RSS
Ohio E-Voting Machines Declared A Crime Scene?
from the good-luck-trying-to-pull-out-the-evidence dept
While it's difficult to believe some of the more conspiracy-minded theories that have gone around concerning voting results from Ohio in 2004, the simple fact that there's absolutely no way to go back and review the results highlights exactly the problem with e-voting machines. Ohio's current secretary of state has now declared some of the machines used in the '04 election as a crime scene to be investigated, but everyone admits that there's little to no chance of being able to recreate what actually happened on election night, and no way to tell if the machines acted properly or if they malfunctioned. And, if they did malfunction, there's no way to tell if it was due to an accident or something underhanded. In other words, whether or not everything worked great or everything worked terribly, there's simply no way to tell. That is why so many of us have trouble with the concept of e-voting machines. Even if they work perfectly, there's no way to confirm that -- and it just leads to more speculation and conspiracy theories about "stolen" elections.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
E-voting machines
Are you kidding us, or yourselves? We can read the situation perfectly well to deduce the truth all by ourselves, thank you very much.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: E-voting machines
I have been among the most vocal in pointing out the problems with e-voting systems since well before most people had even known about the issue. Don't tell me that I'm "creampuff" reporting.
I am NOT saying "golly, we'll just never know." Please read the post again. I am saying the very fact that you cannot definitively know one way or the other is a HUGE problem that should be a concern to everyone.
But, I'm not going to accuse anyone of malicious tactics without actual evidence that there was a conspiracy going on. We don't know for sure that anything actually went wrong. We don't know for sure that, if something went wrong, it wasn't due to a bug in the software.
To accuse someone without proof is unfair. You can do it if you want, but I won't be a part of it.
I will stand up for what is right. I will stand up and point out the absurdities of those who make these machines or those who insist that they are accurate.
But I will not make accusations without proof.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: E-voting machines
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: E-voting machines
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
lol
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, those hard to believe "conspiracy theories."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Mandatory sentences
We all know the bigwigs are behind it all, whether big is the official running or higher-ups in the party, but such mandatory sentences will make those who end up doing the dirty deeds for them think twice about it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Unless you've hacked.
Just stop and think for a moment that in 5 minutes any freshly installed windows box put on the internet without a firewall will be infected with a worm.
Now we are going to trust our elections with similar technology. A technology that is secret and is not open to peer review, verification, or questioning? Doesn't matter if the conspiracy theory's are real or not, the lack of concern for such scenarios is.
Just read http://techdirt.com/articles/20080317/185348564.shtml
if you need any red flags raised.
Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Paper Trail
What you're referring to is called a "paper trail". Most e-voting machines don't produce paper trails because the elections officials don't want them to. It makes it too hard to rig elections.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
e-voting machines
That paper sure is hard to fake-- Just ask Florida!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't use them ...
There is no reason that we can't count all elections manually. We don't have to have instant results. Waiting a few hours or a day for the count to be done is plenty fast enough to learn the results of any election.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't use them ...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Republicans around here couldn't care less
Somebody mentioned this, and he said it was all a figment of Bruner's imagination, and that the machines were perfectly fine. This kind of attitude is what really bothers me about this whole thing. It's the damned elections, people damn well should be concerned about even the appearance of a problem!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment