Why do they use voting machines in some states?!

[OoTLink]

Just a random thought, but over the past decade, and before that, it seems there's been all kinds of crazy voting mechanisms out there - from complete booths with a mechanical curtain that rises when you're finished, to computers (that florida people were too dumb to use), to poking holes in paper (that florida people still couldn't figure out), to using a pen (what we've always done) to fill in dots. LOL.

Why doesn't everyone just use a damn pen? And if their ballot doesn't seem right, why don't they just ask for another one?

I know you guys give us credit for nothing, but at least we know how to use the damn ballots.

[DaveW68]

Why is it that you've been asking so many Andy Rooney type questions lately?

[kevenj]

Well here's one possible answer Oot......

How exactly do you know for sure that the electronic voting machine casts your vote for the candidate you intended to vote for?

Actually it's more than a possible answer..... it's a probable answer.

[OoTLink]

keven, my question is why don't they just use paper ballots filled in with pen like everyone else does?

[marlinspike]

Originally Posted by OoTLink

keven, my question is why don't they just use paper ballots filled in with pen like everyone else does?

Easy, and already answered by Keven. See Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc., a supplier of voting machines to many counties, including 2 in Ohio, who said in 2003 that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year."

[DaveW68]

It's hard to believe that 4 years or 8 years later, you Dems are still bitching about the elections. G.W. won fair and square, both times. Even manual recounts in Florida in 2000 after the fact by a bunch of left leaning groups in selective heavily Dem counties couldn't yield Gore enough votes to win the state, and thus the election. It's time for you Dems to get over it.

[marlinspike]

Originally Posted by DaveW68

It's hard to believe that 4 years or 8 years later, you Dems are still bitching about the elections. G.W. won fair and square, both times. Even manual recounts in Florida in 2000 after the fact by a bunch of left leaning groups in selective heavily Dem counties couldn't yield Gore enough votes to win the state, and thus the election. It's time for you Dems to get over it.

So you think electronic voting does not open the vote up to even more fraud than currently (and has for a long time) gone on?

[kevenj]

Originally Posted by OoTLink

keven, my question is why don't they just use paper ballots filled in with pen like everyone else does?

Oot, re-read my answer, as well as post number 5 by Marlinspike.

Dave, I'm not saying it HAS happened, just that it certainly COULD happen in the future. I feel a lot safer with a paper ballot.

[DaveW68]

Originally Posted by marlinspike

So you think electronic voting does not open the vote up to even more fraud than currently (and has for a long time) gone on?

Fraud can happen in just about any facet of life, including elections. The new machines are supposed to make fraud almost impossible, although I guess anything is possible. Paper ballots don't guarantee a fair election either. Just look at Chicago in 1960. The stuffed ballot boxes got Kennedy the victory that year. But then again, the Kennedy's are the most corrupt family in the history of American politics and nobody should have been surprised. Nixon should have been the rightful President in 1960....if you think that each person is entitled to only 1 vote.

[marlinspike]

Originally Posted by DaveW68

Fraud can happen in just about any facet of life, including elections. The new machines are supposed to make fraud almost impossible, although I guess anything is possible. Paper ballots don't guarantee a fair election either. Just look at Chicago in 1960. The stuffed ballot boxes got Kennedy the victory that year. But then again, the Kennedy's are the most corrupt family in the history of American politics and nobody should have been surprised. Nixon should have been the rightful President in 1960....if you think that each person is entitled to only 1 vote.

It's widely held in political science circles that they both stuffed the snot out of the ballots, and Kennedy simply did a better job of stuffing, i.e. I have no sympathy for Nixon, father of the EPA.

I don't know who said the machines were harder to corrupt. They've been found to be quite hackable. Even this nutty elections head (I forget the real title, but the guy who makes those decisions) back in NC (when I was living there) admitted that they're easier to corrupt (though, he pushed them very hard, and he even was pushing internet voting because "sure, there can be fraudulent votes, but is anybody actually going to do that?" Uh...DUH, yes)