Candidate: Zero Vote Tally Off - by 1

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SeaFox, Nov 13, 2006.

  1. SeaFox macrumors 68020

    SeaFox

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere Else
    #1
  2. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #2
    Sounds like the ballot was confusing...

    How many votes did Pat Buchanan get?


    Could you imagine if they start playing around with the voting machines and find out that Diebold really is changing/re-assigning votes in an effort to aid a particular party/candidate? All of the elections in the past 6 years called in to question due to a town of 80 people and only 36 votes? I'm not saying that I believe Diebold is actually doing this but isn't it usually something stupid like this that can undo the biggest conspiracies?

    I mean everyone knows you don't start re-assigning votes until there are at least 10,000 people who voted and you never zero out a candidate, you don't go any lower than 5 for a candidate since it's entirely feasible that they would know 5 people who are definitely going to vote for them.
     
  3. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #3
    So does this mean the Dems won way more than we thought? :p Or have the conspirators suddenly switched parties? :eek: Maybe it was just a bunch of hackers pissed off at the neocons.

    Seriously though, somebody really should look into this. This might actually be a good thing for the Dems to do. Make them look good while they're ahead. If they promise to look into this now after winning, it will be harder for the opposition to claim bias. I doubt they would stop them either, because it would make them look guilty of something, and would be pretty stupid after losing as much as they did.

    If the Dems lose more than they should in '08, I know we'd wonder, but by then it'd be too late.
     

Share This Page