The Polls Have Closed But Voting Problems Linger (Touch Ballot Snafus, more)

As I thought, they are now admitting how easy it can be to rig these new touch-screen computer polls and how difficult it is to check their accuracy. It should be only a matter of time before Democrats figure out how to use that to their advantage.

And while there's no recount in South Dakota yet (and there ought to be), there apparently were attempts to sue over the polls being left open too long (explaining where the St. Louis election officials were this year).

And, finally, has nobody noted that perhaps one reason why we saw seemingly less election fraud in 2002 than we did in 2000 was because we now had an Attorney General willing to pursue fraud investigations instead of the previous administration's AG? The Dems may have known they had the "all clear" from Reno but felt less free to do so under Ashcroft?

Thank those nice folks in Baldwin County for me. I'd thank them myself next time I visit my sister and her husband but they probably voted Democrat...

Pulaski County Arkansas had a democrat judge who decided to open the polls till 9:00pm. AR Supreme Court reversed the decision, but I'm sure a few liberal votes got sneaked in.

I hope the GOP kicks out those Indian Reservation Fraud Votes in SD.

The machine I used here in Texas made write-ins a very complicated procedure. Write-ins face very long odds to begin with (so many voters are just lemmings), but if these machines catch on, I think it will become darned-near impossible. While I've always done write-in votes as a lark (*hated* all the available choices), if a Wellstone-ish event happened and a major-party candidate needed a write-in vote to win, he/she could never make it work with this system.

What I found interesting was the manufacturers of these machines saying "oh, you wanted vote-checking to come with these machines? That would cost more...". Amazing.

Baldwin county voted 69% Republican.

Yes. But I bet my retired unionized brother-in-law didn't (if he bothered to vote at all).

"But I bet my retired unionized brother-in-law didn't (if he bothered to vote at all)."

He must be the one who writes all the liberal crap to "Letters To The Editor" in the Mobile Register. (Kick his butt!)

Mike S. Assman, a Republican

How'd ya like to have that last name? Wasn't that a personalized license plate on Seinfeld once? LOL

Sorry, this all makes me so sick I had to try to find the humor in this article.

MKM

Well, both sides have a lot of elected people with names that make me chuckle.

Doolittle.
Crapo
LaFalce
Jerry Lewis

If I ever ran for office, I would get my last name changed to "Aqui".

All the polling places have signs that say "Vote Aqui Here" (aqui is spanish for "here"). That would save me the cost of campaign signs!

My brother once tried to form a club band with the name "Free Beer". He thought it would look good on the marquee and attract an audience...

The machine I used here in Texas made write-ins a very complicated procedure. Write-ins face very long odds to begin with (so many voters are just lemmings), but if these machines catch on, I think it will become darned-near impossible. While I've always done write-in votes as a lark (*hated* all the available choices), if a Wellstone-ish event happened and a major-party candidate needed a write-in vote to win, he/she could never make it work with this system.

Actually, what I'd like to see in that regard [yes I know in my last post I just advocated mechanical voting machines...] would be a system where registration was required for all candidates (no 'out of the blue' write-ins) but where the registration was free-of-charge and available to anyone who wanted it. Essentially what would happen would be that the candidate (or his staffer) would fill in a card with a pre-printed six-digit number and submit that card prior to the election. Persons wishing to vote for that candidate would punch in the number of their choice (the candidate would be responsible for ensuring that voters knew his ID). Beyond the fact that this would make tallying the votes easier, it would also avoid the problems that would occur if someone with a common name were to win a write-in campain.

Actually, what I'd really like to see in that regard would be a system where the ballot doesn't list any candidates and it was the responsibility of the candidates to ensure that voters knew their id number. The issues of which candidates deserve "ballot access" would then go away, since all candidates would be equally eligible.

Actually, what I'd really like to see in that regard would be a system where the ballot doesn't list any candidates and it was the responsibility of the candidates to ensure that voters knew their id number.

You HATE Palm Beach voters, don't you? :-)

Seriously, even I would have trouble commiting a bunch of numbers to memory. I'd probably vote "straight party" with your system.

Agreed, some candidates have a name ID advantage, including when Texas had the unfortunately-named Jesse James as State Treasurer. And some live off the name of their lineage (Kennedy, Bush, Rockefeller, Gore, Pryor, Bayh, Udall, Taft, etc.). But I still think I'd rather see the name on there because I always double-check my ballot (even when they were computer punch-outs) and this helps me be sure I've made no mistakes.