Confusing phone calls, electronic machines that didn't work and created delays. In Cleveland, where some voters in 2004 waited in 14-hour lines, problems with ballot-reading machines caused big delays. For the first time, all 88 counties used electronic voting - either touch-screens or paper ballots that are electronically scanned.
In Missouri a judge recently overturned a state law requiring voters to produce a government-issued photo identification. In Kansas City on Tuesday, some voters nevertheless reported being asked for photo ID.
2006-11-07 11:56:47 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I trust the machines, I don't trust the republicans. (small "r" deliberate)
2006-11-07 11:59:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I trust no machine that is "programmable."
In Maine, all voting is done on paper ballots - simply black out the choice next to your selection. This leaves a permanent "paper trail" to be verified or scrutinized if it should become necessary.
This obviously isn't the fastest or easiest way - but it is most certainly the way that garners complete confidence from the voters who expect and deserve an accurate vote count, and isn't that the most important aspect of any election?
Even the possibility or illusion of voter fraud or "inaccurate" vote counts are completely unacceptable in a democracy.
2006-11-07 12:07:43 · answer #2 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I trust the machines. We had one problem. My husband just registered last year and his name wasn't in the book. His name is hyphenated and we discovered that they only put the the first name into the registry. He also had to show a photo ID because it was the first time he voted at the polling place. No problem. We both wish he had kept track of his registration card, though. What's the big deal with having to show a photo ID to vote, unless something a little screwy is going on?
2006-11-07 12:27:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes i had the most pleasant voting experience of my 26 years as a voter it took me exactly 10 minutes from start to finish! No long lines and they printed a paper receipt to show how i voted! It was quick,effective and they had people watching for fraudulent situations! All in all i was very impressed, It beats hands down a paper ballot any day!
2006-11-07 12:09:46 · answer #4 · answered by no one here gets out alive 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In 2004 the liberals cried for more advanced voting systems. They mandated it to happen this year. Another knee jerk reaction by the libs.. So they mandated a change that should have taken another 3 or 4 years to stabalize and this is what you get..
Let's do some knee jerking again this year and reall mess it up for the prezz elections in 2 years....
2006-11-07 12:00:27 · answer #5 · answered by Marshall Lee 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In 2004, my screen kept lighting up "Bush" when I was pushing Kerry...
Things went alot smoother this time but I still won't trust them until they print me a reciept....
The machines are made by a company called Diebolt.... these are the people that also make ATM machines.... those have reciepts!
Why can't I get a reciept????
Anyway, DieBolt has actually stated that they support the Republican party.
2006-11-07 11:59:55 · answer #6 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I didn't have any problems with the electronic voting thingy today thank God, but I still don't trust the things! The question I have are the benefits worth the unreliable results as you have described? I can only think it's not.
2006-11-07 12:02:10 · answer #7 · answered by Slam64 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I was sent to 4 different places. went to my usual voting place (which was confirmed via letter about 2 weeks ago), from there was sent to a 2nd location...which in turn sent me to a 3rd location (based on a list they had) and finally, the 3rd place (which had a different list) sent me to a 4th and final place. I imagine that many people who had limited time would have given up after the 2nd turn away.
2006-11-07 12:00:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Frankly, it was confusing.
It seemed to work okay, but who could possibly know for certain that the electronic ballot stored in the hard drive has the same content that you put into it.
At least with paper, you knew it couldn't be changed without obvious signs of tampering.
2006-11-07 12:00:25 · answer #9 · answered by Privratnik 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Save a tree go electric.
Can we have our tax dollars sent to them via electronic distribution. They don't seem to have any trouble receiving our money that way.
2006-11-07 12:10:29 · answer #10 · answered by Carl-N-Vicky S 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋