View Full Version : this should freak you out...
watch the video, read the FAQ...read more if you so desire. Seriously. Politics aside, this could be a stronger threat to democracy than terrorists and commies combined.
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/
Come on.... a bigger threat than terrorists?
I do agree that it's pretty interesting... I'd like to know what percentage of the polls use this machine.
ok, so I exaggerated that a bit...but really, how secure is democracy if its so easy to rig an election?
BigRedJed
9/14/2006, 05:13 PM
OK, can somebody please tell me why everybody doesn't use the same system we use in Oklahoma (or at least, Oklahoma County, since that's the only one I know about)? The problem I see with fully-computerized voting is no hand-counting, and that records can be altered in ways like that site suggests.
The system we use here utilizes an easy-to-use paper ballot, the votes would be pretty difficult to misinterpret, automatic vote tallies are utilized for quick counting, but a hard copy exists for hand counting. I know it's not perfect, but it seems light-years better than most of the other states' systems I see in the news.
I do agree that it's pretty interesting... I'd like to know what percentage of the polls use this machine.
I don't know. What I'd also like to know too is how many other machines have similar vulnerabilities that are just as easy. This team of researchers only tested this particular model because it was what they could get their hands on, indicating that they are batting 1.000 as far as cracking these machines go.
StoopTroup
9/14/2006, 05:16 PM
What a POS that machine is.
OK, can somebody please tell me why everybody doesn't use the same system we use in Oklahoma (or at least, Oklahoma County, since that's the only one I know about)? The problem I see with fully-computerized voting is no hand-counting, and that records can be altered in ways like that site suggests.
The system we use here utilizes an easy-to-use paper ballot, the votes would be pretty difficult to misinterpret, automatic vote tallies are utilized for quick counting, but a hard copy exists for hand counting. I know it's not perfect, but it seems light-years better than most of the other states' systems I see in the news.
I completely agree. Oklahomas system is likely one of the best in use. But many states and counties have gone full on electronic with no paper trail, I think because it is cost saving and easy to quickly report the results. It's my opinion however that we should worry less about quick reporting of results and instead focus more on accuracy. I mean, the elections are held in the first week of Nov, but new officials don't get to sit in their comfy offices until Jan 20 for a reason. There's nothing wrong with taking that extra time.
jk the sooner fan
9/14/2006, 05:22 PM
ok, so I exaggerated that a bit...but really, how secure is democracy if its so easy to rig an election?
how secure is our democracy after all the rigged elections in the past.....dead people voting, all the voting scandals in chicago, etc etc
our country has dealt with voter fraud for decades, yet democracy has survived!
there's a really good documentary that brings voter fraud to light, i highly recommend it...
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JL1T.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
BigRedJed
9/14/2006, 05:26 PM
See, the beauty of Oklahoma's system is that, other than the creation and storing of the actual ballots, it's not really more difficult for the election board than fully automated voting. The votes can be electronically tallied, and go to databases, just like their fully-computerized counterparts.
But I, for one, sort of like the idea of a hard copy of every vote being kept around for audit purposes. I think it's worth the extra trouble and (probably negligible) expense.
how secure is our democracy after all the rigged elections in the past.....dead people voting, all the voting scandals in chicago, etc etc
our country has dealt with voter fraud for decades, yet democracy has survived!
there's a really good documentary that brings voter fraud to light, i highly recommend it...
Hey I don't doubt for a minute that we can deal with it, however the trend in the past has been to make it harder for such fraud to occur rather than to make it easier.
See, the beauty of Oklahoma's system is that, other than the creation and storing of the actual ballots, it's not really more difficult for the election board than fully automated voting. The votes can be electronically tallied, and go to databases, just like their fully-computerized counterparts.
But I, for one, sort of like the idea of a hard copy of every vote being kept around for audit purposes. I think it's worth the extra trouble and (probably negligible) expense.
I agree completely. In fact, the lack of a reliable back up, particularly something tangible like a paper trail, makes me uneasy.
I doubt any system is failsafe, but this one seems to work and like you mention, the cost can't be that high.
SicEmBaylor
9/14/2006, 05:31 PM
I completely agree about the electronic voting machines. Too many things could go wrong, and I don't trust a system where you don't physically mark the ballot yourself.
SicEmBaylor
9/14/2006, 05:32 PM
I really like Oklahoma's system by the way.
Another great way to cut down on fraud which should have been done all alone is checking IDs.
OCUDad
9/14/2006, 05:59 PM
Bunch of Luddite technophobes.
The only state we have to worry about is Florida, anyway. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.