Wednesday, August 16, 2006

McKinney And Those Evil Electronic Voting Machines

From the AP comes this story.


Rep. Cynthia McKinney, in her first public appearance since losing her re-election bid last week, said Tuesday that the black community needs to oppose electronic voting machines, which she warned can be used to steal elections.

Why is it that anytime a Democrat loses an election, it's the fault of the voting machines? I do not suppose that Cindy would for a minute consider that slugging a Capitol Policeman, saying that George Bush has advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, or being openly anti-semitic had something to do with her defeat at the polls?

The complaint about paper ballots in 2000, led to the electronic machines. Who led that charge? Democrats. Now, who complains the loudest about electronic machines? Democrats. Lose the election, then complain about the voting.

McKinney also said the state of Georgia should prohibit crossover voting among political parties in primary elections and end its system of runoff elections.

The same principle applies here. Would she even raise this question if she had won? She didn't get a majority in the first primary, so she went to a runoff and lost. I bet if she had won the runoff, this would not be an issue either.
The fiery Democratic congresswoman, who scuffled with a Capitol Hill police officer earlier this year and has accused the Bush administration of having advance knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks, said she considers herself a "black political paramedic," and the "black body politic is near comatose."

Hank Johnson is black. How can the "black body politic" be near comatose, when her rival was black too? Is this her way of saying Mr. Johnson is an Uncle Tom? Talk about sour grapes here.

She has squarely pointed the finger at everyone in this scenario, except herself. She was the incumbent. She lost. The voters rejected her. Period, end of statement. There is no legitimate excuse that she can offer that will change that.

My suggestion to her is to move on with her life, find a job in the private sector, and stay out of politics altogether. Then we will see how long she will last with her blame everyone but herself, attitude. We will see just how long she will last, after slugging a security officer in a private company.

9 comments:

Lex said...

Even nutcases are entitled to accurate vote counts. And it isn't just Dems who have complained. There was a case in Virginia involving a Republican primary.

Just sayin'.

-- Lex
editor, "Black Box Voting"
Republican since 1978

LASunsett said...

Lex,

//Even nutcases are entitled to accurate vote counts. And it isn't just Dems who have complained.There was a case in Virginia involving a Republican primary.//

I am not saying there is not an occasional instance, where a Republican complains about the voting machines.

I am not saying that only GOPs deserve accurate vote counting.

But the overall VAST majority or candidates that do the complaining ARE Dems, and it's AFTER they lose.

Lex said...

I'd like some factual proof of that claim.

My work on the book suggests that there are large numbers of people out there -- GOP, Democratic and unaffiliated -- who believe this is a serious problem. However, the politicians making the most noise about FIXING the problem (as opposed to complaining that they was robbed) are, for whatever reason, mostly Democrats.

And a large majority of cases documented by co-authors Bev Harris and David Allen through Nexis searches did redound to the benefit of Republicans/detriment of Democrats when there was a party difference at issue. Absent additional evidence I presume that this fact is simply a matter of random chance, but fact it remains. And the fact only becomes obvious in hindsight -- that is, after elections. That's part of the problem with electronic voting machines: You can't always look at them during an election and tell there's a problem unless, say, a candidate's name just flat doesn't show up onscreen.

A mandatory and robust auditing procedure, drawing on best practices from such industries as banking and the casino-security industry, is the best approach. Paperless electronic voting machines are incompatible with such a system. And given the importance of the issue, this is something everyone, regardless of party, ought to be able to get behind.

Mark said...

What is not surprising is that McKinney is playing the race card.
That is her stock in trade.
Last time she lost, she claimed it was the fault of the Jews.

This time, it's the evil "White Man" and his Uncle Tom stand in.

She's all about the hating.

LASunsett said...

Lex,

Want proof? Research it, for yourself. Better yet, just wait until after the November election. We will all see who does the loudest complaining.

No system is perfect. Bitching about the system after the fact, does no good. There always has been a potential for fraud, paper or paperless.

But you are missing my larger point here. Cynthia McKinney lost. Now she blames the system(s). She blames the balloting, the Georgia voting laws, and and ultimately she blames the white man. Where is your argument on that?

Lex said...

Uh, I said she was a nutcase. We're not arguing on that point.

As for the whole voting-machine issue, Read the book.

LASunsett said...

Lex,

//Uh, I said she was a nutcase. We're not arguing on that point.//

Understood.

Electronic balloting presents a certain kind of problem, as does paper ones. These things have been going on for the entire history of democracy, in some form or fashion. There are from time to time, some groups that will always seek to manipulate the vote. Sda as it may be, that's a fact.

But that said, I think it is important to note that since the complaints of 2000, there was this big push to go electronic, with many not realizing the problems that would be encountered.

Do I think you have to get it as close to right as you can? Yes. But do I think that you can eliminate all forms of error and fraud? No. Realistically, you cannot. You can try, but when it's all said and done, the results are the results.

Look at the years the dead have voted in large urban areas, like Chicago. Look at the other things that happen not due to fraud, things like machine failure. It happens everytime. I do not dispute that.

What I do dispute is that when an election is lost on its merits, you cannot do what McKinney is doing and complain. That's my main point. And many times a candidate will challenge as a measure of sour grapes, not because of any valid complaint.

When that happens, you tie the whole system up for nothing. Do that enough times on a national level and you get what we had in Florida, with the chads.

No, Lex. Do not misunderstand me here. Count the votes. And if need be, count them again. But once that is done, do not keep harping about it. It's going to happen. If something is discovered, then fine, I have no problem with correcting it.

G_in_AL said...

Lex, for proof, research headlines from the last 2 Presidential elections, and the last 3 Congressional elections... count who cried foul on election day...


Mark:

Last time she lost, she claimed it was the fault of the Jews.

This time, it's the evil "White Man" and his Uncle Tom stand in.


That would explain her new relationship with The Nation of Islam...?

Always On Watch said...

I wonder what private-sector company or organization would hire McKinney? Maybe the Nation of Islam.