward. The chances of finding enough people in positions of power
>with the courage and conviction to basically sacrifice their careers
>to prevent this from happening is about as close to zero as it can
>be. While there will be small protests without something large in
>scale and with support from a sizable group in the House and Senate
>nothing is going to happen. This sucks but unfortunately this battle
>is already lost before it has even started.
>
>John Thornton
>
>>I think there's a danger in calling it history too soon. The dominant media
>>and the Democratic Party have given in to -- blessed, really -- a whole new
>>level of fraud, suppression, and manipulation. 2000 was pretty bad, but you
>>could argue it was an anomaly and that such things as fraudulent voter purge
>>lists wouldn't be used again once they were exposed. In 2004, this
>>kind of thing
>>is apparently regarded as pretty much S.O.P., and to watch the
>>news, the birds
>>are chirping, the children are playing and there's nothing much to talk
>>about. So, when 2006 comes around, the Repubs. can take it to a
>>new level, and
>>everyone will worry about sounding like fringey nuts then, too. So
>>we need to
>>raise a fuss now--otherwise the history books, even those we write, will not
>>record it as more than ho-hum, more of the same, you know how
>>Republicans are.
>>For example, around the county they're going full speed ahead on introducing
>>more no-paper-trail, no-audit, proprietary software DRE machines.
>>Jacksonville
>>has a contract for them by 2006--currently they're using Optical scan
>>(marksense) machines which at least have a paper ballot.
>>
>>Jenny Brown
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- Marta Russell Los Angeles, CA http://www.martarussell.com/