Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Desertdog on May 28, 2009, 12:51:58 PM
-
I would not trust any vote to the internet. Way too much of a possibilty of fraud.
Voting Drops 83 Percent In All-Digital Election
People Could Vote Online, On Phone For Neighborhood Board
http://www.kitv.com/politics/19573770/detail.html?treets=hon&tml=hon_9am&ts=T&tmi=hon_9am_1_02000105272009
HONOLULU -- Officials saw an 83 percent drop in the number of voters participating in the Honolulu Neighborhood Board's recent election that is the nation's first all-digital election, where people could vote over the Internet or by phone.
For the first time, Oahu voters had to use computers or the telephone to vote for their neighborhood board candidates and many people did not bother.
About 7,300 people voted this year, compared to 44,000 people who voted in the last neighborhood board race in 2007.
"That is of great concern to me. It is disappointing, compared to two years ago," said Joan Manke of the city Neighborhood Commission.
Manke heads the commission that oversaw Internet voting. She said voters obviously did not know about or did not embrace the change to high-tech voting.
"This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of. So again, this is a huge change and I know that, and given the budget, this is a best that we could do," Manke said.
The city cut its expenses in half by using computers and phone technology by Everyone Counts. It cost about $95,000.
The question is whether the state and the counties will use the new voting technology to reach out to overseas voters, people who are not able to walk into voting booths like these to vote.
"This is the future for presidential elections, general elections, primary elections, all the way," Everyone Counts consultant Bob Watada said.
Watada is the former Campaign Spending Commission director.
"(It) gives access to a lot of people who haven't had the access, and you don't have the hanging chads, you don't have the miscounted absentee ballots, you don't have the ballots lost," he said.
More public education is needed to assure voters, who are used to going into voting booths that online voting is safe and easy, Watada said. However, that costs money, which is difficult to get in these tight budget times.
-
"This is the future for presidential elections, general elections, primary elections, all the way," Everyone Counts consultant Bob Watada said.
If true the Democrats will never lose another election... :mad:
-
About 7,300 people voted this year, compared to 44,000 people who voted in the last neighborhood board race in 2007.
Great! Can we apply this to all elections? We need less people voting.
-
If true the Democrats will never lose another election... :mad:
You don't remember Diebold blatantly promising to deliver Ohio? Republicans had/have Diebold deliver quite a few promised votes. Dems have their own folks (ACORN, et al) rigging other votes.
Unfortunately, vote rigging has been an art for both parties for a long time. Neither side has a vested interest in accurate and trustworthy voting. Don't be foolish enough to believe both parties do not engage in such activities.
Robo-calls, vote tampering, rigged voting machines, voter suppression, etc. Both sides have employed all of the above.
-
You don't remember Diebold blatantly promising to deliver Ohio? Republicans had/have Diebold deliver quite a few promised votes. Dems have their own folks (ACORN, et al) rigging other votes.
Unfortunately, vote rigging has been an art for both parties for a long time. Neither side has a vested interest in accurate and trustworthy voting. Don't be foolish enough to believe both parties do not engage in such activities.
Robo-calls, vote tampering, rigged voting machines, voter suppression, etc. Both sides have employed all of the above.
There are ciminal indictments against Acorn for voter fraud. What evidence do you have for your conspiracy theories about the Republicans?
-
There are ciminal indictments against Acorn for voter fraud. What evidence do you have for your conspiracy theories about the Republicans?
Phone games - Allen Raymond.
Potential vote tampering - Diebold. Ask Jim March for details.
Voter suppression - The technical term is 'caging'. Phony letters allegedly from the 'Board of Elections' saying that one's registration is invalid, or that the election date has changed, etc.
Purging of voting lists - ChoicePoint and the whole Florida Central Voter File thing
On the other hand, the Dem affiliated union folks broke into GOP offices, physically attacked two supervisors, etc. ACORN is starting to get into professional vote tampering, but the Unions have been doing so for decades. Vote counting fraud, intimidation, etc. My point is both sides use voting fraud. One side or the other may do more at any particular time, but neither have clean hands in the matter. That is why there is no real interest in making elections foolproof and tamper resistant.
-
Phone games - Allen Raymond.
Potential vote tampering - Diebold. Ask Jim March for details.
Voter suppression - The technical term is 'caging'. Phony letters allegedly from the 'Board of Elections' saying that one's registration is invalid, or that the election date has changed, etc.
Purging of voting lists - ChoicePoint and the whole Florida Central Voter File thing
Accuation - Yes. Where are the criminal charges??
I am sure if there is any proof of criminal wrong doing the Dems would have people in court in the blink of an eye.
ACORN is facing charges.
-
Accuation - Yes. Where are the criminal charges??
Raymond served federal time for robo-calling.
-
My point is both sides use voting fraud. One side or the other may do more at any particular time, but neither have clean hands in the matter. That is why there is no real interest in making elections foolproof and tamper resistant.
That's what annoys me so much about well-intentioned efforts to discredit Diebold or any other e-voting system. Voting fraud has always existed, and there's ample opportunity to eliminate voting fraud if that's the goal*. Yet e-voting detractors almost exclusively rant about the failures of (naive, basic) current e-voting. They typically fail to mention that fraud is not unique to e-voting, and they fail to note that there exist protocols for reducing/preventing fraud (for electronic AND paper voting).
* e.g. http://rangevoting.org/RivSmiPRshort.html
-
That's what annoys me so much about well-intentioned efforts to discredit Diebold or any other e-voting system. Voting fraud has always existed, and there's ample opportunity to eliminate voting fraud if that's the goal*. Yet e-voting detractors almost exclusively rant about the failures of (naive, basic) current e-voting. They typically fail to mention that fraud is not unique to e-voting, and they fail to note that there exist protocols for reducing/preventing fraud (for electronic AND paper voting).
* e.g. http://rangevoting.org/RivSmiPRshort.html
Ah, you realize you're talking about one of our own members? Jim March was heavily involved in getting Diebold decertified in California. A lot of Diebold detractors have acknowledged this is not a new or unique issue. They're pointing out that poorly designed voting systems allow fewer people to do more damage. With traditional voting machines, you need to have people at every district you want to alter the vote. The more alteration, the more people are in on the fix. With vote hacking a Diebold setup for an entire state could realistically be done by a handful of people.
Might you, some of the issues these 'detractors' are pointing out are so incredibly stupid, it should border on criminal. My personal favorite? Tamper evident seals on machines. If the seal was destroyed, the votes from that machine were tossed out. Yay, voting denial of service.