Do u think U.S.A.'s electronic voting is a sham?

Question

There are recounts .

Answer 1

Yes, totally. Anyone with access to those machines can easily change the program and basically get whatever results they what. And the memory cards they use to save the votes can easily be changed after the fact, too. And the recounts are not legit, either. I don't trust anything like that anymore.

Answer 2

A sham no... Now my opinion would have been different if the tidal wave of democrats wouldn't have happened. I say that only because people are sick and tired of this administration and any other results would have been...hmmmm....suspect.

I think they need a more fool proof system though. Electronic voting is valuable in the information age, but there needs to be a fool proof way to assure the system cannot be hacked and votes can recounted positive.

Answer 3

France has a very effective voting system which virtually eliminates the need for recounts. They manually count every vote. Atleast in the area of France I'm familiar with, when you enter the polling place, there are slips of paper with each candidates name. You can simply select the candidate you want and place his name in the envelope you are given. Or to make it more anonymous, you can select one of each name and go into a private booth and place the name you want to vote for in the envelope and throw the rest away. Each envelope is opened and the candidates' names are placed in piles and counted and whoever has the most wins. The results are know in several hours from the closing of the polls.

Answer 4

First off...you Dem or Repub? The answer to this question might explain the answer to your question. But I do not think that they are flawed. There are only recounts because the people who are counting them, even if they are electronic, are just human. Humans make mistakes. That's why there are recounts, in case someone wants to challenge the "official" results.

Answer 5

If there's no paper backup, then it's a sham.

"Recount" just gives you the same number, but there's not way to check whether that number is accurate.

If there's paper backup, then it doesn't bother me as much as the paperless, but I don't see why the rest of the country doesn't do what I've always done.

They give me cards and a medium felt-tipped pen (that's just right for filling in the little rectangles).

These cards are then scanned by machine (for speed).

Cheap, accurate, easy to use, not determined by the owner of the company that built the machine (as Diebold machines are), but by the voters. No pregnant people named Chad to confuse things. Not screwed up by power failures.

Answer 6

Is a frogs butt watertight? Yes I believe they are flawed. There is good article in Rolling Stone some months back. Bring back manual voting ballots and manual counting machines. Elections should be scrutinized to the finest detail.

Answer 7

Yes I do. With all the hype over the HBO documentary "Hacking Democrocy" I wonder what effect that had on Dems winning for the first time in years, could they have won simple because this time the public was watching for irregularities? Hmmm....I wonder, in any event, I'm happay as all get out over the election results....this time.

Answer 8

seriously is shocking,the most powerfull country in the world can not even run it own elections with out problems of corruption.Why bother with fancy **** electronic machines?Just do the old colour in the box,or tick the box,what is so wrong with that?Its worked for NZ for years,and we havent had any problems. Oh yea..and im pretty sure like france its manually counted..

Answer 9

Since the dems won, I don't think you will hear any complaints. Republicans are good-sport about it.