Posted on 12/18/2007 5:11:50 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts
This is clearly a step in the right direction. Hopefully, more states will wake up and toss these electronic fraud enhancement devices in the landfill.
Great news!
Would you rather trust your money with an accountant or the government?
Hours of staring at chads by a select group of people via the news sure would make more sense. /s
purple finger good.
Only a fool would trust their money with anyone but themselves....
Last election in Washington and New Mexico they just kept "finding" more bags of ballots.
Lyndon Johnson won a senate seat with paper ballot fraud in Texas in 1958, JFK won the presidency with paper ballot fraud in Cook County, IL, in 1960, and Christine Gregoire won the Washington governor’s race with paper ballot fraud in 2004. So how are paper ballots so much better?
Not all are duped!
ping
I meant "Have".
Looong day.... ; (
This is a good thing.
There is no way that the balloting machine and the counting machine should be contained in the same unit.
One should simply print out a crisp, clear ballot with clear selections (and non-selections).
This should be handed over to the precinct workers who run them through a scanner to get a tally.
This gives a paper trail, a means of correcting a ballot before it is printed, and it gives a means of hand-counting ballots if necessary.
It should be a crime to have an election based purely on electronic digits in one machine. No paper trail = phony election.
I rather like the system my town uses. You must draw a black ink line next to the name of your intended candidate. The line completes the middle section of an arrow pointing to a name and the whole ballot is inserted into and read by an optical scanner. Early 80s technology and damned near infallible. No chads. No touch screens and most importantly...no Windoze programs needed to access the machine and tally the votes which are then entered into a database that allows various reports to be run...or modified.
Considering that it's Democrats demanding it, I think you just answered your own question :)
They are contemplating mail-in ballots this election in CO. That must mean that the polls are too close to call and they need a way to have untraceable voter fraud.
I would also like to have biometrix that verify that you only voted once. Don't record the thumb print or eye scan with a name, just verify that it has only voted once. Next, we need to get rid of absentee voting the way it currently is done. Currently, absentee voting is a great potential for fraud.
First the Rats said we needed electronic voting machines. Now they say we need something else. I agree with you. Electronic voting with a printed ballot that can be hand counted later for verification when necessary. Touch screen macines without a voter - visually verified - paper printed ballot have tremendous fraud potential IMO. The old punch cards were perfectly fine with me too.
We scrapped electronic voting machines in Sarasota County after the 2004 election (Whiny Christine Jennings is still wailing about losing by 254 votes!). We converted to optical scanned paper ballots for the 2006 election. The instructions were quite explicit, “Use the supplied marking pen to completely fill in the oval next to the candidate you wish to vote for or your choice for each ballot initiative.” After voting the voter puts his or her ballot into a scanner and it either accepts a correctly completed ballot or rejects a ballot that is incorrectly marked. I was waiting behind an old lady who inserted her ballot three times and got it rejected each time. I glanced over at her ballot and saw that the woman had simply put a check mark next to her choice, missing the oval entirely. I guess that there is no voting system that can overcome stupidity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.