Just reading about the continuing problems with these various forms of electronic systems. Typical computer problems, really. That doesnt even count
the possibility of hackers.
Is this really worth getting results a few hours or a day earlier? Is it really worth not having something tangible to recount or prove that the votes
went one way or another? Yeah, these machines might SOMEDAY save money over all the paper. But I doubt it. By the time the savings are realized by
replacing alot of paper, it will be time to buy new computers/voting machines. We all know how that chase goes........
This is the lynchpin of our whole system of government. Can't we keep at least something analog?Al G - 11-7-2006 at 06:18 PM
Hook..This is the classical government side show of jumping in with both feet and a bag full of tax payers money...Say what..They were sold to us by
south America???? Is that not a joke.Paula - 11-7-2006 at 06:22 PM
The only way I'll ever feel comfortable about electronic voting is if the machine gives me a piece of paper by which I can confirm that my vote was
accurately recorded, and I then be required to put that paper in a ballot box so that an accurate recount can be done.
Soooo.... may as well just vote on paper, as I did in October in Montana, and save the cost of those useless machines.Al G - 11-7-2006 at 06:32 PM
I have been voting absentee for years and have never seen a electronic voter. I just heard 50% vote absentee, wow.
Paper Ballots
Loretana - 11-7-2006 at 06:35 PM
Here in Oregon we have (what were originally reserved for absentees) mail-in ballots for any and all elections.
A week before the election we receive a booklet from the Registrar that outlines the pros and cons of the different measures and statements by the
candidates.
I imagine the process is costly as far as the mailings go, but I am able to spend as much time as I need filling out my mail-in paper ballot,
and I have faith that my vote is counted properly.
I really love this state!! (next to Baja California Sur, of course...)
I do have to attach a stamp to mail the ballot, but to me, it would be cheap at twice the price.Phil C - 11-7-2006 at 06:53 PM
Just voted here in California. Used the new electronic voting mode. Was a little confused, but fumbled my way thru. I'm sure that all is well with my
vote, but next time I'll use the optional paper ballot, leave the computer screen for the under-aged voters.toneart - 11-7-2006 at 07:27 PM
I cast my absentee ballot here in Northern California 1 1/2 weeks ago. Even if I weren't back and forth to Baja, I would always vote with an absentee
ballot or a paper ballot. I will never trust the electronic voting machines. Diebold is a major contributor to the Republican Party. They are right up
there with Haliburton as a favored contractor. Their machines are vulnerable to hackers and are so-o-o-o dirty trickable. bajadogs - 11-7-2006 at 08:29 PM
I just came back from the polling place in my hood. For the first time ever there was a line. The reason? About 3/4 of the voters were requesting
paper ballots. People were sitting on the floor of the fire station with paper ballots while the Diebold machine booths were nearly empty. I'm not
trying to start a polical arguement. This is just an observation. I'm glad my votes are on paper.jerry - 11-7-2006 at 10:05 PM
loratana, I too like the mail in ballot in oregon. It cant be that expensive??bajarich - 11-8-2006 at 11:30 AM
As a person who has worked around computers, I know that just because you get a printout, it does not necessarily mean that the vote is recorded to
match that printout in the computer. The printer is on a separate workflow and instructions can be written to have different workflows produce
different results.
The only way I would trust a computer voting machine is if it prints out the ballot that I then check and drop into the ballot box, and those ballots
are the ones that are counted.bajalou - 11-8-2006 at 12:09 PM
What makes you think people counting paper ballots do it accurately? Stuffing the paper ballot box is a time honored American tradition.Iflyfish - 11-8-2006 at 03:19 PM
As an Oregonian I too like our mail in ballots for all the reasons Loratana has mentioned. The glitch is that these ballots are counted by machine.
There is a paper trail, and that is good, but the machines do the counting.
Let's see, votes counted by machines using propriatory software that only corporate officials can access? Hmmm, don't see any problem there.
Worked like a champ in Florida and Ohio last time!
IflyfishBaja Bernie - 11-8-2006 at 03:24 PM
Look up the Acorn group on the net. It just may not matter what form voting takes.
We can all thank the hanging 'chads' for the billions spend at the direction of our national leaders on 'new' voting systems.
No paper--no chads--simple!
[Edited on 11-8-2006 by Baja Bernie]Hook - 11-9-2006 at 09:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Baja Bernie
No paper--no chads--simple!
[Edited on 11-8-2006 by Baja Bernie]
Just dont hire retired old Floridians to count them and there's no problem.
I thought the punch cards were great. A hybrid of a computer/analog system.vgabndo - 11-9-2006 at 11:39 PM
There are many places to find information about the people and money behind the paper-less electronic voting machines. This article seems to be
consistent with the rest of the information I've found.
Having used Punch card balloting for years both at polling sites and at home via absentee, I remain in favor of said ballots as the BEST available
method. It doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to look over his/her finished ballot and make sure all of the chads have been removed. It's difficult to
have any sympathy for anyone who is incapable of such a mundane task. They probably shouldn't be voting, anyway.
Given the fact that Hackers (for whatever reason) have been able to compromise really sophisticated data bases again and again despite whatever
counter-measures are employed, the Electronic voting system is unlikely to Ever be practical and secure.
The question of whether or not an electronic system provides a paper receipt to the voter for verification is a Strawman. Any hacker capable of
compromising the system could make sure that the paper receipt appeared to confirm the vote while making changes within the database.
In the high desert a few years back, we were treated to an excellent example of such computer problems, although not intentional. An incorrect
tallying of votes was discovered ONLY because the vote in one Water District election tabluated ZERO votes for or against. Since it was virtually
impossible that nobody had voted on that issue, investigation revealed a programming error that had resulted in the erroneous tabulation. It also
revealed that three close races had been tabulated in reverse. Since the races were extremely close, no suspicion existed prior to the "Water" issue.Karyn Ivie - 11-10-2006 at 04:19 PM
In Denver, the people waited 2-3 hours all day long to vote, and continued to vote for 2-3 hours after the poles closed (if they were in line at 7PM
they were allowed to vote). Now it is Friday, 3 days post election, and Denver says that it will take 2 more full days to count the ballots. This is
on the new Touch Screen computers. Whoever says it will save time, and give earlier results is Crazy!
.
