I'm Going to Have My Buddy's At The Greenpapers Look Into This

[Chicopee John]

Clyburn Claims 'Hacking' Behind Greene's Surprise Win in S.C. Senate Race

 

Published June 15, 2010

| FOXNews.com

 

 

 

Trying to account for how a candidate who had no money and no campaign infrastructure was able to pull out a victory over a well-funded local lawmaker in a statewide race, the powerful South Carolina Democrat said the touch-screen voting machines used by the state are notoriously unreliable. Without citing evidence, Clyburn said the voting machines could have been compromised.

 

"I believe there was some hacking done into that computer," Clyburn told Fox News, suggesting that somebody at the state could have deliberately bought those machines so that the system would be vulnerable. South Carolina uses a machine called the iVotronic.

 

"Maybe somebody wanted the machines that were easily hacked into ... We had no business with those machines in South Carolina," he said.

 

The State Election Commission rejected that theory on Tuesday. Chris Whitmire, spokesman for the commission, said the department has not detected even a hint of fraud or hacking in Tuesday's election and dismissed the charge that the system is not dependable.

 

"We've used this voting system since 2004 and it has always performed as it is designed to perform and it's been accurate and reliable," he told FoxNews.com. Whitmire said the 12,000 machines used by South Carolina have been used for "thousands of candidates" and that "no candidate has made this claim before."

 

Several theories have emerged for how Greene was able to pull out a victory over former state lawmaker Vic Rawl, including speculation that Greene's position at the top of the ballot helped him win votes.

 

Democrats are understandably alarmed over Greene's win. In interviews shortly after his surprise win, he demonstrated a lack of understanding about key policy issues that a senator would be expected to grasp. He also is facing a felony charge allegedly for showing pornography to a college student.

 

Rasmussen Reports released a poll on Tuesday that showed Republican Sen. Jim DeMint trouncing Greene in a general election. The poll showed DeMint pulling 58 percent to Greene's 21 percent. The poll of 500 likely state voters was conducted June 10. It had a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points.

 

Clyburn continued to allege Tuesday that Greene was a "plant," though not explicitly saying the Republican Party put him there.

 

"Whether it was just to manipulate the outcome or just to carry out some mischief, I don't know. But laws were broken and investigation needs to take place," he said.

 

Greene's defeated opponent Rawl is calling for such a review. He filed a protest with the state party. The executive committee of the South Carolina Democratic Party will meet Thursday to review the filing.

 

Rawl told Fox News on Tuesday that he never saw one piece of campaign material from Greene before the election. He said he's not sure yet whether his protest will lead to a formal appeal of the vote.

 

"I don't know if I will appeal or not. I cross that bridge as I get to it. We take this situation one step at a time," he said.

 

Rawl's campaign had election experts review the results and said they turned up startling irregularities. Rawl has also questioned the reliability of the voting machines used by South Carolina.

 

Republicans have dismissed the allegation or suggestion that someone in the party planted Greene to sabotage the race. State Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson said Democrats are just "embarrassed" that Greene won.

[Mr. T]

It does seem a little odd that this guy won. Isn't he a perv or something like that?

 

 

Not to take away from your thread Jon but you will like this little spoof. Remember when all of the Libs cried foul play in FL?

 

 

Something is fishy in SC, We will see if they can figure it out. I would say that there is an electronic thumb print is somewhere in the system.

[Chicopee John]

Thanks, T. I will have to check out the spoof at home as our filters catch this stuff.

 

Be well, young man.

[Mr. T]

I dont feel all that young. But Thanks. @@47

[VaporTrail]

Something is fishy in SC, We will see if they can figure it out. I would say that there is an electronic thumb print is somewhere in the system.

 

That's not necessarily true. Once a program is compiled, good luck finding out what it actually does. We really ought to get rid of the electronic ballot, which becomes an obvious middle man in elections. We have no idea who wrote the program nor their dispositions toward the election. We really need votes that have a real, tangible paper trail. I really hate the idea of an electronic ballot.

[Chicopee John]

That's not necessarily true. Once a program is compiled, good luck finding out what it actually does. We really ought to get rid of the electronic ballot, which becomes an obvious middle man in elections. We have no idea who wrote the program nor their dispositions toward the election. We really need votes that have a real, tangible paper trail. I really hate the idea of an electronic ballot.

 

You raise valid concerns, Vape, but paper - by itself - lends itself to fraud.

 

At least, if done right, a 'program' can prevent the same person from voting more than once - at least with the same name.

 

Paper can be cumbersome.

 

I guess they didn't do post voting polling. FWIW, I have a problem with polling before or during elections. If used properly and with care, polling can be helpful. However, I feel that it - in and of itself - can skew elections.

 

To bring up a sore subject, how many would-be Bush voters on the FL panhandle were discouraged from voting after the network projected Gore the state winner?

 

[calfoxwc]

The paper trail of voting, with "hanging chads" and the electonic

 

computerized voting "hey, I lost because those voting machines were hacked"

 

are both imperfect.

 

We'd almost need an IRS kind of oversee group to be watchdog

 

over all these voting machine things.

 

I think bipartisan overeeing of paper ballots makes me feel more secure about our elections.

 

...I don't know...

 

Oh, btw, there are decompiler programs out there that will uncompile code, and restore the original code intact.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I always vote Absentee. In Ohio, anyone can now vote by Absentee ballot. Paper ballot, darken in the circle, mail it. Don't have to mess with the lines, etc.

[Chicopee John]

Feedback from the two guys from The Green Papers:

 

 

Hello John,

 

It's been a long time!

 

I agree with Rich-- the "wrong" candidate won and the SC Dems are looking for something that

sticks. The Republican "plant" claim did not take root so the losing candidate is now claiming

that the voting equipment has problems. So far, they have no solid evidence. One of the experts

stated that the voting pattern observed occurs only 10% of the time. Well, considering there were

16 statewide or Federal offices up for primary, we should have seen the pattern at least once.

 

This reminds me of the GOP attack on Al Franken. The GOP tried and tried but were unable to

overturn the results of that election. However, the GOP was successful in keeping Franken from

being seated for quite some time. In the 2008 Senate election, both sides had plenty of money.

In this year's SC primary only one side has lawyers and money.

 

Get out the popcorn!

 

Tony

 

 

 

 

Hey, John!

 

 

We're watching this one but, so far, all this seems to be are the usual conspiracy theories.

 

Primaries are strange to begin with: lower than "normal" turnout often skews the results away from the expected moreso than re:

General Elections. In this one, less than 30% of the voters who voted in SC in Nov. '08 voted in the SC Primaries re: *both*

Parties (and the 2010 Dem voters were less than 10% of the '08 turnout).

 

I see a combination of Dem Primary voters who wanted to bust the front-runner's "chops" and those who simply didn't really care

figuring DeMint would be re-elected in any event) ended up nominating Greene instead of Rawl, while the SC Dem leadership is

saying, in effect, "how *dare* the voters have rejected *our* candidate!"

But, yes, it does bear watching!

 

All the best to you and yours, too!

 

Rich

 

[Westside Steve]

 

Did this fellow get a huge turnout in the Black community?

 

WSS

[Chicopee John]

 

Did this fellow get a huge turnout in the Black community?WSS

 

 

I could be wrong, but I believe both are Black.

 

Sounds like a low turnout, in general, might have caused this anomoly.

 

Surprised Heck hasn't chimed in on this considering his interest, etc. on such things.

 

[Mr. T]

I believe we will see a lot of incumbents get ousted this year. Everybody is tired of the non representation that has been going since the last national election. just look at all of the wasted money that has been spent and the biggest one is nationa government ran H.C. I would estimate that only 20% of america was for that monster.

[Westside Steve]

I could be wrong, but I believe both are Black.

 

 

http://www.vicrawl.com/vicrawl/

 

Here's his opponent.

 

WSS

[Chicopee John]

http://www.vicrawl.com/vicrawl/

 

Here's his opponent.WSS

 

I was right. He's part Jamacian, like Kosar.