Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
5. "Belief" is not enough.
Sun May 31, 2015, 11:48 AM
May 2015
What does Bernie believe about the ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES? (your title, my emphasis)


I don't want to know what Bernie "believes" about electronic voting machines. I want to know what he DOES about verifying vote counts (or exposing the inherent inability of current e-voting systems to provide verification). Can he even prove that he himself was elected to the Senate? No other elected official can do this, and none of them even try to. Why? How is it that they are "trusting" to private corporations, all of them using 'TRADE SECRET' code--code that the public is forbidden to review--to tabulate election results, with half the states doing NO AUDIT AT ALL of the results, and the other half doing only a miserably inadequate 1% audit. And don't even get me started on WHO owns and runs the PRIVATE corporations that are 'counting' all our votes--it would make your hair stand on end. It is no wonder that Congress has something like a 10% approval rating. Most of the members of Congress represent NO ONE. Or rather, they represent the 0.01%. Many of them were NOT elected by the people. And NONE of them can prove that they were elected.

It is not a matter of "belief." It is a matter VERIFICATION. If verification is NOT POSSIBLE, the system is criminally fraudulent and inherently anti-democratic. And those things are true whether you like the result or not. They would be true if every elected official were a socialist and a peace activist. (As Josef Stalin, in communist Russia, is alleged to have said: "It's not the votes that count; it's who counts the votes!&quot

To my knowledge, there is not a single elected Democratic leader in this country--nor even any of those who were NOT s/elected, nor any party leaders at all--who have challenged this criminally fraudulent and inherently anti-democratic vote counting system. And, believe me, Bernie Sanders will not do so if he is serious about wanting to be s/elected--and if he does challenge the vote counting system, in defiance of our Corporate/MIC rulers, he will see a swift end to his political career. He probably knows this. I think they all do. And if he is not just a decoy--someone to bleed off the leftist energies of the majority (especially with regard to the zillion dollar military/security state/ police state thievery)--he will keep his lip zipped and hope for the best. We will never know what he "believes" about 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting.

Although Bernie Sanders is an independent, he has to play by the same rules as everybody else who seeks power within our Corporate/MIC system. So do not expect him to violate Rule no. 1: Silence about our criminally fraudulent and inherently anti-democratic 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting system. He won't likely do it; he CAN'T do it and remain viable as a candidate for president (or any office). And, in the unlikely event that he does do it, we should know that he is sacrificing his career for the rest of us. That would be an exceedingly noble and patriotic act.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I write about this a lot in FLA. A stronger audit of paper ballots against machine totals is needed. TheNutcracker May 2015 #1
We should make it an issue lovelydestruction Dec 2015 #47
Long past time Vincardog May 2015 #2
Read these links! Baobab May 2016 #48
I would add that people interested should Google William Spoonamore. Dustlawyer Aug 2016 #51
The 'Hursti Hack' of the Optical Scan machines Hacking_Democracy Aug 2016 #52
Thanks for bringing this up. SusanCalvin May 2015 #3
Paper ballots, hand counted, in public, cameras rolling. Nothing less. Scuba May 2015 #4
Yes, yes, yes! kath Jun 2015 #16
Yes Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2015 #19
"Belief" is not enough. Peace Patriot May 2015 #5
Have you ever worked in Early Voting or voting on Election Day? Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #7
That has nothing to do with the vote count accuracy. n/t Wilms Jun 2015 #22
If your claim iscorrect then show the facts, I have presented my information. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #23
Nice try. Wilms Jun 2015 #24
Nice try on your part, this is appearing to be another CT. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #26
. Wilms Jun 2015 #28
. GoneFishin Jun 2015 #29
Guess I have my answer. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #31
Showing the Facts Stevepol Aug 2015 #40
I understand entirely, I need to see some facts and not conspiracy therory. Thinkingabout Aug 2015 #42
It is a FACT that voting machines are UNVERIFIABLE Stevepol Aug 2015 #43
We also found the paper ballots in Florida was not verifible, this has been proven. Thinkingabout Aug 2015 #45
In Florida the printed paper poll tapes are a public record of the election. Hacking_Democracy Aug 2016 #53
It doesn't appear paper ballots helped the DNC in 2000, in fact it cost Gore the election. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #6
Boston uses a paper ballot that you can choose to mark with a pencil--no chad issues--or merrily Jun 2015 #8
Did you know on the Diebold machines you are given a review of your ballot? Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #25
Review is irrelevant unless you have written verification. merrily Jun 2015 #27
Having dealt with pencil strokes for several years I don't find this was an accurate system of Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #33
Testimony in Congress was that it was very easy to program the software to cheat. Not that anyone merrily Jun 2015 #34
Did I say I dealt with pencil strokes on ballots? Louisiana went to electric machines as early as Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #35
The software is easy to rig. That is not even debatable. merrily Jun 2015 #36
Yes, this is why so many people, monitors, companies, grocery stores, etc use computers. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #37
Total non sequitur fail. merrily Jun 2015 #38
When you get a valid argument we can resume. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #39
Banks, grocery stores, etc. Stevepol Aug 2015 #41
What "cost Gore the election" was the US Supreme Court sketchy Jun 2015 #9
I do not engage in CT, electronic voting and counting is more accurate. Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #10
Do you engage in mathematics? sketchy Jun 2015 #11
Are you saying mathematician are not capable of CT? Do you think paper ballots can not be Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #12
No, I am not saying "mathematician are not capable of CT" sketchy Jun 2015 #13
Do Democrats care enough to demand that the votes are never left alone in the hands Cal33 Jun 2015 #15
Are you serious? Hiw long have you been voting electronically or with Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #17
If there are both Dem. and Repub. people present at all times with the votes, the Cal33 Jun 2015 #20
Here's an interesting event you may enjoy reading Stevepol Aug 2015 #44
Nothing new here, the what ifs has not been proven. Apparently you do not like voting machines, I Thinkingabout Aug 2015 #46
The voting machine totals can be rigged to match the voter sign in books. Hacking_Democracy Aug 2016 #49
This message was self-deleted by its author Thinkingabout Aug 2016 #50
I've been harping on this for years, and the Democratic Party hasn't Cal33 Jun 2015 #14
I suspect that they have benefitted in some more convoluted way. Maybe it helps in their primary GoneFishin Jun 2015 #32
This is actually one of the few things that NC has gotten right. Persondem Jun 2015 #18
fair 1STWURLDVIEW Jun 2015 #21
We need a paper record verified by the voter, on hand, available for a recount. Period. Anybody who GoneFishin Jun 2015 #30
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Election Reform»What does Bernie believe ...»Reply #5