per machine to count ballots , when paper , which is more reliable can be used , sure there is the issue of speed but is it not better for it to be reliable and in the case of a recount it seems more of an importance to know whom won then to know whom won in a shorter amount of time .
also , marry chavez elections .
2006-11-05 12:06:58 · 6 answers · asked by kame 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think it is stupid to use machines.
As Americans, we are spoiled.
We need to be patient once in a while, because time gives you greater accuracy.
2006-11-05 12:09:20 · answer #1 · answered by tennistarforever 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I know, in Hawaii you can use either, and almost everyone uses paper. Electronic machines are bogus.
PS I tend to lean conservative and vote republican so this isn't some left-wing nut trying to change the world through yahoo answers :)
2006-11-05 12:09:39 · answer #2 · answered by Wocka wocka 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
How many hanging,dimpled,pregnant chads or having someone else other than the voter deciding what the intent of the voter was, were there last time? That was what we relied on before. I can't see how that was better.
2006-11-05 12:22:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the machines are faster and much more accurate. You have to consider human error/
2006-11-05 12:33:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
As conservative as paying Monica's dry cleaning bill, it must have been very high. PROGRESS!
2006-11-05 12:12:10 · answer #5 · answered by daydoom 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no it's not. my only guess is that the politicians were probably suckered into getting those machines by the lobbyists.
2006-11-05 12:09:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋