This is completly serious. Do you think the voting process should go back to pencil and paper?

Question

Not simply because of what happened in Fla a few years back, but for other reasons too...
1. many of your elderly aren't used to computers and it's easy to make a mistake(and there are people at the polls ready to help)
2. many people didn't do well in school and can't read well - therefore would be less likely to use them and more likely to be afraid of things they aren't used to(my husband would be one of those)
3. People are Making these computers and computers can be "fixed" easier.
What do you think?

Answer 1

There has been voting fraud as long as there has been voting -- there's nothing about the computer voting systems that make them easier to "fix," and in many ways they're much harder to rig than paper ballots of any kind.
You're right about the "scared of technology" factor, though -- I worked at my local polling place 2 years ago when we had touch-screens for the first time, and I spent a LOT of time helping people (especially older voters) figure out how to work things. And these had pretty good user interfaces, too!
I think the "perfect" voting system has yet to be developed...but keep thinking about it!

Answer 2

I think you have number 2 kind of backwards. How is it going to help someone who doesn't read that well to have a paper ballot? I don't understand why some people think these touch screen and or scan machines can be hacked into or fixed so easy. They are a closed system until they are downloaded into a counting computer. There is nothing that says that they have to be on line or anything. You have to have some trust in peoples integrity. How would you like it if I went around and said you couldn't drive a car that well just because you are a woman or can't be an engineer just because you are female. What if I said that your husband is cheating on you just because all men cheat. These are generalizations and/or stereotypes in the extreme. All I'm saying is that there is no reason to assume that one party would be more apt to cheat on elections than any other. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY THAT THINGS ARE DONE, I'M SURE NO ONE IN THE UNITED STATES WOULD BEGRUDGE YOU MOVING TO SOME OTHER COUNTRY WHERE YOU THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER.

Answer 3

I'm not sure what to trust these days. I mailed my absentee ballot, but how will I know if it will be counted or trashed?

For an experienced software programmer it is not so difficult to "fix" software. From California this report:

"Anyone who can get at the yellow button can ruin the election. It takes no password, no computer knowledge, no equipment.

The formula is printed in materials that have been distributed to thousands of people. The machines will count millions of votes.

Citizens -- not scientists or certifiers or testing lab authorities -- identified the problem and have now notified the California secretary of state, and emergency measures are reportedly being taken in California, but not yet in Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, or any other state using Sequoia Voting Systems, the third-largest voting system vendor in the U.S."

More at: http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/44823.html?1162329464

From Bev Harris' site, and she had a very interesting report on election 2000. I heard her on radio, also read her report after that election. One of the disks with the count somehow "disappeared" and some other odd happenings.

Check out the link to Chapter 2 at: http://blackboxvoting.org/

Answer 4

You're wrong.
1. The elderly almost always vote for whoever they're told to vote for, so pencils and paper wouldn't help.
2. Quite frankly, if you can't read well, you'd still not show up, because they still have to write. (Also, the computers would make it easier, no writing, just touching buttons)
3. People also make erasers, which liberals would be more than happy to use to "correct" someones writing.

I gather that you are not American from your reference to "your elderly." If not, my mistake. Still, you clearly don't understand America's left, because you just spouted out 9/10 of their speaking points. (the last is that it discriminates against the poor)
Liberals simply like to make a fuss about things, so they (or you) chose voting machines.

"dbqdawg" you're also wrong. Over 3000 people died in the WTC. We haven't even broken 3000 yet.

Answer 5

1 & 2. There are people there to help them if they are stuck or unsure they just need to ask for assistance

3. Do you realize how many people check over the programing for these systems, the are scutinized in every conceivable way, to prevent them from being "fixed". You can fix a paper ballot with the same level of difficulty

Answer 6

The voting process needs to be simple to use, be able to record a choice and be securely stored for counting. Whether it is automated or not is immaterial. The current Diebold machines have numerous problems as do other electronic voting systems. Look at FL, OH and MD elections.

Answer 7

I think there needs to be some kind of paper trail, and not rely just on computers. The thing is, computers make counting the votes very fast, and there would be no 'hanging chads'/

Answer 8

Computers. The only problem they have is switching from voter identification to anonymity at the very moment of voting. Apparently it's pretty complicated...

More U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq than the number of people killed in the World Trade Center.

Someone needs to speak up.

Answer 9

Get rid of paper and pencil altogether, it is ineffective.

Answer 10

Pen and paper, pencil can be erased.