Run down of election problems happening all over the country

DPrival78

http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp

seagoat2

It's frightening.......

chopitdown

i never understood the use of computers for voting. Every single person i know who owns a computer has experienced a problem with it...why would we think that on one day all the computers would work to allow people to vote???

MakingWaves

I think using the computers is a good idea. It lessens the chance of fraud. Some people are still intimidated by them for some reason. Especially poll workers. They are all 60 years old or above it seems. I think all of this fraud talk is more political bullshit games. It is pretty simple if you are smart enough to mark a piece of paper or touch a screen. At least that is my opinion.

puremagic

chopitdown wrote:

i never understood the use of computers for voting. Every single person i know who owns a computer has experienced a problem with it...why would we think that on one day all the computers would work to allow people to vote???

Simply because it is for ONE DAY, ONE EVENT. There are NO surprise dates. These companies know the dates. These companies have ample time to test and retest these machines for problems. These companies have ample time to have technicians stationed in centralized locations to respond onsite to fix problems.

These private companies get paid top dollar under these contracts to supply a working product for this event. There's no multi-tasking required by these machines, one purpose and one purpose only to accept votes and count them properly.

Blaming the machine is too easy.

chopitdown

puremagic wrote:

Simply because it is for ONE DAY, ONE EVENT. There are NO surprise dates. These companies know the dates. These companies have ample time to test and retest these machines for problems. These companies have ample time to have technicians stationed in centralized locations to respond onsite to fix problems.

These private companies get paid top dollar under these contracts to supply a working product for this event. There's no multi-tasking required by these machines, one purpose and one purpose only to accept votes and count them properly.

Blaming the machine is too easy.

well obviously they haven't done everything to prepare for this ONE DAY AND ONE EVENT. I also recognize there are FAR more places where voting is going off without a hitch than there are places where there are machine malfuncitons.

I'm not blaming the machines, i'm blaming the people for not doing everything they could do to make sure these problems were avoided.

DPrival78

so much for free and democratic elections..

i haven't watched the news yet today, but i'll bet that these stories don't get the coverage they deserve.

puremagic

chopitdown wrote:

well obviously they haven't done everything to prepare for this ONE DAY AND ONE EVENT. I also recognize there are FAR more places where voting is going off without a hitch than there are places where there are machine malfuncitons.

I'm not blaming the machines, i'm blaming the people for not doing everything they could do to make sure these problems were avoided.

Then I guess we're on the same page, because these are the same companies that make the ATMs that we depend on randomly. We expect and demand answers when ATMs fail to properly execute our transactions. The same should hold true to our election process.

The problem is our votes are not to be treated as Secret, our votes are to be accomplished in Private

inmytree

I was able to choose between a paper ballot or a e-voting machine....I went with paper, of course ....

the lone computer voting machine was collecting dust, as nobody went near it, at least while I was their...

cincybearcat

inmytree wrote:

I was able to choose between a paper ballot or a e-voting machine....I went with paper, of course ....

the lone computer voting machine was collecting dust, as nobody went near it, at least while I was their...

That's cause the education in North Carolina ain't so great...don't know how to use that new fancy shiny thing.

denverfan

Here in CO people are complaining about long lines which are the result of computer problems. Problem is, the only people who are election officals are averageing and age of 75 and my guess would be not many of them are too computer savy...At my polling place a lady had a tech. question and the election offical had no idea how to answer. I think the technology is great but if you dont have the people to run it, it all goes for nothing

RockinInCanada

MakingWaves wrote:

I think using the computers is a good idea. It lessens the chance of fraud. Some people are still intimidated by them for some reason. Especially poll workers. They are all 60 years old or above it seems. I think all of this fraud talk is more political bullshit games. It is pretty simple if you are smart enough to mark a piece of paper or touch a screen. At least that is my opinion.

Yeah and computers (and no I am not leading into voter fraud) never get viruses or can be hacked or any of that stuff.....cannot believe that computers can provide a 100% accurate system....there needs to be some sort of human involvement IMHO.....I prefer the old pencil and paper bit.....

Ahnimus

Computers don't make mistakes, people make mistakes.

Computers only do what they are told to do.

RockinInCanada

Ahnimus wrote:

Computers don't make mistakes, people make mistakes.

Computers only do what they are told to do.

True enough....but that is not what I meant by human involvement.....

Ahnimus

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

True enough....but that is not what I meant by human involvement.....

Oh I agree, using voting machines is a bad idea. The machines have no discretion, it's all up to the code and mechanics, which can be manipulated.

jeffbr

Ahnimus wrote:

Oh I agree, using voting machines is a bad idea. The machines have no discretion, it's all up to the code and mechanics, which can be manipulated.

So can hand counting of ballots. So can machine counting of paper ballots.

We use ATM machines every day. We do electronic purchases with credit cards every day. Electronic voting machines are not evil. We just have to have better safeguards, better independent testing and verification, better auditing. But to write off electronic voting machines is silly in the 21st century.

Ahnimus

jeffbr wrote:

So can hand counting of ballots. So can machine counting of paper ballots.

We use ATM machines every day. We do electronic purchases with credit cards every day. Electronic voting machines are not evil. We just have to have better safeguards, better independent testing and verification, better auditing. But to write off electronic voting machines is silly in the 21st century.

The difference between ATM and voting machines is the caliber of crook trying to hack them and the effort to catch the perps.

If someone hacked an ATM the national guard would be looking for them. If someone hacks a voting machine it goes through a beurocratic circus just to get dropped after the crowning of the president.

RockinInCanada

jeffbr wrote:

So can hand counting of ballots. So can machine counting of paper ballots.

We use ATM machines every day. We do electronic purchases with credit cards every day. Electronic voting machines are not evil. We just have to have better safeguards, better independent testing and verification, better auditing. But to write off electronic voting machines is silly in the 21st century.

No I do not agree that it is silly....

evenkat

jeffbr wrote:

So can hand counting of ballots. So can machine counting of paper ballots.

We use ATM machines every day. We do electronic purchases with credit cards every day. Electronic voting machines are not evil. We just have to have better safeguards, better independent testing and verification, better auditing. But to write off electronic voting machines is silly in the 21st century.

Yeah but we get paper receipts with ATM machines and statements from the credit card companies when purchases are made but with electronic voting machines there is no paper trail. The banks can't say we lost your money because of a computer malfunction but with the electronic voting machines votes can be lost due to computer malfunction or you may not even be able to vote because of a computer malfunction. It's not like you can vote the following day if the voting machine is down. These are some of the problems that are happening with the electronic voting machines RIGHT NOW.

jeffbr

Ahnimus wrote:

The difference between ATM and voting machines is the caliber of crook trying to hack them and the effort to catch the perps.

If someone hacked an ATM the national guard would be looking for them. If someone hacks a voting machine it goes through a beurocratic circus just to get dropped after the crowning of the president.

Hence the need to shore up safeguards and audit trails. But to dismiss what should be a more efficient solution just because it involves technology doesn't make sense to me. Tampering with federal election results should bring out the FBI and the Secret Service. Those transactions should be every bit as secure as financial transactions via credit card or ATM.

jeffbr

evenkat wrote:

Yeah but we get paper receipts with ATM machines and statements from the credit card companies when purchases are made but with electronic voting machines there is no paper trail.

I posted my experiences with a Diebold machine in a different thread. But during the review process, each page was printed, I could see the printout behind a translucent, locked panel. Once each page was reviewed, accepted and printed, the entire ballot was cast. So the technogy certainly exists that could give us a physical printout or receipt as well.

Ahnimus

jeffbr wrote:

Hence the need to shore up safeguards and audit trails. But to dismiss what should be a more efficient solution just because it involves technology doesn't make sense to me. Tampering with federal election results should bring out the FBI and the Secret Service. Those transactions should be every bit as secure as financial transactions via credit card or ATM.

Whatever happened to that guy that testified hacking the last election?

fanch75

jeffbr wrote:

So can hand counting of ballots. So can machine counting of paper ballots.

We use ATM machines every day. We do electronic purchases with credit cards every day. Electronic voting machines are not evil. We just have to have better safeguards, better independent testing and verification, better auditing. But to write off electronic voting machines is silly in the 21st century.

And I see ATM machines that aren't working, but I betcha 99.9% of them are working just fine!

Folks, there always have and always will be voting issues. The problem is that the 2000 election was so close that the hair-splitting on vote-counting actually became a decision-making amount. Let's put it htis way - as of now, the link in the original post has 90 items. If there are 90 voting issues nationwide, well that's pretty damn good.

evenkat

jeffbr wrote:

I posted my experiences with a Diebold machine in a different thread. But during the review process, each page was printed, I could see the printout behind a translucent, locked panel. Once each page was reviewed, accepted and printed, the entire ballot was cast. So the technogy certainly exists that could give us a physical printout or receipt as well.

Yes, it can be done but they choose not too. Watch 'Hacking Democracy' on HBO. They ran a test vote using a Diebold machine. 8 people voted - 6 voted no and 2 voted yes. They all watched the paper ballots fed into the Diebold machine but the total that came out of the Diebold machine was different as it read 7 voted yes and 1 voted no. The machine had been hacked, which Diebold insisted could not be done. The receipt that is used to tally the votes is the one that is printed out from the Diebold machine and not the paper ballot. You have to wonder why they would not want to hold onto the paper ballots.

MakingWaves

fanch75 wrote:

And I see ATM machines that aren't working, but I betcha 99.9% of them are working just fine!

Folks, there always have and always will be voting issues. The problem is that the 2000 election was so close that the hair-splitting on vote-counting actually became a decision-making amount. Let's put it htis way - as of now, the link in the original post has 90 items. If there are 90 voting issues nationwide, well that's pretty damn good.

I couldn't agree more. Think of all the counties in this country and if there are only 90 problems that really isn't too bad. Half of those are probably human error and aren't a reflection on the system itself.

MakingWaves

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

Yeah and computers (and no I am not leading into voter fraud) never get viruses or can be hacked or any of that stuff.....cannot believe that computers can provide a 100% accurate system....there needs to be some sort of human involvement IMHO.....I prefer the old pencil and paper bit.....

I understand what you are saying and I agree that the computers won't provide 100% accuracy. I guess nothing will as long as greedy politicians play a role.

Smellyman2

Diebold's CEO, Wally O'Dell, said "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year," in a fund-raising letter to Republicans dated August 13, 2003.

jeffbr

evenkat wrote:

Yes, it can be done but they choose not too. Watch 'Hacking Democracy' on HBO. They ran a test vote using a Diebold machine. 8 people voted - 6 voted no and 2 voted yes. They all watched the paper ballots fed into the Diebold machine but the total that came out of the Diebold machine was different as it read 7 voted yes and 1 voted no. The machine had been hacked, which Diebold insisted could not be done. The receipt that is used to tally the votes is the one that is printed out from the Diebold machine and not the paper ballot. You have to wonder why they would not want to hold onto the paper ballots.

I'm certainly not trying to convince anyone that the system is working flawlessly right now. Clearly it isn't. I'm only suggesting that these flaws are not insurmountable, and this talk of ditching electronic voting is extremely myopic. Most of these issues could be addressed before the next election in 2 years. None of these problems is any more difficult than problems solved every day by technology companies.

I'll suggest we're better off fixing problems with electronic voting rather than ditching it and relying on ballot judges trying to divine voter intent from hanging chads, or relying on USPS delivering mail in ballots on time with no loss, have them received and sorted and counted properly, or having polling officials collect paper ballots, batch them, give them to a driver who delivers them to some headquarters where they are misplaced in the corner of a storage room, etc... We currently have NO system which is flawless or immune from tampering. Electronic balloting has the prospect of being the most secure, accurate and efficient option if we devote enough attention and priority to it.

fanch75

Well, now that the Dems have overwhelmingly won, is everyone now okay with the voting system in 2006?

cincybearcat

fanch75 wrote:

Well, now that the Dems have overwhelmingly won, is everyone now okay with the voting system in 2006?

It's funny that all the voting 'irregularities' mentioned early in the night suddenly became "few and far between" by the end of the night.


I hate whiney losers.

fanch75

cincybearcat wrote:

It's funny that all the voting 'irregularities' mentioned early in the night suddenly became "few and far between" by the end of the night.

lol....right!