Let the vote stealing begin.

[Lwood]

Check this out. www.drudgereport.com/vote1.htm

[Gorf]

As it turns out the voting machines in question have counters on the back that indicate how many times the machines have been used.

They're not indicators of how many votes any particular candidate has received.

Frankly, I'd think a voting machine that has any visible indication of how many votes any candidates have received would be very poorly designed if not illegal.

We have those nice "mark / sense" school test type paper ballots here. You fill in your ovals using provided markers, slide your ballot into a holder that covers all but that last half inch or so of the ballot, take it over to the scanner that snarfs it out of the holder and no one but you sees your selections or the number of votes any candidates have received.

[Lwood]

I read a post on a different board that said the votes were for Bush from the last election. I almost choked I was laughing so hard. What an idiot. Like the machines haven't been used since 2000.

[Gorf]

I guess I'd think its just as idiotic for people at the Drudge Report to think that a voting booth would actually visibly show vote counts for any candidates.

[Lwood]

The said:

I guess I'd think its just as idiotic for people at the Drudge Report to think that a voting booth would actually visibly show vote counts for any candidates.

The Drudge report when I read it did not indicate who the votes were for. The spin doctors went to work on the Drudge report and put out the story that the votes were for Bush.

[Gorf]

I thought the Drudge Report was assuming they were Kerry votes, but you may well be right.