Richard Guy Briggs  wrote:
>"If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines"
>by Thom Hartmann
>Six years later Hagel ran again, this time against Democrat Charlie Matulka
>in 2002, and won in a landslide. As his website says, Hagel
>"was re-elected to his second term in the United States Senate on November
>5, 2002 with 83% of the vote. That represents the biggest political victory
>in the history of Nebraska."
>What Hagel's website fails to disclose is that about 80 percent of those
>votes were counted by computer-controlled voting machines put in place by
>the company affiliated with Hagel. Built by that company. Programmed by that

Breathless speculation aside, it oughtn't be that hard to test whether
Hagel's victory was credible.  Surely there were some polls of the voters.
You would think that if there was significant fraud through compromised
voting machines, then this fact would be very noticeable in the polls.
Does anyone know whether there is any evidence to back up these
allegations that Hagel's election results were fraudulent, or is this
article just blowing smoke?

I agree that we ought to take voting fraud seriously, and I'm very
critical of e-voting.  However, we also ought to get the facts, all the
facts, and to get them right.

The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to