Showing posts with label 2000 Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2000 Elections. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

PCWorld.com - Backdoor Found in Diebold Voting Machines

~~~ I am not a supporter of electronic voting.
As I have written about often here . ~~~ TP
--------------------------------

PCWorld.com - Backdoor Found in Diebold Voting Machines:
by Robert McMillan, IDG News Service Monday, May 15, 2006

"Diebold Election Systems plans to make changes to its electronic voting machines, following the disclosure of a number of serious security flaws in the systems. {The} Company says it will make changes to the electronic voting machines before the November 7 2006 general election."
"After the November 2000 presidential election exposed flaws in traditional paper ballots, many U.S. states have rushed to adopt electronic voting systems. But computer experts have pointed out numerous security flaws in these machines, and some consumer groups have called for them to be dropped altogether."
======================

Thursday, December 08, 2005

EFF moves to block certification of e-voting systems | CNET News.com

I do not see any reason to believe that the Internet will be able to overcome the fundamental issue of trust for election voting anytime in the near future.

Paper ballots and their "hanging chads" while time consuming to count and not at all perfect, are still physically tangible.

And it does not take an advanced degree in micro-processor technologies to re-count the votes if there is a challenge by the losing side in a close race.
If the
Florida votes in dispute during the 2000 Bush-Gore Presidential race had been Internet-Cast-Votes, history may have been different,
Maybe not, but I would not choose to risk it. To have the core of the American democratic process become an activity of cyber-space is something I find spooky. Hackers have proven to be some of the most talented minds of our time and there has yet to be a cyber-system that has been made impregnable to attack. When it come to voting for President or anything else, I would rather take my chances with the hanging chads~~~ TP .

***

EFF moves to block certification of e-voting systems

By Anne Broache

http://news.com.com/EFF+moves+to+block+certification+of+e-voting+systems/2100-1028_3-5988243.html

Story last modified Thu Dec 08 17:57:00 PST 2005 The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a court complaint Thursday aimed at blocking North Carolina's recent certifications of voting machines, saying state elections officials failed to meet legal requirements before signing off on the systems. The complaint (click for PDF), filed in Wake County Superior Court by the EFF and a Raleigh lawyer on behalf of a local voters' advocate, calls for a judge to void certifications that the Board of Elections issued last week to Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia Voting Systems. It also requests a restraining order that would prevent elections officials from certifying any new systems until they comply fully with state election laws. The state legislature modified those laws this summer, setting new standards for e-voting machines and requiring that existing systems be decertified. State elections officials 'exceeded their statutory authority' in signing off on the systems, because they disregarded the law in two areas, the complaint charges.

Sunday, December 31, 2000

During the 2000 Presidential primary season, Senator John McCain's campaign scored a fund-raising coup online

During the 2000 Presidential primary season, Senator John McCain's campaign scored a fund-raising coup online in the wake of his victory in the New Hampshire Republican primary. Team McCain raised about 2 million via his campaign website in the week after his NH primary win.[93] [94] But Senator McCain still lost the nomination to now President George W. Bush.

The Internet and the Future of Presidential Politics

====================


The Digital Tea Leaves of Election 2000:
The Internet and the Future of Presidential Politics

by Don Lewicki and Tim Ziaukas
First Monday, volume 5, number 12 (December 2000),
URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_12/lewicki/index.html

http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/818/727

Abstract


While the Internet may not have played the transformational role in the election of the U.S. President in 2000 that some predicted, this new medium of political communications suggested what an Internet-driven transformation in political communications might look like. After setting the stage by discussing the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs) by Sen. John McCain in the primary campaign, the researchers evaluate the Web sites of four major candidates for President of the United States over the course of the general election. Additionally, this article serves as a digital archive of Web pages caught at what many believe is the nascent stage of what might come to be the dominant medium for political communications in the decades to come.

===========================

Friday, December 29, 2000

e-advocates/Juno Post-Election Review Finds Net Savvy Challengers Defeat Incumbents

~Technopolitical editor's note:~~
~~ In the 2000 Congressional races the Internet played a debatable role in overall election strategies. E-Advocates
(a firm that manages online campaigns) and Juno Online Services (hosts of many campaign websites @ www.juno.com ) ---- and who are by no means unbiased observers---- did a post-2000 election study of Congressional candidates and their websites. I want to quote from their finding summary first and then highlight what I see to be the holes in their arguments.

“In Campaign 2000, challengers who won tight congressional races against incumbents also won the battle of the Web, according to a post-election review of congressional candidate Web sites by e-advocates.com and Juno Online Services, Inc. The study found that in the 8 toss-up U.S. House and Senate races where a challenger won, an overwhelming majority – 75 percent – employed a superior Web strategy, as defined by online voters in a February 2000 e-advocates/Juno survey and candidate rankings on top search engines. Additionally, in seven out of the eight races, the winning challenger raised less money than the losing incumbent – an anomaly in the results of all congressional races nationwide”.

It is my firm believe based on experience as a political professional, that core organization of any campaign's staffing and activist base is the most important factor –--even over money--- in any successful election run or lobby-issue crusade. The fact that the less-funded challengers with effective websites fared better than those without effective websites, more than likely means that these campaigns were simply more energetic and better organized to turn out their voting supporters. It is not so much that their website helped them win, but that producing a solid website was reflective of good core organization. Richard Davis correctly asserts that "the Web plainly is less useful than, say, direct mail or newsletters" [102] in getting out information about a campaign and/or candidate. And until the digital divide is completely closed in the USA it will most certainly remain that way.

The message that the Internet can only play a small supporting role in winning election campaigns seems to have registered with Congressional candidates in the upcoming 2002 elections. A study by the Bivings Group shows that as of March 2002 “only 29 percent of Senators and Representatives up for election in 2002, have clearly marked campaign websites.” [103] The same study put Republicans as better equipped in using the Internet to energize their bases, and for adding to those numbers. So as of now the GOP is winning this Cyber-Electioneering arms race and only a post-mortum of the 2002 race will tell if it will also translate into electoral victories.

I do plan to do a follow up when that scorecard is in. For there are on the horizon in this year's 2002 elections several trials of voter-peer-to-peer Cyber-Electioneering [sort of like phone-tress but in cyber-space], and the experimentation with techno-real-time monitoring of voter turnout on election day, possibly enabling elections campaigns to better target election day voter pulls as the day progresses. As we have seen in the 2000 American Presidential elections every vote can count (---unless the Supreme Court says no---) so any cyber-tools that may get you additional votes will eventually find their way into the permanent arsenals of election campaigns. (We will see if any of the above mentioned cyber-electioneering "experiments" become worth writing about after the 2002 election.)


********************

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_natrvw/m4PRN/2000_Nov_20/67456681/p1/article.jhtml?term=cyberpolitics
Nov 20, 2000

e-advocates/Juno Post-Election Review Finds Net Savvy Challengers Defeat Incumbents.

In Toss-Up Races, Congressional Challengers

Used the Web to Advantage

WASHINGTON, Nov. 20 /PRNewswire/ --

In Campaign 2000, challengers who won tight congressional races against incumbents also won the battle of the Web, according to a post-election review of congressional candidate Web sites by e- advocates and Juno Online Services, Inc. (Nasdaq: JWEB).

The study found that in the 8 toss-up U.S. House and Senate races where a challenger won, an overwhelming majority -- 75 percent -- employed a superior Web strategy, as defined by online voters in a February 2000 e-advocates/Juno survey and candidate rankings on top search engines. Additionally, in seven out of the eight races, the winning challenger raised less money than the losing incumbent -- an anomaly in the results of all congressional races nationwide.

Among winning challengers in toss-up House and Senate races, all had Web sites that provided information and features desired by voters online, including issue statements, campaign e-mail addresses, volunteer and online contribution opportunities, and online voter registration capabilities.

. Eighty-eight percent of winning challengers provided issue statements that could provide the basis for voters to compare candidates, a feature desired by 79 percent of Internet users. Sixty-three percent of winning challengers provided campaign e-mail addresses, a feature of interest to 73 percent of Internet users.

All victorious challengers provided Internet users with the ability to volunteer with their campaigns online, a feature identified as important by 13 percent of Internet users, and 88 percent of winning challengers gave Internet users the ability to make campaign contributions online, a feature of interest to 7 percent of Internet users

. Thirty-eight percent of winning challengers offered online voters the ability to register to vote online, a feature of interest to 42 percent of Internet users.

"Today's savvy candidates aren't just going door-to-door, they're connecting with voters desktop to desktop," said Pam Fielding, principal, e- advocates. "With 59 percent of U.S. adults now online, no candidate in a tight race can afford to ignore the Web -- or the needs of e-voters," said Nicole Duritz, also a principal, e-advocates.

The firms also tested the ranking of candidate sites with top search engines -- an important strategy for campaigns to connect with online voters.
The search engine test found that 75 percent of winning challengers in tight races achieved a first-page, search-engine ranking with at least three of the four major engines as identified by Media Metrix -- Yahoo, MSN, AOL, and Lycos. Reviewers gave candidates a successful rating with a search engine if, after entering their first and last names into the search field, the search engine provided a link to the candidates' official campaign Web sites on the first page of the search results.

In seven out of the eight races analyzed by e-advocates and Juno, the winning challenger raised less money than the losing incumbent.

According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) data analyzed by U.S. PIRG and reported in an unrelated study, only seven percent of winning congressional candidates nationwide raised less money than their opponents. Michael Cornfield, George Washington University Associate Research Professor and Research Director of George Washington University's Democracy Online Project, observed that the findings suggest a strong Internet strategy can "help financial underdogs gain better footing."


"Election 2000 will go down in history as the first presidential cycle where the Net played a decisive role in political campaigns.

Candidates and elected officials who underestimated the virtual voter were likely to suffer for it," said Roger Stone, Vice President of Juno Online Services and director of the Juno Advocacy Network, Juno's Washington D.C.-based public interest and political advertising division.

To view a chart detailing candidate Internet performance, please visit http://www.e-advocates.com/survey .

The U.S. Senate race for Washington State remains undecided and, for this reason, is not included in the analysis.

About e-advocates

e-advocates, based in Washington, DC, is a full-service Internet advocacy consulting firm dedicated to helping public affairs and advocacy organizations harness the power of the Internet to achieve legislative and political priorities.

Principals Pam Fielding and Nicole Duritz are leading experts in the field of cyberpolitics. Fielding is coauthor of the recently published book, The Net Effect: How Cyberadvocacy is Changing the Political Landscape, which highlights how the Internet is reconnecting citizens with government. e-advocates is a subsidiary of Capitol Advantage, the premier innovator of Internet-based political tools and services.

Through the use of its products, hundreds of organizations have promoted their agenda and influenced the political process by engaging individuals in political dialogue. Survey results can be viewed at http://www.e-advocates.com/survey . To reach Pam Fielding and Nicole Duritz for comment, please call 202/955-3001.

About Juno

Juno Online Services, Inc. is a leading provider of Internet access to millions of computer users throughout the United States

Founded in 1996, the company provides multiple levels of service, including free basic Internet access, billable premium dial-up service, and (in certain markets) high-speed broadband access. Juno's revenues are derived primarily from the subscription fees charged for its billable premium services, from the sale of advertising, and from various forms of electronic commerce.

Based on its total of 3.7 million active subscribers during the month of September 2000, Juno is currently the nation's third largest provider of dial- up Internet services, after AOL and EarthLink. As of September 30, 2000, Juno had approximately 12.77 million total registered subscriber accounts.

For more information about Juno, visit http://www.juno.com/corp . To get a copy of the Juno software, go to http://www.juno.com or call 1-800-TRY-JUNO.

COPYRIGHT 2000 PR

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_natrvw/m4PRN/2000_Nov_20/67456681/p1/article.jhtml?term=cyberpolitics

Newswire Association, Inc.
in association with The Gale Group and LookSmart. COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group

Monday, December 04, 2000

Post-Election 2000 Survey on Internet Use for Civics and Politics

Post-Election 2000 Survey on Internet Use for Civics and Politics
December 4, 2000

"Highlights of a nationwide survey of 1,006 American adults, conducted for the Democracy Online Project between November 21-26, 2000, by Thomas Opinion Research, in conjunction with the TNS Intersearch Omni Poll (margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points):

The most general findings:

- More than one in three Americans (35%) uses the Internet to get information about politics, campaigns, or issues in the news. In 1998, 25% did. Thirty percent of today's "online public," reported getting public affairs information from the Internet "almost every day" and 35% do so Aoccasionally."

- Four in ten Internet users (40%) Bor 14% of the total adult populationB say the Internet was important in providing them with information that helped them decide how to vote in the November election. In 1998, 36%, or 9% of the total population, responded similarly. Men relied on the Net more than women, 44% to 33% saying it was an important source of help in deciding their vote. Half of the youngest users (ages 18-34; 491%) relied on the Net considerably, and 45% of those ages 35-44.

The following figures are percentages of the 55% of survey respondents who said they use the Internet. (Note: this is somewhat higher than the 44% of Americans online according to the U.S. Department of Commerce's August 2000 study.)

- When it comes to politics and public affairs, Net users turn to e-mail more than the Web. And they prefer humor to action."

From: http://democracyonline.org/databank/dec2000survey.shtml


9999999999

Wednesday, October 18, 2000

Cyberspace and the Concept of Democracy

~`This next one is really unique. The only article in my knowledge to mention existentialism, Rushdie and cyberspace’s concept of democracy, ~~
~TechnoPolitical


Cyberspace and the Concept of Democracy

by Fred Evans
First Monday, volume 5, number 10 

(October 2000),

Copyright ©2000, First Monday
URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_10/evans/index.html


Salman Rushdie's provocative novel, Midnight's Children and the Internet. Rushdie's fictional devices for talking about the society of India bear a strong affinity to descriptions of the Internet.

Although we will occupy ourselves only briefly with Rushdie's novel, it will help us show how the Internet reveals important aspects of society and democracy.

It is ironic that we can use the Internet to inform us about the democracy of the very societies that gave birth to this information and communication technology - that we can use the virtual or artificial as a model for understanding, and perhaps improving, the actual.

====================

Friday, November 19, 1999

Freedom of Information? The Internet as Harbinger of the New Dark Ages

Freedom of Information? The Internet as Harbinger of the New Dark Ages

by Roger Clarke
First Monday, volume 4, number 11 (November 1999),
URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue4_11/clarke/index.html

" There's a common presumption that the Internet has brought with it the promise of openness, democracy, the end of inequities in the distribution of information, and human self-fulfillment. Any such conclusion would be premature.

The digital era has ambused and beguiled us all. Its first-order impacts are being assimilated, but its second-order implications are not. Powerful institutions perceive their interests to be severely threatened by the last decade of technological change and by the shape of the emergent 'information economy'. Elements of their fight back are identified, particularly extensions to legal protectionism, and the active development and application of technologies that protect data from prying eyes.

Many of the features that have ensured a progressive balance between data protection and freedom of access to data have already been seriously eroded. The new balance that emerges from the current period of turmoil may be far less friendly to public access and more like a New Dark Ages."


{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{

Monday, November 01, 1999

New Statesman: Change the world via e-mail - use of Inernet by political activists - Brief Article

New Statesman: Change the world via e-mail - use of Inernet by political activists - Brief Article: "FindArticles > New Statesman > Nov 1, 1999 > Article > Print friendly

Change the world via e-mail - use of Internet by political activists - Brief Article
Brian Doherty

Open to everyone, the Internet offers new possibilities to those trying to challenge the established order.

'The revolutionary forces of the future may consist increasingly of widespread multi-organisational networks that have no particular national identity, claim to arise from civil society and include aggressive groups and individuals who are keenly adept at using advanced technology for communications.' So spoke the Rand Corporation in 1993.

But did they mean multinational corporations or the social movements opposing them? Both sides could fit the description, and that tells us something about the most important political battle of our time, one in which the Internet is playing an increasingly important role.

For campaigning groups such as Earth First!, where actions speak louder than words, the real measure of the difference the Internet makes is in its effectiveness as a mobilising tool. Detailed tactical manuals on everything from tripods to tunnels are available online and may explain why this technology has spread so fast. It is also easy to find a local Earth First! group in Br"