NationStates Jolt Archive

It got Der Gubernator. (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-110805arnold_lat,0,7268769.story?coll=la-home-headlines)
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger showed up to his Brentwood neighborhood polling station today to cast his ballot in the special election — and was told he had already voted.

Elections officials said a Los Angeles County poll worker had entered Schwarzenegger's name into an electronic voting touch screen station in Pasadena on Oct. 25. The worker, who was not identified, was testing the voting machine in preparation for early voting that began the next day.

Somehow, Schwarzenegger's name was then placed on a list of people who had already voted, said Conny B. McCormack, the Los Angeles County registrar.

Schwarzenegger's aides were informed of the problem when they arrived this morning to survey the governor's polling station. The poll worker told the governor's staff he would have to use a "provisional" ballot that allows elections workers to verify if two votes were made by the same person. McCormack said the poll worker did the correct thing.

Now this error was caught because of who got input incorrectly--if it was a poor schmuck, you think that anyone would have listened?

But this is just one problem with electronic voting machines--others, far more serious have been documented in the past and will no doubt be reported after today's elections conclude. The sort of thing Schwarzenegger ran into today is the least of our worries when it comes to the clash between open and fair elections and computer touch screen voting machines.

The 'obfuscated v contest' (whose name is a hacker in-joke) demonstrated how electronic voting can be hijacked by software that looks good (even in the source code) but actually does something sinister:

http://graphics.stanford.edu/~danielrh/vote/scores.html

Ex-hackers should be put in charge of electronic voting? Why? Go look up stories about computer tech help hotlines. Those people calling in are the people running the machines. And if it isn't the people calling in, it is the ones who won't call in for fear of looking dumb and eventually figure it out by asking questions on forums.

It got Der Gubernator. (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-110805arnold_lat,0,7268769.story?coll=la-home-headlines)


Now this error was caught because of who got input incorrectly--if it was a poor schmuck, you think that anyone would have listened?

But this is just one problem with electronic voting machines--others, far more serious have been documented in the past and will no doubt be reported after today's elections conclude. The sort of thing Schwarzenegger ran into today is the least of our worries when it comes to the clash between open and fair elections and computer touch screen voting machines.
So what would you propose? Hand Written Ballots? (OMG Racist vs. Non-Native speakers/Illiterates!) More Karl Rove Inspired Butterfly Chads?

We certainly can't expect people to have to show/scan their Drivers License/ID... that would keep undocumenteds from voting!

So, what is your plan for "open and fair elections"? :rolleyes:

So what would you propose? Hand Written Ballots? (OMG Racist vs. Non-Native speakers/Illiterates!) More Karl Rove Inspired Butterfly Chads?

We certainly can't expect people to have to show/scan their Drivers License/ID... that would keep undocumenteds from voting!

So, what is your plan for "open and fair elections"? :rolleyes:
Well, for starters, if we're going to have machine counted elections, then how about optical scan machines that have a paper trail that can be audited? They're by far the most accurate system, and the one that's the easiest to get an accurate count from if or when it fails. The issue is not to have a fail-safe system--that's impossible to achieve. The goal is to have a system that fails well, that has a solid set of backups, and optical scan does that.

Now, did you want to actually have a discussion on this subject, or do you want to keep rolling your eyes like an asshole?

Now, did you want to actually have a discussion on this subject, or do you want to keep rolling your eyes like an asshole?
When all else fails, use profanity and call people names. How adult.
Well, for starters, if we're going to have machine counted elections, then how about optical scan machines that have a paper trail that can be audited? They're by far the most accurate system, and the one that's the easiest to get an accurate count from if or when it fails. The issue is not to have a fail-safe system--that's impossible to achieve. The goal is to have a system that fails well, that has a solid set of backups, and optical scan does that.The Florida Ballots WERE optical scan punchcards. Maybe you are talking about SAT style #2 pencil bubble ballots... that people badly erase and are every bit as easy (or easier) to invalidate.

If you want the illiterate vote, you have to have pictures - which means touch screens.

Maybe your touch-screen can print out an Optical-capable card... but you would have to make it visually verifiable - disenfranchising your illiterates again.

You want to curb vote fraud and decrease eligibility errors, make IDs mandatory. After that, the mechanics of voting becomes less of an issue since there will be fewer illigitimate votes to begin with.

The Florida Ballots WERE optical scan punchcards. Maybe you are talking about SAT style #2 pencil bubble ballots... that people badly erase and are every bit as easy (or easier) to invalidate.
I'm talking about the second one, and they aren't easier to invalidate. More importantly, it's a lot easier to determine the will of the voter when you recount them by hand.

If you want the illiterate vote, you have to have pictures - which means touch screens.

Maybe your touch-screen can print out an Optical-capable card... but you would have to make it visually verifiable - disenfranchising your illiterates again.

You want to curb vote fraud and decrease eligibility errors, make IDs mandatory. After that, the mechanics of voting becomes less of an issue since there will be fewer illigitimate votes to begin with.
I'm more concerned with the vote fraud that's possible by hacking a computer touch screen with no paper trail than I am about people voting twice--the first instance makes it easy for one person to steal an election. The second is far more time intensive, far less effective, and far easier to catch. Like I said--no system is failsafe. We just need one that fails well and limits the amount of potential fraud. Computer touch screen voting fails badly and in some cases, accentuates the potential for fraud.

The machine I voted on today looked like it was from 1965 and I'm East Tremont in the Bronx so explain that one to me.

So, what is your plan for "open and fair elections"? :rolleyes:

Well, considering that the Democrats lost power in the US starting in 1994, and it's only gone downhill since then... and since they were used to having things their way for 40 years.... and since 1994 we've gotten some interesting effects, like a 63 percent drop in violent crime...

the only explanation that Democrats have for Republican victories is:
A. The voting machines are rigged.
because they are sure that the majority of people are Democrats (hence their characterization of anything Republican as "out of the mainstream" or "extremist").

or
B. The voters are stupid idiots.

because in their mind, no person with an IQ over 60 would vote Republican

The machine I voted on today looked like it was from 1965 and I'm East Tremont in the Bronx so explain that one to me.
Your area hasn't gotten new machines since 1965? Get after whoever's in charge of local elections if you want it changed, I guess.

Your area hasn't gotten new machines since 1965? Get after whoever's in charge of local elections if you want it changed, I guess.


LOL it looked like it was from 1965...coulda been older or newer but definitely in excess of 10 years, nothing that recent can look that old.

Well, considering that the Democrats lost power in the US starting in 1994, and it's only gone downhill since then... and since they were used to having things their way for 40 years.... and since 1994 we've gotten some interesting effects, like a 63 percent drop in violent crime...

the only explanation that Democrats have for Republican victories is:
A. The voting machines are rigged.
because they are sure that the majority of people are Democrats (hence their characterization of anything Republican as "out of the mainstream" or "extremist").

or
B. The voters are stupid idiots.

because in their mind, no person with an IQ over 60 would vote Republican
Why make this partisan? Did I say anything about whether this was a Democratic or Republican issue? No, I didn't. This is--or rather, should be--a bipartisan matter. Fair elections are necessary for there to be confidence in any government. Take your partisanship to another thread, if you don't mind.

Now this error was caught because of who got input incorrectly--if it was a poor schmuck, you think that anyone would have listened?

Yes. I've worked as an election observer and seen this happen many times, including with manually checked paper lists of voters and punch card ballots.

Sometimes a poll worker puts the checkmark next to the wrong name.

It happens, and provided you have your voter registration card, or a picture ID, it's easy enough to sort out.

Not the grand conspiracy you think it is under the table.

Yes. I've worked as an election observer and seen this happen many times, including with manually checked paper lists of voters and punch card ballots.

Sometimes a poll worker puts the checkmark next to the wrong name.

It happens, and provided you have your voter registration card, or a picture ID, it's easy enough to sort out.

Not the grand conspiracy you think it is under the table.
Where are you getting grand conspiracy from? You're making an assumption based on your biases about me as a poster. Have I said that I thought the fix was in? No. Have I said that I thought elections were being fixed? No. Is there a possibility that it could happen? Of course--you'd be a fool or an idiot or both to think otherwise.

I was hoping for a talk about ways to ensure open and fair elections and was using this story as a way to show that screwups can and do happen, even to the most powerful people in a state. Usually they happen to people who can't garner this kind of publicity, and they get disenfranchised as a result. So how do we stop that from happening?

I was hoping for a talk about ways to ensure open and fair elections and was using this story as a way to show that screwups can and do happen, even to the most powerful people in a state. Usually they happen to people who can't garner this kind of publicity, and they get disenfranchised as a result. So how do we stop that from happening?

I haven't seen anyone disenfranchised yet, and I've been doing either poll work or election observing since 1978.

Maybe you count on the honesty of the poll workers, who usually have a greater interest in civic responsibility than most people.