So the question is asked: having already stripped the voter rolls, how long will it now take to flip the outcome?
The IT expert gives the obvious answer: about 60 seconds, maybe less. Not only the presidency but control of the Congress, statehouses, state legislatures and much more can be flipped in tandem.
In the process, the expert says, it’s customary to plant media stories of “glitches” in the voting process that will delay the reporting of the vote count. In Ohio 2004 the flipping process was stretched from 12:20 am to 2 am, during which John Kerry’s 4.2% margin of victory became a 2.5% George W. Bush margin of victory, giving him a second term.
But the process is clear, simple and long-since prearranged. Funded by the Help America Vote Act of 2002, the vast majority of America’s electronic voting machines date back at least a decade. Many can be flipped at the precinct level by operatives driving by with WIFI apparatus. In other cases, “technicians” from the voting machine companies have already recalibrated the tabulators while Election Day was in progress, or immediately after.
So the months of campaigning, endless media bloviation, and millions in campaign expenditures can all be funneled down to about a minute of one hired hacker doing a few quick keystrokes that no one will ever be able to fully unearth or overturn.
All that’s then needed as follow-up is to adjust the pre-election exit polls, which are usually extremely accurate, to match the official vote count, which will have been flipped by 2 or 3 am. (Sooner or later, such polling will be banned altogether).
In the meantime, in this dark post-democracy night, there is a pause. Each IT expert asks each governor and secretary of state in each of these key swing states what they wish done. And how much the Koch Brothers will be paying them to do it.
See if you can guess the answer.
This couldn’t happen if people weren’t being taught erroneous economic theories in universities, either:
Rather than talking about how the rich raise the cost of our healthcare, the Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell wants us to be upset at seniors.
This is how you do success, and we need such initiatives in many more places. Co-ops have staggeringly high success rates and are incredibly resilient in economic downturns. They stabilize the entire local economy.
In June 2014, members of Damayan’s board heard that New York’s city council had set aside $1.2 million to fund a Worker Cooperative Business Development Initiative. The city directed money to 11 organizations with experience incubating cooperatives in low-income communities of color, allowing them to expand their reach to new entrepreneurs. It was the largest investment in cooperatives by any city government in U.S. history. In the last year, the initiative has helped facilitate the launch of 21 new cooperatives, provided guidance for 19 new worker-owned businesses that will open in 2016, and assisted 26 existing cooperatives. By the end of 2016, there will be 66 new worker-owned cooperatives in New York City. One of them is the new Damayan Cleaning Cooperative.
Look! Brown people! (nabs wallet..)
Not just an ideologue, but capable as well. Is there anything more alien to American politics than this?
As mayor of Burlington, Vt., Bernie Sanders had some critics. But few disputed that his reforms resulted in an efficient and responsive city government.
A very nice, concise overview:
Free market ideology has so pervaded our culture that we aren’t even aware of it. It is incorporated in the very language we use to discuss anything vaguely economic.
Free market ideology has so pervaded our culture that we aren’t even aware of it. It is incorporated in the very language we use to discuss anything vaguely economic. Education is a good illustration. We used to “nurture” our children and prepare students to be responsible and productive participants in the democracy we claimed to be. Now we “invest” in them and prepare them for the workplace. Many people in the both established parties look to competitive models like charter schools and “choice” to fix everything – even though there’s no evidence these actually improve learning. Rather than looking for caring and capable teachers, we want to align their incentives and measure their value-added.
Let’s face it, the self-made billionaire is a myth. All successful people have benefited from both good fortune and support from society and government. Did Steve Jobs cleverly choose parents who lived in Mountain View, California where he would get good schooling and happen to run into the inventor of the Apple? Would his career have been equally successful if he had been born in Mountain View, Oklahoma? And how successful would he have been if the government and non-profit institutions had not collaborated to create the internet? Is the fact that Silicon Valley billionaires are almost all white men a sign that white men are more meritorious by nature, or is a more likely explanation that they get the opportunities to succeed where others don’t?
And a little history:
Another presumption implicit in the pro-market argument is that “a rising tide lifts all boats”. The 1950s and ’60s were a period of growth which was widely shared. This rising tide did help most Americans. Wages grew at a reasonable clip and poverty declined. Markets were part of the story but so was government, the New Deal, and for that matter, labor union power. Income was taxed at rates up to 90%. The banking system was very heavily regulated.
Then, the free market ideologues began to make political inroads. In the 1970s and increasingly in the ’80s and ’90s, banks and other industries were deregulated and taxes, particularly taxes on capital, were decreased. Ronald Reagan famously broke union power. What happened? As you can see in the graph below, there was no improvement in economic growth as shown by productivity (output per hour worked). But, even worse, wage growth completely stagnated. So, lower taxes and bank deregulation did nothing for economic growth. But they did allow the 1% to grab virtually all of the growth that did occur. And, the situation of the poorest has become, if anything, more dire. Since 1975, the rising tide has been lifting a few boats but has been drowning the rest.
Actually, the whole idea of a free market is a myth. We have never seen one. The US during its greatest periods of economic prosperity was a protected economy favoring domestic producers and provided significant government support. The government has also made significant contributions to economic growth by funding scientific research or as a result of military projects, the space program and other programs. This was also true of other countries that have become economic powerhouses such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan. And if you think about it, there’s a broad inconsistency here as well: most advocates of free markets, Donald Trump being an example, are very much against free movement of labor – otherwise known as migration.
Unless, of course, you need that illegal immigrant to increase your profits in your hotel.. 😉
There’s alot more good stuff here:
To be clear, while capitalist economies plunged into a major depression and reliably lapsed into recessions every few years, the Soviet economy just as unfailingly did not, expanding unremittingly and always providing jobs for all. Far from being unworkable, the Soviet Union’s publicly owned and planned economy succeeded remarkably well. What was unworkable was capitalism, with its occasional depressions, regular recessions, mass unemployment, and extremes of wealth and poverty, all the more evident today as capitalist economies contract or limp along, condemning numberless people to forced idleness. What eventually led to the Soviet Union’s demise was the accumulated toll on the Soviet economy of the West’s efforts to bring it down, the Reagan administration’s intensification of the Cold War, and the Soviet leadership’s inability to find a way out of the predicament these developments occasioned.
By: Ari Rabin-Havt in The Nation
All the serious people in Washington know we have a debt problem. “Rapidly Growing Debt Threatens America’s Economic Future” blared a typical press release from Senate Budget Committee chairman Mike Enzi. “It is clear from [Congressional Budget Office] analysis that rapidly growing public sector debt threatens America’s economic future,” he said.
There’s just one problem. The numbers relied upon by Enzi and far too many others inside the Beltway, including the Congressional Budget Office itself, are completely bogus. The methodology used by the CBO to create these projections exaggerates the federal government’s long-term debt projection by as much as 440 percent, creating a phony fiscal crisis where none exists.
An issue that should be revisited again, especially in light of the voting problems that appear to have also surfaced in Kansas and Wisconsin. Is a legitimate election even possible?
A Republican computer data security expert tells how cyber-partisans could have stolen the 2004 election.