PDA

View Full Version : Why can't the wealthiest country in the world ensure the safety of everyone's vote?


the Talking Can
11-01-2004, 06:04 PM
link (http://www.local6.com/news/3879408/detail.html)

after all the shenanigans last time we're still going have a process that is totally ****ed up....I gaurantee this the tip of the ice berg, tomorrow will be a nightmare of glitches:

13,000 Ballots Rushed From Voting Site, Must Be Recounted
Memory Card On Optical Scan Machine Fails

POSTED: 12:08 pm EST November 1, 2004
UPDATED: 6:42 pm EST November 1, 2004
About 13,000 ballots were removed from an early-voting site in Daytona Beach, Fla., Monday and rushed to a secure vault in Deland after an optical scan machine failed, according to Local 6 News.

Local 6 News has learned that a memory card, on the machine failed and all 13,000 votes must be recounted.

A computer error is to blame for the failure of the memory card which records the voting data, Local 6 News reported.

When the error was discovered Monday, representatives from both parties were notified.

Both sides then witnessed the removal of the ballots and their storage in the vault.

The canvassing board will meet Monday to discuss how to recount the ballots.

Election officials said that the discovery will not compromise the count, according to Local 6 News.

Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.

Copyright 2004 by Internet Broadcasting Systems and Local6.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Donger
11-01-2004, 06:05 PM
link (http://www.local6.com/news/3879408/detail.html)

after all the shenanigans last time we're still going have a process that is totally ****ed up....I gaurantee this the tip of the ice berg, tomorrow will be a nightmare of glitches:

13,000 Ballots Rushed From Voting Site, Must Be Recounted
Memory Card On Optical Scan Machine Fails

POSTED: 12:08 pm EST November 1, 2004
UPDATED: 6:42 pm EST November 1, 2004
About 13,000 ballots were removed from an early-voting site in Daytona Beach, Fla., Monday and rushed to a secure vault in Deland after an optical scan machine failed, according to Local 6 News.

Local 6 News has learned that a memory card, on the machine failed and all 13,000 votes must be recounted.

A computer error is to blame for the failure of the memory card which records the voting data, Local 6 News reported.

When the error was discovered Monday, representatives from both parties were notified.

Both sides then witnessed the removal of the ballots and their storage in the vault.

The canvassing board will meet Monday to discuss how to recount the ballots.

Election officials said that the discovery will not compromise the count, according to Local 6 News.

Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.

Copyright 2004 by Internet Broadcasting Systems and Local6.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

I blame Sandisk.

And President Bush, of course. He's to blame for everything that is bad and nothing that is good.

Soupnazi
11-01-2004, 06:07 PM
Why can't a car company build a car that will have precisely zero problems?

25,000 moving parts. Same deal here.

It's probability theory.

Michael Michigan
11-01-2004, 06:08 PM
Because some Floridians are too stupid to work a simple punch card ballot.

the Talking Can
11-01-2004, 06:09 PM
who mentioned Bush?

oh, you did.....I'm simply talking about priorities...voting procedures should have been a priority after 2000, but we got systems all over that are being used with little to no testing....

headsnap
11-01-2004, 06:13 PM
who mentioned Bush?

oh, you did.....I'm simply talking about priorities...voting procedures should have been a priority after 2000, but we got systems all over that are being used with little to no testing....

because we have politicos that don't want to have a foolproof voting system, for they depend on the fools. ;)

Donger
11-01-2004, 06:13 PM
who mentioned Bush?


Yes. An attempt at humor; a rather poor one, apparently.

oh, you did.....I'm simply talking about priorities...voting procedures should have been a priority after 2000, but we got systems all over that are being used with little to no testing....

If the voters of Florida were capable of accurately and completely filling out a butterfly ballot, the computerized machines wouldn't be there in the first place.

Soupnazi
11-01-2004, 06:14 PM
who mentioned Bush?

oh, you did.....I'm simply talking about priorities...voting procedures should have been a priority after 2000, but we got systems all over that are being used with little to no testing....

You just need to come to realize that our voting is not a "perfect" system. People misread ballots, computers fail, humans make errors, etc, etc. The system always has had, and always will have a certain degree of error in it. The task is to minimize it as much as possible.

How did they respond to the 2000 issues? New voting machines, which were more complex than the older punch cards. More complexity=more chances for errors to be made.

WoodDraw
11-01-2004, 06:16 PM
Because it smipy isn't a priority of the politicians. People bitch every year come November but everyone will forget about it in a few months. Why should they bother when it only helps them?

Michael Michigan
11-01-2004, 06:18 PM
Yes. An attempt at humor; a rather poor one, apparently.




It was funny. Can just needs to pull that stick out of his...can.

NaptownChief
11-01-2004, 07:25 PM
Mainly cause the Democrats don't want a clean system. They have been cheating with their "vote early and often" motto for a long time. Several years ago when they were talking about making a move to showing a photo id when voting the Dems threw a fit and completely opposed it.
They want as much freedom to cheat the vote as possible.
The first thing that needs to be done is get federal laws in place that treats voter fraud with the severity that it deserves. Cheating the vote in a federal election should be handled with the same type of severity as tax evasion and theft.

penchief
11-01-2004, 07:27 PM
The thing I'm still shaking my head about is the fact that even one single American could accept the notion of computerized touch screen voting with no method (paper trail) to verify the results.

To me, that seems about as undemocratic as it can get (related to vote-counting). If you're gonna' cheat it's a good idea to eliminate the means by which you may be detected. It is beyond me how a democracy-loving nation such as ours could stand by while the most basic democratic concept (one man, one vote) is threatened by technology.

Bowser
11-01-2004, 07:29 PM
because we have politicos that don't want to have a foolproof voting system, for they depend on the fools. ;)


heh

memyselfI
11-01-2004, 07:31 PM
The thing I'm still shaking my head about is the fact that even one single American could accept the notion of computerized touch screen voting with no method (paper trail) to verify the results.

To me, that seems about as undemocratic as it can get (related to vote-counting). If you're gonna' cheat it's a good idea to eliminate the means by which you may be detected. It is beyond me how a democracy-loving nation such as ours could stand by while the most basic democratic concept (one man, one vote) is threatened by technology.


Well, I admit to being guilty of such before the 2000 election...

no longer. I'm voting early and using the Sharpee and colored dot method.

NaptownChief
11-01-2004, 07:33 PM
The thing I'm still shaking my head about is the fact that even one single American could accept the notion of computerized touch screen voting with no method (paper trail) to verify the results.

To me, that seems about as undemocratic as it can get (related to vote-counting). If you're gonna' cheat it's a good idea to eliminate the means by which you may be detected. It is beyond me how a democracy-loving nation such as ours could stand by while the most basic democratic concept (one man, one vote) is threatened by technology.


In a day and age where you can go take computerized touch screen exams for securities license, real estate license, school entrance exams etc.etc with no problem with error and virtually zero chance of cheating or having someone else take the exam for you tells me that technology isn't the problem nor a threat to the democratic system. The problem is a bunch of cheating politicians that have little recourse for cheating the system.
You can use any kind of technology you want, you just need to have a fear in people that cheating in any format will be handled no different than if you just walked in and knocked off a bank.

headsnap
11-01-2004, 07:33 PM
The thing I'm still shaking my head about is the fact that even one single American could accept the notion of computerized touch screen voting with no method (paper trail) to verify the results.

To me, that seems about as undemocratic as it can get (related to vote-counting). If you're gonna' cheat it's a good idea to eliminate the means by which you may be detected. It is beyond me how a democracy-loving nation such as ours could stand by while the most basic democratic concept (one man, one vote) is threatened by technology.
those damned hanging chads...

the Talking Can
11-01-2004, 07:33 PM
because we have politicos that don't want to have a foolproof voting system, for they depend on the fools. ;)

rep for brevity....well said

Cochise
11-01-2004, 07:45 PM
The more complex the machine, the higher the likelihood of failure.

penchief
11-01-2004, 08:07 PM
those damned hanging chads...

Intent is a big thing. Intent was determinable with the "hanging chads" even though the "lawyer hating" retrocons sent in the best of the "old guard" deliberators (Olsen, Baker, etc.) to help secure the republican's self-serving definition of "voter intent."

Nice diversion, however, it doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement of the Diebold voting machine and the possibility of the vote being manipulated.

headsnap
11-01-2004, 08:13 PM
Intent is a big thing. Intent was determinable with the "hanging chads" even though the "lawyer hating" retrocons sent in the best of the "old guard" deliberators (Olsen, Baker, etc.) to help secure the republican's self-serving definition of "voter intent."

Nice diversion, however, it doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement of the Diebold voting machine and the possibility of the vote being manipulated.
no matter the trap, there will always be a better mouse. ;)





Is is too late to get into the divining rod business for this election?

penchief
11-01-2004, 10:00 PM
no matter the trap, there will always be a better mouse. ;)





Is is too late to get into the divining rod business for this election?

Building better mousetraps and safeguarding democracy are far different matters and could very well be conflicting interests.

With comments like that I can understand why so many people are willing to forego their liberties for the privelege of pledging allegience to the republican party.