Remember 2000? 2004 is going to be worse MUCH worse!
To: crusty codger
This sucks. I hated the 2000 election and I am going to hate this one too. I am sick of the dems thinking that we are going to steal the election. They are the most paranoid hateful group of people in the U.S.
2 posted on
04/21/2004 12:10:40 PM PDT by
areafiftyone
(Democrats = the hamster is dead but the wheel is still spinning)
To: crusty codger
After all--like Shrum's floppo populism--Gore's post-election tactics worked so well, why not copy it.
To: crusty codger
There were at least 2 books written about the 2000 election; one from the Right, and one from the Left.
Long day, and I cannot remember the titles of either, but I have both books, and I recommend we all read them this summer in anticipation of the autumnal election frolics.
4 posted on
04/21/2004 12:17:38 PM PDT by
theDentist
(JOHN KERRY never saw a TAX he would not HIKE !)
To: crusty codger
I agree with paper ballots.
6 posted on
04/21/2004 12:19:48 PM PDT by
xzins
(Retired Army and Proud of It!)
To: crusty codger
And Hillary wants reciepts- and so do union organizers and those who buy votes. now the payoff can be in return for the reciept after the vote, instead of a sawski beforehand and never knowing if the mark voted "right".
2004 is gonna be a nightmare!
7 posted on
04/21/2004 12:20:15 PM PDT by
DBrow
To: crusty codger
Make mine paper.
9 posted on
04/21/2004 12:23:13 PM PDT by
cripplecreek
(you tell em i'm commin.... and hells commin with me.)
To: crusty codger
Weren't the Dems the ones pushing for the electronic ballots and online voting back in 2000?
10 posted on
04/21/2004 12:25:39 PM PDT by
Chewbacca
(I think I will stay single. Getting married is just so 'gay'.)
To: crusty codger
I don't have a problem with touch screen voting, but I want a printed receipt of my choices, and one to be kept by the machine for auditing purposes.
We could find this technology in this new fangled device called the "cash register".
11 posted on
04/21/2004 12:27:26 PM PDT by
freeeee
("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
To: crusty codger
I support paper ballots - scantron should be the standard - either draw an arrow or fill in the circle(like a multiple choice test).
Straightforward, harder to fraud than punchcards, and while not fullproof, the best one possible.
12 posted on
04/21/2004 12:29:24 PM PDT by
Dan from Michigan
("12 hours outta Mackinaw City, stopped at the bar to have a brew.....")
To: crusty codger
Could I recommend a simple hybrid solution? The voter inserts his paper ballot into the voting maching and casts his ballot electronically, like at an ATM. The machine marks the paper ballot accordingly and returns it to the voter. The voter can review the paper ballot and cast it, or request another ballot if he determined that it does not reflect his intentions.
The computer marked ballots would be free of over-votes, hanging chads or any other nonsense.
To: crusty codger
The only solution to this is an overwhelming victory. The most important thing in this election is to get all the people who assume someone else will make a wise choice for them to actually get out and vote. That means all the people who are so immersed in their work they "can't" take the time to vote. If they don't take the time, we are going to be saddled with this nonesense for years to come.
16 posted on
04/21/2004 12:54:31 PM PDT by
McGavin999
(Evil thrives when good men do nothing.)
To: crusty codger
How ya gonna verify with shenanigans like
this^ going on?
The Nov, 2004 election may well spill over into 2005 because of this.
I love technology. There's an intrinsic thrill in using "bleeding edge" technology. But you don't turn bleeding technology into the wild. That's exactly what is happening here. We're about 4 years ahead of the curve and it's gonna be messy!
19 posted on
04/21/2004 1:43:42 PM PDT by
upchuck
(Message to Senator John F'ing sKerry: Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.)
To: crusty codger
The best system is the paper ballot/optical scanner. The voter physically marks the ballot and it is read by the machine. Polling place judges count the ballots handed out and compare that number with the number of ballots read by the machine. In the event of a recount, the ballots are still there to be run through the machine again.
The problem with a paperless system is what happens if the touch screen systems malfunction on election day? According to their manufacturer, the system won't accept votes if it malfunctions. That's good, but how does the voter cast a vote? With the optical scanner, the voter still votes and the ballots are run through the machine when it is operational again.
I am very much against the idea of the paper receipt that can be carried outside the polling place. That receipt is as good as cash.
To: crusty codger
Paper ballots is probably the only thing Kerry & I agree on.
27 posted on
04/21/2004 2:46:08 PM PDT by
Ditter
To: crusty codger
Give us paper ballots
Does anyone really believe that our votes are actually counted?
Without a paper trail, which has not existed everywhere for some time, the elections are in the hands of Diebold........................
I trust no one.....................
34 posted on
04/21/2004 7:25:10 PM PDT by
WhiteGuy
(Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson