Merlin1047
Senior Member
I just watched a CNN report on balloting in Florida.
I hate electronic devices which leave no hard copy for verification. How do you detect tampering? Are votes recorded on more than one storage medium? What security measures have been taken? Is there a bi-partisan organization responsible for oversight? If a machine is lost or damaged, how will the votes be recovered? Will a re-vote be required? Is there a record of which voter accessed each machine? Somehow NOT ONE of these questions were asked by the dingbat doing the piece for CNN.
Then they showed another county where a paper ballot was to be used. The voter would indicate his or her choice by completing (coloring in the middle of) a two part arrow which pointed at the voter's choice. The ballot was then placed in a reader which scanned it for proper completion.
CNN's dingbat interviewed several hispanic folks. She showed one voter who got it right and several who were so incredibly stupid they couldn't follow simple directions. They circled names or placed an X next to them. In one case some idiot put an X next to Cheney's name and THEN an X next to kerry's. Somehow I doubt that CNN accurately reflected the ratio of slack-jawed idiots versus those who completed the form without trouble. After all, it's not a story if there isn't a problem - even if you have to make one up.
I doubt very much that the CNN story has any degree of credibility. The exact same ballot has been in use in Alabama for years. The state has had numerous elections including one very close race for governor which ended up in a mandatory recount. No ballot problems surfaced.
To me, the only thing that the CNN piece really proved is that no one is smart enough to design a system so foolproof that it defeats people who are really determined to be stupid.
I hate electronic devices which leave no hard copy for verification. How do you detect tampering? Are votes recorded on more than one storage medium? What security measures have been taken? Is there a bi-partisan organization responsible for oversight? If a machine is lost or damaged, how will the votes be recovered? Will a re-vote be required? Is there a record of which voter accessed each machine? Somehow NOT ONE of these questions were asked by the dingbat doing the piece for CNN.
Then they showed another county where a paper ballot was to be used. The voter would indicate his or her choice by completing (coloring in the middle of) a two part arrow which pointed at the voter's choice. The ballot was then placed in a reader which scanned it for proper completion.
CNN's dingbat interviewed several hispanic folks. She showed one voter who got it right and several who were so incredibly stupid they couldn't follow simple directions. They circled names or placed an X next to them. In one case some idiot put an X next to Cheney's name and THEN an X next to kerry's. Somehow I doubt that CNN accurately reflected the ratio of slack-jawed idiots versus those who completed the form without trouble. After all, it's not a story if there isn't a problem - even if you have to make one up.
I doubt very much that the CNN story has any degree of credibility. The exact same ballot has been in use in Alabama for years. The state has had numerous elections including one very close race for governor which ended up in a mandatory recount. No ballot problems surfaced.
To me, the only thing that the CNN piece really proved is that no one is smart enough to design a system so foolproof that it defeats people who are really determined to be stupid.
