full-disclosure - OT: U.S. 2004 Election Fraud.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87hdnrrkq1.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
From: fw at deneb.enyo.de (Florian Weimer)
Subject: OT: U.S. 2004 Election Fraud.

* Paul Schmehl:

> --On Monday, November 15, 2004 07:25:58 PM +0100 Florian Weimer 
> <fw@...eb.enyo.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> <http://www.sbe.state.va.us/Election/Electoral_College.htm>
>>> <http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_elec.html>
>>> <http://www.spies.com/Forums/showthread.php?threadid=404>
>>
>> And what's your point?
>
> If you want to understand how the electoral system works, read.  Just 
> because you don't understand it doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.

At least one of these documents is factually incorrect.  I fail to see
how procedural details can shed some light on the current strange
effects you are experiencing.

Or do you think that if electors were assigned according to
Hare-Niemeyer, the vote tallying problems would multiply?  The Law of
Large Numbers suggests it's far less likely that they could have
actual election-deciding effect.