JeffC, whats the skinny?

bad_ptc's picture

Diebold Electronic Voting cost Senator Barack Obama

Any possibility any of this could be true?

bad_ptc's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Thu, 01/10/2008 - 12:31pm.

Don't know. Last time O'Dell was upfront that he was fixing the election for Bush:

Voting Machine Controversy

I think he was surprised by the criticism because people like to think that they have some say in the process. In any case, I haven't heard him say who his pick for us is this year. You'd think Romney since he is Bush on steroids, but that's just supposition; I have not heard it from O'Dell.

Maybe Mixer knows. He moved to Ohio to work for Diebold and fix the elections there again. I wish he would go ahead and tell us who was going to win and end the suspense.

Maybe they have not told Mixer and the other members of the vast right-wing conspiracy who to be for yet. You'd think our friend Mixer would have told us already if he knew.

Submitted by bobcat on Fri, 01/11/2008 - 9:47am.

This seem to have been a problem with the person who invented the internet Puzzled Al Puzzled Gore ran for President and seem to act like a Sad
loser. Then along comes Kerry and tries to do the same thing and has all of us laughing. Any plans on this for this go around. BTW it took Kerry 5 hours to figure out what he would look like. He would look like Al Puzzled that invented the internet did. Laughing out loud

sniffles5's picture
Submitted by sniffles5 on Thu, 01/10/2008 - 1:43am.

First of all, I seriously doubt Diebold would tamper with their voting machines in a Democratic election. Eye-wink

I don't think there is any fraud. Hillary and Obama targeted different groups: Obama went after college-educated and rural voters and Hillary went after low-income city dwellers.

The issue here is that Diebold had their machines in virtually all the urban city centers, and Hilary won that vote.

Obama won a huge margin among rural voters, and most rural voters were in towns where hand counts were done.

The large number of hand-counted rural Obama supporters and the large number of machine-counted urban Hilary voters explains the perceived discrepancy.

Quite frankly, I'm more surprised that Romney didn't use his millions to have Diebold tilt the election to himself.

Main Stream's picture
Submitted by Main Stream on Wed, 01/09/2008 - 9:56pm.

Thanks for the update, bad. This is really disturbing, if this is found to be true. Are we in for the same mess we had in the previous presidential elections, fighting over CHADS again. This is outrageous. Obama won 38% over Hillary 34%??!!!


yardman5508's picture
Submitted by yardman5508 on Wed, 01/09/2008 - 10:01pm.

Stalin said: "It is not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes" Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.