Comments on: Lucas County and the parade of voting machines…

By: LisaRenee

LisaRenee — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:25:45 +0000

I can't say I agree with their research completely, especially given this on the Diebold AccuVote-TS by Center for Information Technology Policy and Dept. of Computer Science, Princeton University Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University.

By: chrismyers

chrismyers — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:11:24 +0000

Chris, Lisa and everyone,

Please take a look at this non-partisan research on voting machines.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/537110/

I completely agree with what their research found out.

By: Chris Brudy

Chris Brudy — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:12:03 +0000

To Myers about whether we had problems with the mechanical voting machines, I ask, who knows? Unless you have paper ballots counted via the New Hampshire methods, you can not be sure a count of the vote is honest and accurate.
If you get to Nancy Tobi’s website, you’ll find her three videos of NH handcounts. Start with Wilton, then Lynnborough, then State Recount.

By: LisaRenee

LisaRenee — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 04:24:47 +0000

Chris, I don’t have a problem with the Scoops site, nor do I have a problem with the Common Dreams site, like any site it’s up to the reader to determine the credibility of that particular article, it would be like judging a forum based on one post that you found to be a concern.

If you don’t find value in it, that’s of course your prerogative. As stated before, I read many sites, even ones I don’t agree with because it lets me know what others are stating and their reasoning.

It does appear that part of the problem is the lack of a strong process, I think that’s something we do agree on, a lack of a strong process equals a lack of trust and it’s apparently clear that there are dissenting voices out there making it clear they do not trust the process. ChrisB and those like him want transparency as well, the difference being disagreeing on how we get to transparency. To me that means you work on the areas you do agree are a concern to at least improve that part of the process rather than to try to dismiss someone.

By: chrismyers

chrismyers — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 03:26:30 +0000

And the SC voting problems could be prevented Chris and you ignore the problems voting on paper have such as security of the ballots, lack of accessiblity for disabled voters. So you prove my point that you blindly advocate for other systems without thinking about what you really are advocating for. A wrongly calibrated optical scan machine could have produced problems too.

Chris, you also have not answered my questions.
1. If your consipracy happened in the west coast, why was it never investigated? It could easily be proven if it was investigated, but maybe it was never investigate because it never happened.
2. Where were you when many people voted on mechanical machines? How could we have not had a problem for decades using the same thing, secret counts too, just without a computer.

Yes, Chris I am sure that a bunch of people in your large conspiracy ignored the little races while tampering with the results, that makes complete sense. I think people reading this thread can determine who is making sense and who is not.

I will need to look for it, but I remember a story 1.5 years ago where a box of paper ballots were tossed accidentally by people cleaning the voting area. Problems happen with any voting methods and only good people can prevent this.

Lisa that article is interesting, but how about linking to a respecable site. That web site is riddled with conspiracy people who have not gotten over the presidential election. I watch voting issues as they pop upand I normally skip over anything on that site because it hardly makes sense.

DRE machines have audit mechanisms and I am sure they could be more robust if demanded. In Columbus people were able to audit the results of elections on DRE machines this past year, so saying you can’t does not make sense either.

Regardless whether it is rocks, paper, mechanical, and DREs there will be problems if the process is not transparent, you do not have quality staff, and appropriate checks and balances and procedures. There will always be people complaining about the results regardless of the system. A strong pocess can prevent problems from happening.

By: neighborhood concerns

neighborhood concerns — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:38:11 +0000

“COLUMBIA, S.C. — Up to 1,500 votes may be cast on paper ballots in the Republican primary today in Horry County, S.C., which includes Myrtle Beach, because of voting machine problems due to human error on the part of county election commission staff, who failed to properly prepare the machines, state and county election officials said. After being tested, the machines should have been reset in preparation for election day, but that did not happen prior to this morning.”

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/19/592019.aspx

By: neighborhood concerns

neighborhood concerns — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:28:52 +0000

The solution might be, one standardized system for federal elections, monitored by a non-partisan group that comes together in advance of the elections and verifies the operation and set up of the system and monitors the elections and then disbands and goes back about their business.

We have something similar now, but it is not working properly, we have a hodge podge of voting systems and processes.

Some states set the vote this way or that way when the election is one of the most important we can cast.

We need a uniform and easy to understand and easy to utilize system.

By: LisaRenee

LisaRenee — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:16:17 +0000

I'd recommend a recent article by Nancy, here for those interested in a starting point.

By: Chris Brudy

Chris Brudy — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:08:19 +0000

Chris M,
First, you did not get elected in 2004 because the counters only wanted to steal the Presidential election. About the use of machines, again:
What in the world did America do before Edison and Tesla brought electricity to us? Before the lever machines? Why, we voted on paper ballots and counted those ballots by hand, in public.
Yesterday, in South Carolina, 98% of an entire county was disenfranchised because they relied on machines.
There is no excuse for the continued use of DREs, for many reasons. The most important reason is that there is no way to prove whether the votes were correctly recorded or counted. No way to prove the counts are right, and no way to prove they are wrong. Results must be taken on faith, and that is not good enough. Further, subcontracting any part of the elections process to a private contractor is an open invitation to disaster.
To see how hand counts are done in a manner which virtually blocks any attempted fraud, Google Nancy Tobi. You’ll see how votes can be counted, in public, is such a way as to determine the true voters intent.

By: neighborhood concerns

neighborhood concerns — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:51:57 +0000

“Most of the violence in other parts of the world in response to election outcomes is based on mistrust of those counting the votes or the system used to count votes.”

Have some friends from Ghana and in discussion I asked what about the system back home.

Most of the leaders are from an ethic or tribal group and traditionally those in higher rank would look out for or act with the interests of the group or tribe when in office or in higher position.

When the leaders would leave and assume political office, the folks back home, became forgotten and the leader would live the high life, what with monies and perks.

The members of the group or tribe would become weary of the leaders forgetting them and when the corrupt ways became evident after many years of patience, the ensuing violence would happen.

The leaders there as here have forgotten whom they serve.