Skip to main content

View Diary: One Day Until Victory (Let's Close the Deal Together) (168 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Honestly (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nyceve, Keone Michaels, greenearth, theark

    why don't we just go back to the levers?

    This article that someone linked to a few days back is what did it for me.  Without e-voting, technology is static.  You buy a machine, and you keep it -- for decades.  But with this, the machines -- which are only used once a year -- are going to have the lifespan of any other electronic device: years, not decades.  And once they get replaced, we're going to have to fight this damn battle all over again, and if we ever stop fighting, then someone's going to be able to jump in and buy machines which can be reprogrammed.

    So why don't we just forget the e-voting machines?  Honestly, anything -- including hanging chads -- would be better than this.

    •  The lever machines are great (5+ / 0-)

      like a pair of scissors--they always work.  A timeless design that needs no improvement.  

      •  Correction about Levers (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenearth, lemming22

        In New York I just heard a story on the radio about how some years ago when the supervisor went to the warehouse to get the machines and set them up for election day, a Republican was already there with the machines opened up.

        Also, no voter-verifiable audit trail.

        Any system is only as good as the people who use and adminster it.

        •  Eek--Gremlins!! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          greenearth

          Any system is only as good as the people who use and adminster it.

          I could go and say something cynical, but I'm really trying to stay upbeat today...

        •  True ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          greenearth

          ... but the potential for fraud is significantly less than the potential for fraud with e-voting.  About the only thing you could do is insert rolls of paper with pre-recorded votes (which should be relatively easy to verify), or cross wires somehow so that the wrong holes get punched in the paper (which should be incredibly easy to spot).  Or, I suppose, leave the paper out entirely.

          A voter-verifiable audit trail is only necessary because with computers, there's no necessary connection between the user's input and the printer's output.  For analog systems, there's no way of programming the system to alter a person's vote, hence, no need for a trail.

          Systems which are easier to understand and administer tend to be better than those that are complex, especially when you're working with a group of older volunteers.  And e-voting is anything but easy to understand.

          The more I think about it, the more I realize that computers are completely unsuited for elections.  How long do you think the Diebold machines will last?  Five years?  Ten?  I'm not putting any bets on that touch-screen monitor, personally, and once it's gone, the district has to buy another (expensive) machine.  It's ridiculous, and pointless.

          •  lemming22, another example about computers (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lemming22

            I just saw a presentation which omitted the speaker's #1 item on a list (I only found out by asking afterwards why something wasn't listed).

            It seems he e-mailed his presentation and the software dropped whatever wasn't in a certain font.

            I collect computer glitch disaster stories.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (125)
  • Community (55)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (27)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Media (18)
  • Labor (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Education (16)
  • GOP (16)
  • Law (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Bernie Sanders (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Racism (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site