Skip to comments.
Drudge Siren: TOUCH SCREEN CONFUSION
Drudge ^
| 11/05/02
| Drudge
Posted on 11/05/2002 10:19:09 AM PST by TheConservator
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-144 next last
To: thoughtomator
I agree. Computer voting is a TERRIBLE idea. At least with paper ballots somebody has to make off with a heavy box full of ballots, and might get caught with the evidence in the car trunk or closet, or even floating in the bay. The same with punch cards and chads, although they are more easily spoiled. But with a computer, all you need to do is hose the software or plug in a fraudware program, and you could instantly flip 1,000 R votes to 1,000 D votes, in less than a nanosecond, and tracelessly. Or, as happened in the Florida primary, just flush all the votes down the drain and come up with a big zero if you don't like what you see.
101
posted on
11/05/2002 11:10:27 AM PST
by
Cicero
To: Leto
I have to believe that this issue will work in the favor of Republicans, overall. After all, Democrats are, by definition, less intelligent. ;-)
To: Mo1
Are you in Hoeffel's district? I would like to get a read on how that race is going.
103
posted on
11/05/2002 11:10:41 AM PST
by
twigs
To: Naspino
"why shouldn't I be able to connect to the GA state website and see who I voted for?"
... and if it shows you voted for the "wrong" person what do you do then? ... or does everyone have the new right to change their vote at any time ?
104
posted on
11/05/2002 11:11:02 AM PST
by
RS
To: hot august night
Something is not right here...how much of this is going on today, and how many hard-working conservatives who are stuck working long hours and may not get another chance to make it to the polls are being denied their right to vote? Sounds like they were playing their games early .. you should report it and yes EVERY vote counts
I heard Rush mention earlier that the Unions boys were actually going INTO the voting booth to "help" folks vote up in Mass.
105
posted on
11/05/2002 11:14:18 AM PST
by
Mo1
To: AmishDude
No real solutions have been proposed. There is an easy solution. When you have placed your vote electronicly, the machine should print a paper copy. The voter reviews the paper copy, then deposits it into a lock box. If there is a question about the vote, the state can then go back and count the paper ballots to verify the accuracy of the electronic ballots.
To: Brookhaven
Excatly!
107
posted on
11/05/2002 11:15:43 AM PST
by
free me
To: Cicero
Do the voting on the screen...use the computer to verify you voted for who you want..print off a physical ballot and save electronically. Deposit this ballot into a physical box. Electronic ballot and physical ballot should have a numeric identifier that matches. If the numbers from both places don't add up you know someone is cheating. Throw out all that don't match.
108
posted on
11/05/2002 11:16:32 AM PST
by
Noslrac
To: TheConservator
Vegas uses the touch screen, when I went to vote for a candidate I touched the screen and the wrong candidate was selected. It was a simple matter of touching the screen again and wiping out that vote and redoing it to correct the problem.
The dems will make a big deal out of nothing, no matter what.
109
posted on
11/05/2002 11:18:08 AM PST
by
swheats
To: r9etb
Regarding paper ballots, I posted this on a similar thread earlier...
This (potential for fraud or error) really depends on the way the counting is managed at the polling station. I've worked elections here in Toronto in the past and the system used is so simple it's practically foolproof. Allow me to elaborate...
We use good old paper ballots with the candidates names in huge type and a big circle beside each one for an "X" or checkmark, either is allowed but the X is the preferred standard. The ballot is placed in the box under the observation of two election officials. In each polling station are representatives of each official political party, but their role is strictly to observe. They are not permitted to speak to voters in any way shape or form that might be construed as councilling their vote. Violation of this rule is grounds for immediate removal from the facility under orders of the Returning Officer who is selected and trained by Elections Canada, an arms length agency with representation from all parties. Police are available should a party worker ignore the directions of the Returning Officer.
When the polls close the ballot box is emptied in front of all people in the polling station; election workers and party observers. The ballots are unfolded by one worker who calls out the voter's selection and displays the ballot so it can be seen by all present. Another worker records the vote on a master sheet, again in the presence of all in attendance. The ballots are very tightly controlled and at all times visible during the count. Party workers stand in a position where they can see everything but not close enough to be able to touch or handle a ballot in any way. It is virtually impossible to screw around with this process. It may sound primitive but it works.
One difference in our election procedures that I've noticed from that of The U.S. is that your system seems to rely more heavily on actual participation of the parties in the whole affair, whether that be running the electoral commissions or actually registering voters. Again, we use Elections Canada for this (the process of enumeration) and keep the parties completely out of it. I recall during the Floriduh fiasco in 2000 watching the recount and being stunned that you actually allowed party workers to handle the ballots. Attempting to touch a ballot at a Canuck polling station would result in immediate expulsion from the building, by a police officer if necessary.
I realize that there are quite often many more ballot initatives and propositions voted on during an American election than is usual in Canada, and that has often been suggested to me as the reason for a greater reliance on electronic or mechanical voting machines down there. I grant that this fact could make the use of paper ballots somewhat more cumbersome, but the fact remains that machines can be tricked or outright fail. IMO, the process of an election is so critical to the health of a nation that the convenience of a voter or electoral worker should be secondary to the need for a reliable and fraud-proof process of voting and tabulation. Politicos just cannot be trusted to leave their bias at the door if they are working a poll. I've threatened a number of party workers from various parties with sanction at polls and always been backed up by those in charge.
Paper ballots and hand counting may seem old fashioned and time consuming, but when done right can go a long way towards cementing the legitimacy of a vote. I can't believe that Americans put up with some of the nonsense I've read about here on many occaisions.
Have a great election day and here's hoping for a GOP led House and Senate!
To: FreeAtlanta
I don't think the problem in GA had anything to do with the monitors touch calibration being off....... listening to Boortz's show this morning, a lady called in who said when she voted and the "review screen" came up at the end she read thru the review and noticed that one of the votes was wrong. She swore that she voted Rep, but the review was showing a Dem vote. Now here is the biggy..... at that point you are supposed to be able to change the vote to reflect the correct choice before final submission. But she said that touching the screen to make the change would not work. She called over a precint worker to help her make the correction. The worker could not get it to make a change either and in the process of hitting on the screen the worker touched the "cast vote" button and then there was no turning back. Worker appologised and said at this point there is no way to retrive the vote and make a correction and the vote would have to stand. The voter was livid and had been calling all over the state complaining.
To: twigs
I had thought I was .. but I didn't see his name was on the ballet .. but Curt Weldon was .. which makes me very happy .. I hate Hoffel
I knew he was redistrict .. but maybe my area didn't get in ..
I talked to my sister who is in Philly said Hoffel was on her ticket and she voted for Brown because Joe told her not to .. LOL
112
posted on
11/05/2002 11:27:57 AM PST
by
Mo1
To: AmishDude
>>But I wouldn't worry. It's like going on a long trip and wondering if you've left the oven on halfway there. It doesn't do you any good to worry and your concerns are probably unfounded.<<
I have another approach. Trust but verify.
To: Tiger6
I experienced a similar problem in Florida. I touched the screen to vote for a particular candidate for AG but when I got to the end and saw my review sheet, it indicated I hadn't voted for AG.
So I went back and revoted. I imagine, I hadn't placed my finger in the exact spot needed when I cast the vote originally.
With the review screens, I don't see how this can be a problem. If your review screen isn't right, don't submitt the vote.
114
posted on
11/05/2002 11:29:44 AM PST
by
dawn53
To: FreeAtlanta
The easy answer is that you don't want Union Thugs waiting outside to verify who you voted for. If it ever gets to the point where I'm afraid to cast a ballot I fear I won't live long or they won't live long -- depending on how accurately I shoot.
115
posted on
11/05/2002 11:30:24 AM PST
by
Naspino
To: RS
... and if it shows you voted for the "wrong" person what do you do then? ... or does everyone have the new right to change their vote at any time ? Well it should be pretty simple and a good way to highlight fraud. If I had a paper receipt of who I voted for plus an encrypted signature then I can prove that my reciept is valid and that the DNC rigged the machine.
116
posted on
11/05/2002 11:32:03 AM PST
by
Naspino
To: mitchbert
>>Could be deliberate but I lean towards bad set up, likely by people that have no idea what they're doing with the technology. <<
Oh well. So long as they put the entire nation into Constitutional turmoil, what the hell?
To: Apple Pan Dowdy
Worker appologised and said at this point there is no way to retrive the vote and make a correction and the vote would have to stand. The voter was livid and had been calling all over the state complaining. Umm -- had that been me I'd be sitting in jail now and that worker would be in an ambulance. Stealing someone's vote is a serious affront.
118
posted on
11/05/2002 11:34:40 AM PST
by
Naspino
To: TheConservator
As the support manager for a company that buids touch screen kiosk systems this could be one of 2 things:
1. Touchscreen calibration is off (though once it's done on good quality screen it rarely needs to be done again. With ours it's about once every 6 months).
2. Some USB touchscreens are registered as UIDs or User Interface Devices in Windows. Since the hardware is recognized some inexperienced people may not load the driver. When this happens, calibration can not be done and the screen will register 180 degrees off of a screen center axis to where it is touched.
To: Brookhaven
What if there's a discrepancy? Do the paper ballots win? Do the e-ballots win?
Actually, it's not a terrible idea if the paper ballot includes a unique identifier and a time stamp. But if the paper ballot doesn't match with what the voter wants, while he or she's still in the booth, it must be disposed of in some way by the voter.
Not to say it can't be resolved but all of these electoral "reforms" come from the Dem idea that voters are not responsible for their votes.
Of course, there will now be Democrat lawsuits. Which will cause people to lose faith in elections. Which will depress turnout. Which is good for Republicans. I think.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-144 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson