11.20.06 1 in 76 BILLION: Odds of 5.1% Discrepancy in Dem House Vote vs. Generic Poll —TruthIsAll
11.29.06 Electionline.org gives midterms mixed grades; e-voting failures 'plentiful' —Paul McNamara, Networkworld.com
12.05.06 TGDC Resolution # 06-06...passed unanimously —TGDC, upon report prepared by the Security and Transparency Subcommitee of the TGDC in conjunction with NIST staff

"The TGDC has considered current threats to voting systems and, at this time, finds that security concerns do not warrant replacing deployed voting systems where EAC Best Practices are used."

12.07.06 Yet Another Stolen Election? —Unofficial Results In Seventeen Ohio Counties Cannot Be Right —Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.

12.08.06 Reconciling 2006 Discrepancies: Generic 120-Poll Trend vs 7:07pm and Final Exit Polls —TruthIsAll

01.01.07 (To scroll   use scrollwheel or arrow keypad —if necessary, click empty window-area first to get focus)
¹ DREs with problems were identified as one of these 11: Sequoia Advantage and Edge (all models); Diebold DREs
(all models); Hart InterCivic eSlate; Microvote Infinity and M464; ES&S iVotronic (all models); Unilect Patriot;
Danaher Shouptronic 1242; AVS WINVote; VTI VoteWare. No problems were reported for the Avante Vote-Trakker
(used in NY).
² Precinct Scanners with problems were identified as one of these 6: Diebold AccuVote OS (all models); ES&S M-
100 and InkaVote; Optech 3P Eagle; HartInterCivic eScan and BallotNow; Sequoia Insight. Two types of central
count scanners malfunctioned: Optech 400C and ES&S 650.
³ EBMs with problems were AutoMARK (27 states), InkaVote (CA, MO). No problems were reported for the Populex
(NY and WI). …
Many polling places couldn’t open on time because of machine failures, and complex procedures often left pollworkers frustrated and reluctant to serve again. Election directors were often forced to rely on voting equipment vendors to set up the election, administer it, and tally the votes because it was too complicated for their personnel to handle. Others blamed themselves for not following the poorly documented, non-intuitive procedures required to collect and tally the votes.

After the polls closed, poll workers and election officials struggled with a myriad of reporting problems. Many couldn’t retrieve data from memory cards or couldn’t get the tally software to combine totals from different computerized systems, while others couldn’t figure out why the software was subtracting votes instead of adding them, or adding them two and three times instead of only once; couldn’t determine for sure whether the first set of results was correct, or the second set, or the third; couldn’t explain why one out of every six voters didn’t have an electronic vote recorded for a hotly contested race; or why the machines recorded more ballots than the number of voters who signed in to vote.

Often hidden from public view, equipment malfunctions such as these have normally been exposed only when they are severe enough to attract media coverage. Reports from Pollworkers for Democracy and voters provided additional insight into the extent of these problems. The frequency of reports of difficulties retrieving results even casts doubt on the accuracy of the certified results in affected areas, particularly since it is reasonable to assume that many such retrieval problems were never reported.

An increasing number of voters, poll workers, and election officials are finding the election process to be more difficult, not easier, and confidence in the final tallies has been undermined. While our source material is neither a complete list of problems nor even a representative sampling, the number of incidents and the broad range of problems reported is indicative of the widespread failure of electronic voting systems across the country and how this failure affected the experience of voters on November 7, 2006.
…E-Voting Failures in the 2006 Mid-Term Election —A sampling of problems across the nation — A report prepared by VotersUnite.Org, VoteTrustUSA, Voter Action, Pollworkers for Democracy

 Three  Preliminary  "Non-Matched"  Exit Polls of Interviewed-Voters'  Votes 
vs. A  Final Exit Poll  " Forced to Match"  the  Recorded  " (To scroll  use scrollwheel or arrow keypad —if necessary, click empty window-area to focus)


[Click for Full Article] Count"  of 

See  e-Vote Hacking  for videos of hacks of the two main types of electronic "voting machines":

I. paper-fed     Optical Scanner   vote-mark Counting computer

Programmable

A paper format...but once fed and disappearing inside a programmable "blackbox"
Optical Scanner, ballot vote-marks can be counted differently from the
INTENDED VOTE

See video of the Harry Hursti Hack of a Diebold Optical Scanner
for programmed mis-counting that SWITCHES VOTES

Paul Lehto: By what right or authority did my right to watch the counting of the vote get taken away?

II. paper-less    DRE    vote-mark Direct-Recording-and-Counting computer

Programmable

"Touch Screen"
Paper-less entry of vote-marks,
No machine-independent record of vote-marks entered,
No means to verify the recording and/or counting of vote-marks as the
INTENDED VOTE

See the Princeton Hack video for programmed, untraceable
mis-recording-&-counting of vote-marks

(vote-marks entered for G. Washington counted as votes for Benedict Arnold)

"NIST's recommendation to the STS
is that the DRE in practical terms
cannot be made secure."

ABSTRACT: In the Nov 7, 2006 election in Ohio, there were:

• 350,669 more ballots cast than the number of votes counted for US Senator
• In 16 counties        : 268,987 uncounted votes, or 19.46 % of ballots cast
  In 71 other counties:  82,957 uncounted votes, or   2.99 % of ballots cast
  
  This indicates that 227,000 votes may have been lost by the touch screen voting machines (DRE), which were utilized in all 17 of the suspect counties.
  
  Source:  2006 Landslide Denied   12.07.06  Yet Another Stolen Election?

Vote-Marks 

2004 Exit Polls background, from excerpts of "An Open Letter to Salon's Farhad Manjoo" by TruthIsAll :

THE  EXIT  POLLS  WE  WERE  NOT  SUPPOSED  TO  SEE Many voters went to sleep on election day assuming Kerry won. Jonathan Simon stayed up long enough to spot and download the 12:22am state exit polls. Luckily for us, The Washington Post chose not to delete the corresponding National Exit Poll ( 13047 respondents at 12:22am) which showed Kerry the 51-48% winner. We also have the earlier NEP timelines at 4pm ( 8349 respondents) and 7:30pm ( 11027 respondents) which established the 51-48% Kerry trend. He held the lead until the Final National Exit Poll ( 13660 respondents), when the numbers magically reverted to a 51-48% Bush win. The numbers (weights and vote shares) were revised to match the vote. click to open PDF On Election Day, exit polls … by six leading news organizations showed Kerry winning handily in four crucial states: Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and Ohio. Since the poll results were beyond the margin of error, Bush's odds of victory were less than one in 450,000 But when the ballots were tallied, the four states "flipped" to Bush, depriving Kerry of fifty-seven electoral votes — and the White House. click to read Timeline shows the midnight "forcing" of exit polls to the "count" of  vote-marks from: Was the 2004 Election Stolen?—RFK Jr. for  Rolling Stone, June 2006 THE  IMPOSSIBLE  FINAL  EXIT  POLL According to the ( To scroll  use scrollwheel or arrow keypad— if necessary, click empty window-area first to get focus ) Final National Exit poll, 43% of the 122.3 million who voted in 2004 were Bush 2000 voters and 37% were Gore voters. These weightings in and of themselves debunk rBr. Now 43% of 122.3 is 52.57 million. And since Bush only got 50.5mm votes in 2000, of whom about 1.75mm died, only 48.7mm (39.8%) could have returned to vote in 2004, so the 43% Final NEP weighting was mathematically impossible.  The Bush vote was inflated by 4 million . I have just shown that the Final Poll at 1:25pm on Nov 3 is bogus, and that the earlier 12:22am numbers are close to the truth. Here's proof that the Final NEP weights are impossible. Here's the National Exit Poll Timeline.  Notice the smooth trend in the first three timelines  (4pm, 7:38pm, 12:22am). Compare it to the discontinuous Bush jump in ALL the demographic weights and/or vote shares in the Final NEP. ... THE  NEP  TIMELINE — A  TRAGEDY  IN  FOUR  ACTS 11.02.04   3:59pm   8349 respondents: Kerry 51 - Bush 48 11.02.04   7:33pm  11027 respondents: Kerry 51 - Bush 48 11.03.04  12:22am  13047 respondents: Kerry 51 - Bush 48 11.03.04   1:25pm  13660 respondents: Kerry 48 - Bush 51 11.04.04 "... a server at Edison/Mitofsky malfunctioned shortly before 11 p.m. The glitch prevented access to any exit poll results until technicians got a backup system operational at 1:33 a.m. yesterday. The crash occurred barely minutes before the consortium was to update its exit polling with the results of later interviewing that found Bush with a one-point lead. Instead, journalists were left relying on preliminary exit poll results released at 8:15 p.m., which still showed Kerry ahead by three percentage points. It was only after the polls had closed in most states and the vote count  was well underway  click for link to a state-by-state    Regional Analysis State Exit Polls of Voters   vs.   Vote "Count" Discrepancies EASTERN US:    All 21 states (and DC) deviated to Bush by an average of 2.80% the odds:  1 in 4.2 million    12 states deviated beyond the margin of error probability:  1 in 32 trillion    Ohio and Florida "flipped" from Kerry to Bush    in the East that it became clear that Bush was in a stronger position in several key battlegrounds, including Ohio, than early exit polls suggested."

• 11.04.04 To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe...—Part I—TruthIsAll
  
  11.15.04 To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe...—Part II—TruthIsAll
  12.28.04 To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe...—Part IIIb, IIIa, III—TruthIsAll
  03.23.05 To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe...—Part IV—TruthIsAll
• 11.04.04 Kerry Won —Greg Palast
• 11.04.04 Faun Otter: Vote Fraud - Exit Polls Vs Actuals —Alastair Thompson, “Scoop” Co-Editor
• 11.04.04 The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy —Thom Hartmann
• 11.05.04 Report Says Problems Led to Skewed Surveying Data —Jim Rutenberg, NYT
• 11.05.04 Footprints of Electoral Fraud: The November 2 Exit Poll Scam —Michael Keefer, Centre for Research on Globalisation
• 11.06.04 Evidence Mounts That The Vote May Have Been Hacked —Thom Hartmann
• 11.09.04 For DUers who wanted a summary of my posts... —TruthIsAll
• 11.10.04 Mathematical proof that TV network polling results are FRAUDULENT —Petrodollar Warfare
• 11.11.04 47 State Exit Poll Analysis Confirms Swing Anomaly —Jonathan Simon —Introduction by “Scoop” Co-Editor Alastair Thompson
• 11.12.04
  
     But then, in key state after key state, counts showed very different numbers than the polls predicted; and the differentials were all in the same direction. The first shaded column in Table 1.1 shows the differential between the major candidates’ predicted (exit poll) percentages of the vote; the next shaded column shows the differential between their tallied percentages of the vote. The final shaded column reveals the “shift.” In ten of the eleven consensus battleground states,⁵ the tallied margin [recorded vote count] differs from the predicted margin [unadjusted exit polls], and in every one, the shift favors Bush.
  
     The media have largely ignored this discrepancy (although the blogosphere has been abuzz), suggesting either that the polls were flawed, or that the differential was within normal sampling error, a statistical anomaly, or could otherwise be easily explained away. In this report, I examine the validity of exit poll data, sampling error, the likelihood of statistical anomaly, and other explanations thus far offered to explain this discrepancy.
  … (To scroll   use scrollwheel or arrow keypad —if necessary, click empty window-area first to get focus)
  The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy Steven F. Freeman¹
     Most Americans who listened to radio or surfed the internet on election day this
  year sat down to watch the evening television coverage thinking John Kerry won
  the election. Exit polls showed him ahead in nearly every battleground state, in
  many cases by sizable margins. Although preelection day polls indicated the race
  dead even or Bush slightly ahead, two factors seemed to explain Kerry’s edge:
  turnout was very high, good news for Democrats,³ and, as in every US
  presidential election with an incumbent over the past quarter-century, undecided
  voters broke heavily toward the challenger.⁴ The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy —Steven F Freeman, Ph.D.  (Dec 29, 2004)

• 11.17.04 Complete US Exit Poll Data Confirms Net Suspicions — Full 51 State Early Exit Poll Data Released For The First Time —Alastair Thompson, “Scoop” Co-Editor
• 11.19.04 Working Paper: The Effect of Electronic Voting Machines on Change in Support for Bush in the 2004 Florida Elections —Michael Hout, Laura Mangels, Jennifer Carlson, Rachel Best —With the assistance of the UC Berkeley Quantitative Methods Research Team
• 11.20.04 How the Grinch stole the White House … again —Alan Waldman, Online Journal contributing writer
• 12.05.04 Evidence of Fraud in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election: A Reader —Michael Keefer, Centre for Research on Globalisation
• 12.06.04 Whistleblower Affidavit: Programmer Built Vote Rigging Prototype at Republican Congressman's Request! —Exclusive: BLOGGED By Brad ON 12/6/2004
• 12.13.04 Clint Curtis Testifies —claims Tom Feeney (former Jeb Bush running mate/now-Congressman, R-FL) hired him to prepare vote-rigging software —Video of testimony, December 13th, 2004 Congressional hearing in Columbus, Ohio
  UPDATES: Curtis/Feeney FL-24 Congressional Seat Challenge —The BradBlog
• 12.15.04 Proof of Ohio Election Fraud Exposed —includes affidavit of Sherole Eaton, Hocking County, OH, deputy director of elections—William Rivers Pitt, Truthout
• 12.19.04 EXIT POLLS: THE LATEST MYSTERY POLLSTER BLOG - AND MY COMMENTS —TruthIsAll
• 12.19.04 A "GLITCH". IT'S ALWAYS A "GLITCH" WHICH FAVORS THE REPUBS. A "GLITCH" —TruthIsAll
• 12.22.04 TV Networks Officially Refuse to Release Exit Poll Raw Data —Gary Beckwith, The Columbus Free Press
• 12.24.04 Kerry votes switched to Bush and ballots pre-punched for Bush —Dr. Werner Lange

• 12.28.04 The 2004 Presidential Election: Who Won The Popular Vote? —An Examination of the Comparative Validity of Exit Poll and Vote Count Data —Jonathan D. Simon, JD and Ron P. Baiman, Ph.D.
• 01.05.05 Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio —Executive Summary —Full Report —Status Report, House Judiciary Comm Democratic Staff, Rep. John Conyers, Ranking
• 01.24.05 The Strange Death of American Democracy: Endgame Ohio —Michael Keefer, Centre for Research on Globalisation

 E/M  Non-Response Bias  Hypothesis-Testing ("rBr" Debunked) 

• 01.28.05 Summary
  The Edison/Mitofsky report confirms there were large differences between their exit polls and the official results
  of the 2004 presidential election — much more so than in previous elections (p 31). The [unadjusted] national exit poll
  indicated a 3 point victory for Kerry; whereas the ['forced'] official election results indicated that he lost by 2.5%,
  a difference of 5.5%.                                                                                                                    [ed: see  Exit Polls ]
  
  The Edison/Mitofsky report fails to substantiate their hypothesis that the difference between their exit polls and official
  election results should be explained by problems with the exit polls. They assert without supporting evidence that (p 4),
  “Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters.” In fact, data included within
  the report suggest that the opposite might be true.
  
  Their analysis of the potential correlation of exit poll errors with voting machine type is incomplete and inadequate,
  and their report ignores the alternative hypothesis that the official election results could have been corrupted.
  …
  We invite all those who care about democratic processes in this country to join us in fully investigating and explaining what
  really happened in the 2004 Presidential election.
  Study of the 2004 Presidential Election Exit Poll Discrepancies —Response to  Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004  Report — USCountVotes.org, contributors & supporters: Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D.; Kathy Dopp, MS, USCV-President; Steven F. Freeman, Ph.D.; Brian Joiner, Ph.D.; Frank Stenger, Ph.D.; Richard G. Sheehan, Ph.D.; Paul F. Velleman, Ph.D.; Victoria Lovegren, Ph.D.; Campbell B. Read, Ph.D.; Peer Reviewers
  02.12.05 BLOWN TO SMITHEREENS: Mitofsky's "Reluctant Bush Responder" Theory —TruthIsAll
  
  05.21.05 Patterns of Exit Poll Discrepancies - Working Paper —USCountVotes.org - National Election Data Archive
  07.05.05 It's a shutout: FRAUD 3 , rBr 0 —TruthIsAll
  07.09.05 EXIT POLL RESPONSE OPTIMIZER: KEY RESULTS —TruthIsAll
  10.16.05 CLINCHER III: EXIT POLL RESPONSE OPTIMIZER: KEY RESULTS —TruthIsAll
  "This analysis confirms the USCV simulation...Bye, bye rBr: ..."
  07.29.05 Response Optimizer analysis of State Exit Polls [DU post & comments] —[PI post & comments] —TruthIsAll
  09.08.05 The 2004 Presidential Election: Exit Poll Error or Vote Miscount? —USCountVotes.org - National Election Data Archive
  08.13.06 Exit poll non-responders: the income factor means it's rKr, not rBr... —TruthIsAll
  
  
• 02.15.05 A Corrupted Election —Despite what you may have heard, the exit polls were right —Steve Freeman & Josh Mitteldorf