Quote:People don't want to believe they are being defrauded, so they don't believe it. Like nice little sheep.
It's been known, conclusively, for over two years now that the Diebold voting machine system is insecure and open to more than one form of attack. And yet we used them anyways, in many cases b/c it was 'too expensive' to replace with a system which prints out a paper reciept.
Surely you remember that this is the same company that delivered the Great State of Nebraska into the hands of Chuck Hagel - Republican Senator, and former CEO of Diebold - who defeated the long-time democratic opponent in DIRECT contradiction of the exit polling numbers?
Although the last couple of posts have made a strong showing about the technical weaknesses of the Diebold machines, that doesn't imply foul play. This wouldn't be the first time that our government purchased shoddy equipment without doing a proper cost-benefit analysis. What does all of this prove? Not much. Nor am I convinced that a CEO who publicly endorses a candidate should automatically be suspected of major criminal activity. For a company with as many employees as Diebold to actually engage in voter fraud would be an enormously risky and difficult feat; a feat that no rational CEO (no matter his political preferences) would attempt. And that said, you would try to convince us that he not only attempted this feat, but publicly and fearlessly stated his intentions?
As a parting note, I don't think that Hagel and Bush would be able to share a conspiracy. That's about as likely as an Osama and Saddam lovefest (another irrational conspiracy theory). It doesn't make any sense.