Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Netcraft Shows Smartech Running Ohio Election Servers

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the something-rotten-in-the-state-of-Ohio dept.

Republicans 688

goombah99 writes "Netcraft is showing that an event happened in the Ohio 2004 election that is difficult to explain. The Secretary of State's website, which handles election reporting, normally is directed to an Ohio-based IP address hosted by the Ohio Supercomputer Center. On Nov. 3 2004, Netcraft shows the website pointing out of state to a server owned by Smartech Corp. According to the American Registry on Internet Numbers, Smartech's block of IP addresses 64.203.96.0 – 64.203.111.255 encompasses the entire range of addresses owned by the Republican National Committee. Smartech hosted the recently notorious gbw43.com domain used from the White House in apparent violation of the Presidential Records Act, from which thousands of White House emails vanished." Update: 04/25 01:24 GMT by KD : ePluribus Media published a piece called Ken Blackwell Outsources Ohio Election Results to GOP Internet Operatives, Again on election eve 2006, when a similar DNS switch to Smartech occurred. They have been investigating the larger story of IT on Capitol Hill and elsewhere for two years.

cancel ×

688 comments

Breaking News (4, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858445)

The President announced today that he as complete faith in the Ohio Supercomputer Center, Smartech Corp. and the RNC, which utterly destroys any remaining credibility they may have had left.

The longer this fellow stays in office, the more he resembles Richard M. Nixon, IMHO.

Nixon is not dead. How do I know? Always two there are, a Master and an Apprentice.

Re:Breaking News (-1, Offtopic)

Atlantic Wall (847508) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858489)

MOD PARENT +100000000000

Re:Breaking News (4, Funny)

Khaed (544779) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858627)

Fuck.

AOLers found /.

Re:Breaking News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18859173)

Pointing and shouting "Ewwww, AOL'ers!" is soooooo last century.

Re:Breaking News (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858663)

Are you kidding?

Bush makes Nixon look like a shiny, white pussy cat without a speck of dirt on him.

Bush. Worst. President. Ever.

Re:Breaking News (-1, Flamebait)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858789)

Are you kidding?

Bush makes Nixon look like a shiny, white pussy cat without a speck of dirt on him.

Bush. Worst. President. Ever.


Is that all it takes to get mod-points here at slashdot, saying Bush=Bad? No reasons, no explanation, nothing but "Bush. Worst. President. Ever."

I guess this AC is too young to remember Carter, does not have a job (therefor unable to participate in the Best. Economy. Ever) and didn't pay attention in the history classes my tax dollars provide him.

Re:Breaking News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858877)

I remember Carter VERY well. Why would you consider him worse than Bush?

Re:Breaking News (-1, Troll)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859159)

I remember Carter VERY well. Why would you consider him worse than Bush?

Where do I begin:

Carter was more in the "Religious Right's" pocket than Bush ever will be. Were visiting dignitaries allowed a glass of wine with dinner while visiting the White House in 1978? Nope! Alcohol was banned in the White House by Carter.

Average mortgage rates during the Carter administration were over 15%! I don't even pay credit cards 15%!!!

Inflation was through the roof (12%).

Unemployment was high (7%).

Deficit spending went through the roof (the deficit for the fiscal year 1979 totaled $27.7 billion, and that for 1980 was nearly $59 billion).

Devaluation of the dollar.

Gas shortages.

Iranian hostage crisis.

Failure to rescue Iranian hostages.

Demoralization and dismantling of the US military

Canceled the B1-B program as well as the MBT-70. (Both badly needed to compete with our enemy of the time... the Soviets who had the T-72 and the Tu-160 BLACKJACK)

Need I go on?

Carter wasn't all bad, however. He did mediate a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt that is still in effect today.

It's actually kind of sad. Carter was probably the most intelligent president in US history. He just sucked as president. I can't say it was all his fault, but things were better when he took office than when he left and things were much, MUCH better after four years of Reagan.

Re:Breaking News (1, Insightful)

fredrated (639554) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859283)

Actually you do need to go on, but please don't.

"Failure to rescue Iranian hostages."

Excuse me? Don't you remember that they came out alive? Is there some better outcome that you expected? I bet I know what it is, we didn't bomb, strafe and kill to get the hostages back, and that makes you mad. Of course if we did then almost certainly many of the hostages would have been killed as a result, but hey, YOU weren't a hostage, and not killing to get them back makes you mad. What a monstrosity, no wonder you love Bush.

Re:Breaking News (1, Flamebait)

galenoftheshadows (828940) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858929)

Except that this is not the Best. Economy. Ever.

Employment is still low, stock is still down, petroleum products are still horribly expensive.

Oh yeah, and we're still entrenched in a losing battle with terrorism.

What a great time to be alive and ignorant . . .

Re:Breaking News (1, Flamebait)

omeomi (675045) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859141)

Is that all it takes to get mod-points here at slashdot, saying Bush=Bad? No reasons, no explanation, nothing but "Bush. Worst. President. Ever."

What other president lied to start a war that has killed more than 3000 American troops?

What other president's administration has called the Geneva Convention "Quaint" and "Obsolete"?

What other president has actually defended torture?

What other president has overseen the arrest of innocent people (there have been "enemy combatants" released with their charges dropped), holding them for years as "enemy combatants" without any right to habeas corpus?

What other president has overseen warrant-less NSA and FBI wiretaps?

Re:Breaking News (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859209)

Ahh, Carter. I remember something he used once. Starts with a 'd' but hard for me to remember, not used much today. Oh yes, diplomacy.

Camp David Accord anyone?

Sure, he did some things that didn't sit well. Pardoning draft dodgers was a mixed bag. Letting the Shah of Iran in for cancer treatment didn't really help his legacy much either, leading to the hostage crisis. But would you say John Adams was horrible simply because of the XYZ Affair with France?

Re:Breaking News (1)

visualight (468005) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859227)

Best economy ever (in my lifetime rather) was under Clinton, Bush is the worst President EVER, and STFU about Carter, he's the only honest President you've known.

Re:Breaking News (1)

visualight (468005) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859291)

yes, that was a bit reactionary, sorry.

Re:Breaking News (1, Funny)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859013)

You say Bush and Pussy like it's a bad thing.

Re:Breaking News (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858685)

No, he easily surpasses Nixon by leaps and bounds. And what's more, Nixon knew when he was breaking laws and doing shady things. This president seems to believe he's doing exactly what he's "allowed" to do and is operating within his rights.

It would be an interesting question to ask the president whether he thought Nixon was a shady character as president and whether Nixon's activities and actions were of a questionable if not illegal behavior. Could he agree with History's assessment of Nixon while at the same time continue to claim he is within his rights and is acting in the best interest of the nation?

Re:Breaking News (2, Insightful)

CogDissident (951207) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858777)

Well, untill someone actually says "no, you can't do that", then he really DOES have the ability to do whatever he wants.

Example:
Shooting someone is illegal, yet you go out into times square and shoot someone in the face. A cop comes out and looks at the dead guy, looks at you, and sort of shrugs and walks off. Do you feel like you broke the law? What if you do it every day before work, and eventually a cop says "Hey, maybe it'd be a good idea to stop shooting people". Did you break the law then?

We really haven't done anything to show Bush that he is anything less than an absolute monarch in his kingdom.

Re:Breaking News (0, Offtopic)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858883)

We really haven't done anything to show Bush that he is anything less than an absolute monarch in his kingdom.

So Bush decreed that private investment of personal Social Security funds thing and that drilling in ANWR thingie as supreme law?

Some monarch!

Re:Breaking News (0, Offtopic)

Moridin42 (219670) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859215)

Its funny how the audubon society opposes drilling in the ANWR.. Yet they allow oil drilling in their own privately owned wildlife preserves. Of course they do get paid for that..

Re:Breaking News (2)

stewwy (687854) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858703)

Having lived through both I think you'll find that Nixon was a LOT more honourable, at least he bowed out (eventually). I think the only way this one will leave is kicking and screaming.

Re:Breaking News (1, Insightful)

EvilTwinSkippy (112490) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858795)

Richard Nixon? You should call Mrs. Nixon and apologize. Richard Nixon may have been a crook, BUT HE WAS A COMPETANT CROOK. GWB doesn't hold a candle to Nixon.

At this point GWB is neck and neck with Harding for worst.

Re:Breaking News (4, Interesting)

profplump (309017) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859067)

That's not fair -- Nixon was actually a pretty effective president. People only remember the resignation, but he was able to push through a large number of domestic policy changes and had a foreign policy that extended beyond Vietman. Whether or not you agree with his politics (and be sure you know what they are before you make that decision), and the crimes he helped cover up, you should at least respect his effectiveness in the office.

Misunderstanding (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858463)

Your own submission answers your question.

Nothing "changed" or was "transferred". http://election.sos.state.oh.us/ [state.oh.us] is a special web site in operation for elections. Otherwise, it points to http://www.sos.state.oh.us/ [state.oh.us] as it does now. It appears that the State of Ohio contracted with SmartTech for hosting, processing, and dissemination of the election results via the special elections web site, when it is in operation.

That probably won't be a good enough answer for people, though. Regardless, it appears that SmartTech has obvious ties to the Republican Party, and hosts many sites for various Republican political interests. The Secretary of State of Ohio is a partisan political position. This doesn't mean there aren't questions that can be raised or points to be debated.

The sad truth is that partisans are involved in just about every aspect of the voting and elections process, and that's not going to change, ever.

Witness the decades-old joke from Democratic stronghold cities: "Why did the Democrat walk into the cemetery? To thank his voters."

It's April 2007. Anyone who believes the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (or not) isn't going to change what they think now.

Re:Misunderstanding (2, Interesting)

rlp (11898) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858639)

Interesting. Perhaps the Secretary of State was merely contracting out to a site that could handle the unusual volume that an election site would experience during a highly contested election.

Wait, what am I thinking? No, it's more evidence of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Re:Misunderstanding (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858665)

The sad truth is that partisans are involved in just about every aspect of the voting and elections process, and that's not going to change, ever.

Witness the decades-old joke from Democratic stronghold cities: "Why did the Democrat walk into the cemetery? To thank his voters."

It's April 2007. Anyone who believes the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (or not) isn't going to change what they think now.

Selected quotes on the topic from various sources:

"'Stolen' is such an ugly word... 'purchased' is much closer to the truth." - B. L. Zeebub, RNC Campaign Chief

"Shocked... I'm shocked to find out that we didn't think of it first!" - Lou Cipher, DNC Campaign Chief

Welcome to the world of 21st Century Politics-As-Usual.

Re:Misunderstanding (5, Insightful)

Jeian (409916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858683)

Save your logical explanations... Slashdot wants a conspiracy, so they're going to see a conspiracy.

Re:Misunderstanding (5, Insightful)

tedshultz (596089) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858719)

It's April 2007. Anyone who believes the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (or not) isn't going to change what they think now.
Thats not true at all. In 2004 I thought all the people who were saying the election was stolen were crazy tin foil hat types. The more I learn, the more I realize that it is much more likely that I was the blind sheep type. No one is debating that lots of non standard and illegal activities took place during the 2004 election, the only question is how wide spread, and how well organized those activities were. The more stories that come out, the more people will start to change their minds.
--crazy tin foil hat guy

Re:Misunderstanding (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858807)

And his point is made by your posting...sheesh

Re:Misunderstanding (4, Insightful)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858965)

I've looked into a lot of these claims, and most of them are nonsense.

I personally debunked the UC Berkeley study (cough) which "proved" the Flordia results were rigged. Though they hid it in a bunch of technical nonsense, essentially what they said was that they had a model to predict the outcome of results in Florida (based on past elections in 1996 and 2000) and since the 2004 numbers were different from what they expected, the results were rigged. QED.

Needless to say, this is complete hokum, and they should have been laughed out of the room instead of published.

Seems to me there's more evidence for a vast left wing conspiracy. :p

Parent mangled the joke... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858983)

"When I die, I want to be buried in Chicago"

"Why?"

"So I can stay politically active!"

Re:Misunderstanding (3, Insightful)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859167)

While it hardly is a smoking gun, it does create situation so ripe for exploitation that it's proper to second guess the logic of the SOS's decision. There are other checks on the vote totals, but there's still problems if someone can adjust the reporting. Perhaps this is obvious but if you are planning any monkey business running the reporting site gives you the opportunity to see the data before anyone else knows and to delay posting it. Buys time and tells you exactly the minimum number of votes that have to be intercepted up-stream. (It's kinda like the plot of the movie the Sting, where horse racing results were delayed). Even if one is not planning to try to manipulate the precinct totals there's other values. For example, Early and large misreports in the florida election had Gore planning a concession prematurely (he eventually did concede of course). And perceived swings in east coast voting may possibly affect west coast voting turn-out.

Finally, there's other potential problems. As I said there are other checks on the votes, but it seems they really are not in use. Ohio was such a mess that it still is hard to match up precinct totals with final totals. Some of this is due to artifacts in the way they attribute absentee votes to precincts as virtual voters causing more apparent votes than voters signing in. In other cases the discrepancies in the poll books go the other way. And in some cases precincts post "corrected" total late. Now you might think a person could get all the data and sort it all out. But the fact is that in practice this is not really possible. There just never seems to be one set of books. If you go to many web sites to day, New Mexico, for example, you can do the addition yourself and find that the sum of the precinct totals on the SOS's website is not the sum of the election, and some counties had more votes than voters while others had undervotes in the tens of percent. In fact there are even errors that simply are accepted because the canvassing board accepted them.

Ordinary citizens usually don't have standing to contest elections. And it can literally be expensive for candidates to do so. Generally they don't get back any bonds they put up unless the election actually changes outcome. And with electronic voting they become more reluctant to do so since theirs nothing to recount (and so the totals won't change).

Thus in a close election changing the vote totals at the "top" is not even a completely crazy notion since it's in practice hard to verify.

For these reasons it's imperative that the vote counting system not have egreious opportunities to inflame partisan suspicions. It does not matter so much what was done, if anything, but if it expanded the opportunity for this to be done. Perceptions matter a lot.

In this case some reports say the crew that set up this site was the same one now being accused of the phone jamming dirty tricks against the DNC. So it's not really so far fetched to be suspicious.

Partisans are one thing but crooked partisans ? (1)

cyberianpan (975767) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859255)

Fine nobody is truly neutral, partisans will always be involved, problem is that their involvment in gbw43.com suggests that Smartech may have crossed the line & become crooked. Until the gbw43.com issue is resolved this is an interesting open issue. Even if the gbw43.com is resolved finding Smartech folk in the criminal wrong this doesn't mean that Ohio had its books cooked but... often you see the smoke first & you gotta step up your vigilance at that point, maybe it's just a flash in the pan but maybe not- this will need to be investigated further.

Re:Misunderstanding (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859299)

It's April 2007. Anyone who believes the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (or not) isn't going to change what they think now.

The problem is getting those of you who think otherwise to look at the evidence.

Netcraft confirms it! (5, Funny)

Nimey (114278) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858477)

The Republican Party is dying.

Re:Netcraft confirms it! (1, Insightful)

roguefugu (979727) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858557)

Please tag this and similar articles ``nixon''!

Re:Netcraft confirms it! (4, Funny)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858623)

Next:

-But who confirms Netcraft? (5, Funny)

-In Soviet Russia, Netcraft confirms YOU! (5, Funny)

-That doesn't even make sense, dude. (5, Funny)

The RNC ... (2, Funny)

fossa (212602) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858863)

... will it blend?

Re:Netcraft confirms it! (1)

Sneakernets (1026296) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858779)

It is now official. Netcraft confirms: RNC is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Repubican party when analysists confirmed that the president's approval rating has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all serious gun-totin' republicans. Coming on the heels of a recent find which found RNC running Ohio Election servers, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. The GOP is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Alberto Gonzales testimony.

You don't need to be Barrack Obama to predict the GOP's future. The hand writing is on the bill: RNC faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for The GOP because the GOP is dying. Things are looking very bad for the good old red. As many of us are already aware, The GOP continues to lose congress seats. Red states flow like a river of blood.

All major surveys show that The Bush Administration has steadily declined in approval. The RNC is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If the RNC is to survive at all it will be among Hunting clubs and the Ku Klux Klan. The Republican party continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, The elephant is dead. Fact: Microsoft is dying

Re:Netcraft confirms it! (1)

Sneakernets (1026296) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858859)

haha, I didn't see that last thing at the end.

*writes note to self to use the damned preview button!*

I wish! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858857)

Nuff' said.

Accountability, bah. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858517)

All in favour of investigating this?

*Half of democrats and no republicans raise their hands*

All opposed?

*No democrats and every republican raise their hands*

No need to investigate then. Nothing to see here, move along!

How reliable is the data? (3, Insightful)

dougoxley (688508) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858561)

I have some questions...

1. How reliable is the Netcraft data? What would it take to hack Netcraft and make it look like there was a hack of the Ohio SOS?

2. What information do we have that the election.sos.state.oh.us domain was a part of the election procedures during the 2004 election?

3. Was the April 2006 change during a primary election?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Re:How reliable is the data? (5, Informative)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858613)

The "change" is because the elections web site is only in operation for elections. Its operation was contracted to SmartTech by the Ohio Secretary of State. There was no "hack". Partisans and partisan companies are involved in the elections and voting process. The key is having enough oversight to keep everyone honest.

Re:How reliable is the data? (1)

dougoxley (688508) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858675)

The "change" is because the elections web site is only in operation for elections. Its operation was contracted to SmartTech by the Ohio Secretary of State. There was no "hack". Partisans and partisan companies are involved in the elections and voting process. The key is having enough oversight to keep everyone honest.

You're right... Calling the switch a "hack" was too strong for the evidence we have at the moment.

I stand corrected.

Re:How reliable is the data? (4, Interesting)

glassesmonkey (684291) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858953)

What a horrible version of this story to pick. There are many submission with the whole story, but only this one is chosen.. How very /.


This was submitted yesterday when this was still news:

"The Free Press is reporting [freepress.org] how the IT company that provides Rove's emails and RNC websites, also hosted Ohio's 2004 election results. The country results were sent to Ohio's Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, and those results were hosted on a SMARTech webserver in TN. Blackwell had the IT guys switch the DNS [epluribusmedia.org] on election night in order to accomplish a man-in-the-middle [wikipedia.org] exploit on election results."

Netcraft confirms... (1, Flamebait)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858575)

Netcraft confirms: Democracy is dead.

Seriously though, this is a rather strange turn of events. And given the Bush administration's history of explaining such strange events, I don't expect a civil debate coming out of this.

Ryan Fenton

Re:Netcraft confirms... (1, Troll)

Tuna_Shooter (591794) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858645)

It seems the tinfoil hat crowd is at it again. Nothing (and i mean nothing) to see here please move along

Re:Netcraft confirms... (3, Funny)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859071)

I expect it to stay civil, this is the internet after all and we can't have people acting a fool on this thing otherwise some busybody will try to legislate some controls into place.

Actually Aaron Russo confirms it (0)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859117)

America Freedom to Fascism:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-431273027 7175242198 [google.com]

-Near the end they show a guy giving testimony that he can rig elections with electronic voting machines (old news for us /.'ers)
-voting makes no difference. The same elite still call the shots (and no "lobbying" required!)

-It gets worse...
-Banks print money and charges the US Gov. interest.
-Corp taxes ==> Military (as per constitution)
-Fed Pers income taxes ==> disappears (900+Billion)
-Fort Knox gold has not been audited in decades
-It gets worse, still.

I fail to understand... (5, Insightful)

Barkmullz (594479) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858579)


...why this is revelant. This sounds like an association fallacy [wikipedia.org] to me.

Re:I fail to understand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858711)

There is a difference between association and context. This falls within the context of the greatest torrent of corruption, scandal, and federal-level crime the nation has ever seen, involving these very people.

Here's the difference:

If I am sitting in a public room with a gangster, you can't reasonably assume that I am a gangster.

However, if I am sitting in a private room behind a known mafia front shop with ten gangsters at 4:00 am and there's a corpse laying in the corner, you are probably safe in assuming that I am a gangster.

Re:I fail to understand... (1)

polar red (215081) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858793)

indeed, but this will stimulate a further lack of confidence in the results of upcoming elections - bad news for democracy : a democratic government can only rule by grace of the populace.

Re:I fail to understand... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858889)

Good thing the US is a republic, not a democracy then huh :)

Obvious . . . (3, Insightful)

Dausha (546002) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858587)

"Can anyone suggest a good explanations (sic) for this seemingly dubious election-eve transfer?"

Somebody obviously hacked the Netcraft server to make it look like the Republicans were so stupid as to try to steal an election by using their own block of IPs. It also seems amazing that the GOP would wait until the last minute to change the DNS, as it can sometimes take a bit longer than expected for such a transfer to properly propagate. Heck, if they were smart enough to steal an election by changing the DNS, why not spoof the entry to make it look like it pointed to the Democrat Party?

Re:Obvious . . . (0, Troll)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859081)

Why? Because the Democrats didn't have a FAKE ELECTION RESULTS SERVER in operation on their network, that's why.

I'm not saying they did, I'm just pointing out the implication of a fake election results server by this conspiracy theory.

yea, definitely (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859177)

And some socialist had put Reichstag on fire back in 1933.

dont make believe. it is the mechanism that allows democracies to go down the drain.

if there is something fishy about something, then there IS something fishy there. and there are nothing non-fishy about last 2 elections republicans - excuse me, not republicans, but bush republicans - won. they are totally 'fishful'.

Re:Obvious . . . (2, Informative)

aftk2 (556992) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859297)

Democrat party?

You fail at political dialogue.

Yawn (5, Insightful)

pudge (3605) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858593)

There is no evidence of any kind that any votes we changed through this server "switch" bullshit, or that even if it DID happen, that it possibly could have or would have gone undetected. The counties would surely have seen that their reported results were not what was being reported by the state. If there was going to be fraud, it would have had to happen at the county level, and if it happened there, then why bother to do it at the state level?

This doesn't even pass the smell test.

As the Democrats' own statistician, Jasjeet Sekhon, who coauthored their 2004 post-election report said:

More voters supported Bush in Ohio in 2004 than Kerry. There is no scientific evidence that they did not. There were some irregularities (such as the allocation of voting machines), but they were not large enough to change the outcome. Bush won in 2004; Democrats have to admit that he really did if they are to fix their electoral problems much like how an alcoholic fist has to admit that s/he has a problem.

Re:Yawn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858661)

.. any votes we changed ..

Ha ha, yeah that's about right.

Re:Yawn (1)

Lord Bitman (95493) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858731)

I admit that Bush won the Ohio election.
That said, I'd just like the point out the irony in:
"We have detected an irregularity!" => "Can't be! It is very unlikely such a thing would go undetected!"

Re:Yawn (1)

pudge (3605) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859121)

I'd just like the point out the irony in:
"We have detected an irregularity!" => "Can't be! It is very unlikely such a thing would go undetected!"
There are irregularities, and there are irregularities.

The ones Sekhon was referring to were things like long lines due to unequal voting machine allocation (which, he noted, were not entirely unreasonable allocations given data registration and previous election data). Those irregularities existed, but were not significant (according to Sekhon).

The irregularities here are simple vote totals not adding up between county reports and state reports, which would absolutely be detected.

oh come on now. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859137)

More voters supported Bush in Ohio in 2004 than Kerry. There is no scientific evidence that they did not.


is there ANY scientific evidence that they did ?

and the democrat statistician used what ? reports from organizations, county offices that were handled by republicans ?

Re:Yawn (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18859205)

You really shouldn't be posting things with factual references that make sense under a thread like this. Bad form; all Slashdot political discussions are reserved for ad hominem attacks and mindless cant.

Wel, Duh, the only explanation. (-1, Flamebait)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858657)

Can anyone suggest a good explanations for this seemingly dubious election-eve transfer?"

It was done to steal the election. What else is new?

Re:Wel, Duh, the only explanation. (1)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859027)

Why is the parent post moderated flamebait?! It's a perfectly realistic possibility in the current climate and it's the obvious implication of the story, to the extent that it's ironically redundant in that it states the obvious.

ken blackwell said... (0, Flamebait)

teh_chrizzle (963897) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858659)

that the election (and by proxy the election website) was not tampered with and that there was no need for a recount. what more proof do you people need?

Wierd (1, Offtopic)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858687)

Wierd things:

1)The smart tech site IP address is the first one listed by netcraft. From the link, you can't tell what it was before that.

2) It switched back to smartech on april 22, of last year as seen below.

SMARTECH CORPORATION PO BOX 11181 Chattanooga TN US 37401 64.203.98.137 Windows 2000 Microsoft-IIS/5.0 22-Apr-2006

Is that significant in any way?

3) Smartech uses Windows. That's neither smart, nor tech. Discuss amongst yourselves.

4) Firefox informs me that wierd is not the correct spelling of "weird".

I before e, except after c, except in weigh?

Does that mean its supposed to be pronounced way-rd. Now that is wierd.

Re:Wierd (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858949)

Firefox informs me that wierd is not the correct spelling of "weird". I before e, except after c, except in weigh?
"I before E, except after C, or when sounded as 'A,' as in neighbor or weigh." But I always learned it as "I before E, except after C, unless it's weird." That pretty much encompasses all the exceptions.

Re:Wierd (5, Informative)

jkauzlar (596349) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858969)

Search for wierd [google.com] :

Did you mean: weird

Even more interesting is that the search for 'weird' and 'smartech' eventually leads to this interesting blog post [neomeme.net] which lists "Strange Domains Registered by the RNC"

  • africanamericansforbush.com
  • arabamericansforbush.com
  • asianamericansforbush.com
  • catholicsforbush.com
  • conservationistsforbush.com
  • democratsforbush.com
  • farmersandranchersforbush.com
  • jewishbushteam.com
  • laborforbush.com
  • militaryfamiliesforbush.com
  • nativeamericansforbush.com
  • sportsmanforbush.com
  • wstandsforwomen.com (I liked this one :)

"After you've got your minority support locked away, you can then begin the attack ads:" (from the blog post)

  • democratflipflops.com
  • democratscaretactics.com
  • demsagenda.com
  • imaliberal.com
  • liberalswantyourmoney.com
  • stophillarynow.com

"...and, of course, to anticipate attacks by grabbing(and squatting on) those domains first:" (from the blog post)

  • georgebushbites.com
  • georgebushbites.net
  • georgebushblows.net
  • georgebushsux.com
  • georgebushsux.net
  • georgewbushbites.com
  • georgewbushblows.net
  • georgewbushsucks.net

Re:Wierd (1)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859249)

4) Firefox informs me that wierd is not the correct spelling of "weird".

I before e, except after c, except in weigh?


I think the correct rhyme is something like "I before e, except after c or when sounding like a as in neighbor and weigh". Weird is an exception (there always seem to be exceptions in English) that the rhyme doesn't cover. Maybe we could add "and I'll pluck out your beard if you don't think of weird".

Cheaters. (0, Troll)

TheGeneration (228855) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858701)

The Republican party didn't win 2004's Presidential election legally. They cheated in many races. I was doing "Get Out The Vote" work in Nevada and witness the Republican intimidation tactics personally. When I saw the news coverage of what was happening in Ohio I wasn't surprised at all. Now there's this, once again, I'm not surprised. The Republicans targeted that state for election tampering and they won as a result. And yet there are Republicans who will defend this to no end. Who will reply to this and basically say "it doesn't matter that the RNC controlled the voting machines at every step, from design, software engineering, fabrication, delivery, vote tabulation, and result announcements!"

Our democracy is in great peril as long as these "win at all costs" idiots are in the game.

Re:Cheaters. (4, Informative)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858927)

Our democracy is in great peril as long as these "win at all costs" idiots are in the game.

Well, what a relief that the democrats would never stoop to grandstanding, using foreign money to fund campaigns, submit thousands of fraudulant voter registrations in key races, retain congressmen caught with $90k of bribe cash in their freezers (and put them on the Homeland Security oversight committee! you can't make stuff like that up!), etc. Do you REALLY think that the other party's habit of doing things like taking election cash from China as donations through a monestary in California DOESN'T count as "win at all costs?" You need a different complaint.

Re:Cheaters. (1)

TheGeneration (228855) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859277)

So, what you're saying is that two wrongs make a right? Or in the case of the Republican party a thousand wrongs and a handful of Democratic wrongs make a right?

Stop deflecting. Your party is vile.

Not stolen...rotted and decaying (1)

PinkPanther (42194) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858961)

Your democracy is not in peril because a handful of individuals might have swayed/stolen a percent or two of votes. There is no way that they stole more than that because it would be way too detectable.

So in essence, your "democracy" is in peril because people are not voting. Don't put the blame on the election system. The fact is that you needed to "Get The Vote Out"...your democracy isn't being stolen, it is decaying.

Re:Cheaters. (4, Insightful)

KiltedKnight (171132) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859019)

Our democracy is in great peril as long as these "win at all costs" idiots are in the game.
The problem is, they are in both of the major parties. They are both out to win at all costs and maintain or build their power bases. They are not concerned with doing the job they were sent there to do. They are more concerned with being reelected.

If you really want to do something, get a "no consecutive terms on Capitol Hill" law enacted in your own state. Make them come home and live under the laws they passed for the past two to six years while holding an elected office. Eliminate their special pension plans, forcing them to live under the same Social Security and Medicare plan they force everyone else to live under.

Change in the way our government works will not occur until the people wise up and realize they're being strung along with lots of lip service and "feel good" knee-jerk reaction laws.

I have no plans to hold my breath waiting for that change, however.

Re:Cheaters. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18859251)

Oh please. Like Democrats didn't do the very same thing. Remember how the tires on all vans the Republicans in some county had rented to take people to the polls were slashed the night before the election? And in all this US Attorney firing flap it came out that some of the people the DNC contracted to run a voter registration drive (in Utah, I think) had falsely registered children to vote.

I'm sure that some of the Republican operatives were not saints either, just as I'm sure that these sorts of things are not representative of most Democratic operatives. You are either beyond naive or willfully blinded if you think that this sort of stuff was one-sided.

I have a few explainations (1)

old7 (564621) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858705)

Can anyone suggest a good explanations for this seemingly dubious election-eve transfer?"
I have a few explainations, but none that would be legal, ethical or moral.

Which article? (2, Interesting)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858713)

Which link is responsible for this: "On Nov. 3 2004, Netcraft shows the website pointing out of state to a server owned by Smartech Corp."

I'm not questioning this necessarily, but with all of the links to evidence I'm confused why there was no link for this one...

Wrong IPs (4, Informative)

pudge (3605) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858733)

Ohio: 64.203.98.137
RNC: 64.203.98.0 - 64.203.98.127

There is no evidence presented that the RNC controlled the Ohio server in question. It fell outside the range.

Just neighbors. Borrowed a cup of sugar once. (1, Troll)

cpu_fusion (705735) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858921)

Yeah, they're just Internet neighbors who never talk. Pure coincidence. I think Ohio asked RNC for a cup of sugar once, but that's it.

Re:Wrong IPs (1)

hyperstation (185147) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859093)

pfft, and you people claim pudge never posted anything relevant...

Jeremy Allison said it best (5, Funny)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858735)

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.

Since the Internet is a series of tubes, either 1) anyone involved has no idea how it works, but got a free iPod for switching hosting facilities, or 2) its a plan by the geeks to throw the election, which, frankly, is better than the politicians throwing it.

as an Ohio resident... (3, Interesting)

otacon (445694) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858745)

this data doesn't mean that the RNC fixed the election, but what it could mean is that by having control over the voting reports to the public, they could infact hold back information or skew results before the votes were finalized and this could prevent a late rush to the polls from democrats fearing defeat.

Re:as an Ohio resident... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858979)

They're supposed to hold back information. No results are given until after the polls close.

The implications of this terrifies me. $ (0, Redundant)

starX (306011) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858759)

Am I alone?

Re:The implications of this terrifies me. $ (1)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859015)

Am I alone?

In being "terrified" that a web hosting company with extra capacity would be used to host a very busy site right before the traffic spikes during a large public event? "Terrified" that most people that run large businesses and are known to other people in a particular sector of industry or public affairs happen to be ... GASP! ... people who have their own public opinions? Why aren't you "terrified" of George Soros? Or, doesn't some guy with billions of dollars to spend swearing that his only purpose in life will be to influence an election bother you, since he's going to influence it in the way you personally want? Also: there may be a different brand of coffee in the office coffee maker today. I thought I'd warn you, so you wouldn't be terrified by the implications.

Re:The implications of this terrifies me. $ (2, Informative)

glassesmonkey (684291) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859037)

This is horrible to leave out the actual reporting on this and only link to the NetCraft "smoking gun". The mods here really, really suck. <Obvious>

This was first reported on by ePluribus Media back in Nov. 2006
Ken Blackwell Outsources Ohio Election Results to GOP Internet Operatives, Again [epluribusmedia.org]
And again summarized yesterday by Columbus Free Press
The GOP's cyber election hit squad [freepress.org]

Re:The implications of this terrifies me. $ (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859163)

No. There's lots of gullible, easily excited people here on Slashdot. You are not alone.

Date of RNC intrusion doesn't mesh with election (1)

b0bm00re (1059266) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858765)

I posted a comment on Democratic Underground attempting to explain this news in layman's terms.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa rd.php?az=view_all&address=203x471399 [democratic...ground.com]

One reply correctly pointed out that election was Nov. 2, not Nov. 4. Which makes the Nov. 3-Nov. 5 hosting service intrusion even more mysterious.

I will be reading with interest what you folks with real expertise can figure out about this.

smoking gun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18858785)

I say old chap -- is that gun still smoking?

Fascism in the USA (3, Insightful)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858815)

Today's Guardian [guardian.co.uk] includes this interesting piece entitled "Fascist America, in 10 easy steps". Guess how many steps down the path we are?

For the benefit of those who won't read it, here's the ten points.

  1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
  2. Create a gulag
  3. Develop a thug caste
  4. Set up an internal surveillance system
  5. Harass citizens' groups
  6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
  7. Target key individuals
  8. Control the press
  9. Dissent equals treason
  10. Suspend the rule of law

And in other news: Jessica Lynch [guardian.co.uk] comes out and condemns the Hollywood show they made of the incident she was involved in.

Re:Fascism in the USA (2, Insightful)

Jeian (409916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858977)

We did more than half of those things during WW2.

(We won WW2, by the way.)

Firehose (1)

mdsolar (1045926) | more than 7 years ago | (#18858985)

Look at the TOP of the firehose: there is another story from the Free Press that is ranked above all the stories on the main page. This one goes a lot further in its accusations.

So Ohio and RNC use the same host? So what? (4, Insightful)

HighOrbit (631451) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859003)

I don't think there is anything especially nefarious about a state agency and the RNC contracting for hosting with the same company. Big deal. They probably both buy stuff from Wal-Mart too. I think somebody with an axe to grind is leaping to a conclusion that simply is not merited by the evidence given here.

See, the Republicans are right. . . (4, Insightful)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859057)

when they complain about voter fraud being rampant [columbiatribune.com] . I guess they didn't count on it being found out they were complicit in the fraud.


Personally, anyone found to be a participant in voter fraud [washingtonpost.com] should be barred for life from voting.

I can (4, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859095)

think of an explanation.

On election day, the people who run the SOS's DNS point election.sos.state.oh.us to a contractor who has contracted to provide "real time" updates from election data, something the SOS's staff is not equipped to do.

That vendor markets hosting services to political and government entities. It unwisely assigns a governmental web site from the very next block of addresses that are given to a political client, and unfortunately that block of addresses has become implicated in a serious scandal. Note the address is not in the RNC owned block (contrary to the article's title).

Now there are a gazillion possible ethical temptations that marketing yourself to political and government entities entails. So contracts let to such companies should be looked at very closely. But this is no smoking gun; or if there is smoke, it is more likely to involve improper contract selection than anything else.

So, it bears looking into, but is nothing to get excited about yet.

Original Ohio Election Story HERE: check data (5, Informative)

luaptifer (974590) | more than 7 years ago | (#18859233)

Suggested good explanation: impeachment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18859235)

No further comment needed.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...