Touch Screen Voting- Too Techy or The only way to go?

Ok so in the aftermath of the Bush\Gore voting disaster, 15 Florida counties have moved to touch-screen voting. Florida Congressman Robert Wexler has brought a federal lawsuit already to determine the constitutionality of having 15 out of 67 counties in the state vote in this manner which would not allow for a manual recount.

Are we ready to use a paperless system? Will Florida be another disaster? Anyone bothered by the fact that the biggest manufacturers of these voting machines are also enormous contributors to the Bush campaign?

IF the entire country uses this system, wouldnt it be EASIER for candidates to cheat/hack the system???

they have better run hacking tests on this new system be4 they bring it to the public...

o0o well though...

it does not matter anyway...

bush is gunna' cheat sumhow and win again no matter what!

damn...

i can already see whats gonna happen some punk ass kid who can hack well is gonna screw up the election OR the companys who run the electing thing will have rigged it in bush's favour. really whats so hard about just having names on a card and checking off box beside the person you wan to vote for. i mean REALLY.

Originally posted by The Descendant
Ok so in the aftermath of the Bush\Gore voting disaster, 15 Florida counties have moved to touch-screen voting. Florida Congressman Robert Wexler has brought a federal lawsuit already to determine the constitutionality of having 15 out of 67 counties in the state vote in this manner which would not allow for a manual recount.

Are we ready to use a paperless system? Will Florida be another disaster? Anyone bothered by the fact that the biggest manufacturers of these voting machines are also enormous contributors to the Bush campaign?

__________________________________________

Just curious...who are the manufacturers of these voting machines, and what types of enormous contributions have they made to the Bush campaign? I'd like to see your sources.

I personally like the idea of touchscreen voting. Look at Florida in 2000...people couldn't even handle a hanging chad, for chrissakes. And as far as checking a box and hand counting, that's a much bigger opportunity for corruption from both parties.

john

Well I posted a long answer to this and then my PC went to crap on me.

So....this method is subject to fraud on a national scale. There is proof that these voting machines can be hacked and the data altered and...and here's the main problem...there is NO AUDIT TRAIL. That's right...whatever votes these machines return, there is NO WAY to independantly verify the results. Read that again! That's right! The results you will see in the press could have been altered and no one will be able to challenge it.

Democracy, yeah right.

This site has more

These anticipated "problems" are very easily overcome. You tie your vote to a number, perhaps your SSN. There is your audit trail, and is totally un-hackable. You can even get a printout of your vote when you leave the voting booth.

Much more preferable to having a corrupt precinct boss and his cronies getting their grubby hands on my ballot.

john

Back to my original questions: who are the manufacturers of these voting machines that are enormous contributors to the Bush campaign? Or has it been determined that verifying those inflammatory allegations are not important, having served their purpose of inserting an anti-Bush tone to the thread?

john

Originally posted by jsobecky
Back to my original questions: who are the manufacturers of these voting machines that are enormous contributors to the Bush campaign? Or has it been determined that verifying those inflammatory allegations are not important, having served their purpose of inserting an anti-Bush tone to the thread?

john

walden o'dell is the chief executive of Diebold inc who manufacture the voting machines. He was at a republican party fundraiser last year and stated "i am committed to helping ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year".
(source New Internationalist magazine issue 366)

bolshevik

Thanks for the reference. I appreciate it.

Way to go, Walden! Exercise your rights as an American!

john

Originally posted by jsobecky
bolshevik
Way to go, Walden! Exercise your rights as an American!

You originally said the statement was "inflammatory allegations", which basically implies that what the person is being accused of is wrong.
Then you have nicely been proved wrong, and you backtrack and say that crap quoted above.

So was it not "inflammatory allegations" to begin with then? Make sense man, that was the worst attempt at spin I have ever seen in my life, you do not deserve to have "The man with no name" in your avatar, he was a real man and would never backtrack.

Originally posted by John Nada

Originally posted by jsobecky
bolshevik
Way to go, Walden! Exercise your rights as an American!

You originally said the statement was "inflammatory allegations", which basically implies that what the person is being accused of is wrong.
Then you have nicely been proved wrong, and you backtrack and say that crap quoted above.

So was it not "inflammatory allegations" to begin with then? Make sense man, that was the worst attempt at spin I have ever seen in my life, you do not deserve to have "The man with no name" in your avatar, he was a real man and would never backtrack.

____________________________

Chill out. The fact that Diebold's CEO is a Bush supporter does not prove that he is an enormous contributor. That part has not been proven. Otherwise, it is an inflammatory allegation, given it's context.

So now do you want to switch feet in your mouth and show me where I have been proven wrong?

BTW, Bush is going to be here this week, not a campaign trip, but a business trip. So YOU'LL be paying for his lunch! And I'll be out there cheering him on!





john

Originally posted by jsobecky
Chill out.

I'm perfectly calm.

So now do you want to switch feet in your mouth and show me where I have been proven wrong?

Sure thing, you said that the statements were "inflammatory allegations", which indeed turned out to be very false as what was said was true. Maybe my definition of proved wrong is all screwed up though...

BTW, Bush is going to be here this week, not a campaign trip, but a business trip. So YOU'LL be paying for his lunch! And I'll be out there cheering him on!

Wow!!! We have a new King of Assumptions here, that void hasn't been filled since THENEO left. What makes you think that? I wont be paying s**t my friend.

[Edited on 24-3-2004 by John Nada]

I like the idea it might get more people to vote but it seems to me that it would be easy to cheat.


But it always HAS been easy to cheat.


This could work out if done right..........

But when is the last time the Government done ANYTHING right

Originally posted by John Nada

Originally posted by jsobecky
Chill out.

I'm perfectly calm.

______________________________

Personal attacks make it seem otherwise.

_______________________________

Sure thing, you said that the statements were "inflammatory allegations", which indeed turned out to be very false as what was said was true. Maybe my definition of proved wrong is all screwed up though...

__________________________________

Your definition of proved wrong may or may not be correct; I don't know. However, something can be an inflammatory allegation and be true or false.

Now, as to the other part. We know that someone had to be the CEO of the corporation that makes the voting machines. The fact that he happens to be a staunch Bush supporter only makes it better. But the part about enormous contributions has not yet been proven.

_____________________________________


Wow!!! We have a new King of Assumptions here, that void hasn't been filled since THENEO left. What makes you think that? I wont be paying s**t my friend.

[Edited on 24-3-2004 by John Nada]

_________________________________

You're right...I only assumed that you were a US taxpayer. You live elsewhere - your loss. So sorry. I'll give Dub your best, OK.

john

Originally posted by jsobecky
Now, as to the other part. We know that someone had to be the CEO of the corporation that makes the voting machines. The fact that he happens to be a staunch Bush supporter only makes it better. But the part about enormous contributions has not yet been proven.

it think the following proves it nicely.

"Walden O'Dell, chief executive of North Canton-based Diebold Inc., confirmed in an interview with Plain Dealer editors that he has been a top fund-raiser for the Republican president"
www.diebold.com...

"It doesn't help that Diebold's CEO, Walden O'Dell, is a major fundraiser for the Republican Party"
comment.zdnet.co.uk...

"For years, O'Dell has given generously to Republican candidates. Last September, he held a packed $1,000-per-head GOP fundraiser at his 10,800-square-foot mansion. He has been feted as a guest at President Bush's Texas ranch, joining a cadre of "Pioneers and Rangers" who have pledged to raise more than $100,000 for the Bush reelection campaign."
www.blackboxvoting.com...

From one of the references you cite:

O'Dell was quick to point out that he has done nothing illegal. He also said he has no daily involvement with Diebold's election-systems division, which is based in Texas - and run by a registered Democrat.

So, Mr. O'Dell is a registered Republican, a staunch supporter of GWB, and donates up to the legal maximum allowed by law. All legal activities. None of which translates into election fraud.

The CEO of IBM could possibly be a Republican, much like O'Dell. Should we imply that IBM computers run software that is rigged to favor the Republican vote count?

Skepticism is healthy, but if not tempered with common sense, can easily result in seeing ghosts rising from the steam from your soup.

john

im not saying that the introduction of voting machines is a republican conspiracy - i dont believe it is, although i do think that the system is fatally flawed and should not be implemented.

i was merely answering your queries.

you firstly asked:
who are the manufacturers of these voting machines that are enormous contributors to the Bush campaign?
and i replied walden o'dell, CEO of diebold.

you then stated:
But the part about enormous contributions has not yet been proven.
and i gave you the evidence.

whats the problem?

No problem, thanks for taking the time to do the research.

But why do you think the system is fatally flawed?

john

Originally posted by globalmisinformation
i can already see whats gonna happen some punk ass kid who can hack well is gonna screw up the election OR the companys who run the electing thing will have rigged it in bush's favour. really whats so hard about just having names on a card and checking off box beside the person you wan to vote for. i mean REALLY.

I'm unsure if anyone out there watches the Real Time with Bill Mahr (sp?) show on HBO, but on this week's show, he did address the touch-screen computer voting system. The most interesting thing that he brought up was, the company (forgive me because I don't remember the name) that is contracted to make the computers and software is owned and/or operated by a man who is a giant contributor to... (guess who?) The BUSH Campaign.

ho-hum, "it appears the hipocracy knows no bounds."

In addition, one of the guests, an author who I'd never heard of, spoke about one particular account of local voting on these touch screens in California. He said that, once checked, an ENTIRE DAY'S WORTH OF VOTES HAD DISAPPEARED (over 2,000 votes!!!! Thats four times the difference of the deciding votes in the Bush/Gore election, in a simple local vote).

It appears that this year, Bush won't need to create fake felony lists to alter the votes. He's got the best hackers on payroll-- those who MADE the software.

I feel this election is doomed, unless the American people overwhelmingly vote him out, to the point that it is undeniable. With Ralph Nader there to act as a diversion, drawing 2-3% of the vote, and the obvious problems that WILL arise in the digital voting process, we need help.

* IMO - Voting should be a defined, painstaking process. Every vote MUST be counted by trusted hands, and done so atleast 3 times. This is the most important government function, and should be treated as such.

[Edited on 25-3-2004 by Cappa]

Originally posted by jsobecky


No problem, thanks for taking the time to do the research.

But why do you think the system is fatally flawed?

john

like i said before, i dont think that there's a governmental conspiracy (although diebold probably got the contract due to its links with the government but thats nothing new) but that the machines are not infallible and that they overcomplicate a simple process. whatever happened to walking into a polling booth and putting a cross next to your chosen candidate?

there was a programme on channel 4 news (uk) about it a few weeks ago that showed how easy it is to break into the system and change results.

"Using a widely available Microsoft product, Mr March showed us how he could break into this tally within 30 seconds.
Mr March added: "There's no password required to get in, you can tamper with the audit trail, you can tamper with votes, you can do anything you want with this programme, its wide open to unlimited rape as long as a standard copy of Microsoft Access is around. This is the single biggest problem with the Diebold product"

www.channel4.com...