Wneglia wrote:Why couldn't voting machines be developed that print a receipt for the voter with all the information of how he voted, as well as some sort of centralized website where one could check the receipt against what was tabulated, to see if there was a change after leaving the voting booth?
Alas, that would be a nightmare.
You'll get thousands of people each election who - accidentally or maliciously - incorrectly claim that their receipt doesn't match how they voted. And since the voter's choice must be secret, you can't store any information to verify the claim.
You couldn't even verify whether the voter is using his own receipt. (If we know that the voter X got receipt# Y, and we can tell that receipt# Y was a vote for Z, then X's vote is no longer a secret.)
Anyone candidate wanting election results for a specific area to be thrown out - the area voted against him and nullifying its vote will turn the election in his favor - could just round up 20 people to all say that they votes were incorrectly registered. Confidence in the system would quickly become worse than with any actually rigged vote.
Wneglia wrote:Why couldn't voting machines be developed that print a receipt for the voter with all the information of how he voted, as well as some sort of centralized website where one could check the receipt against what was tabulated, to see if there was a change after leaving the voting booth?
Alas, that would be a nightmare.
You'll get thousands of people each election who - accidentally or maliciously - incorrectly claim that their receipt doesn't match how they voted. And since the voter's choice must be secret, you can't store any information to verify the claim.
You couldn't even verify whether the voter is using his own receipt. (If we know that the voter X got receipt# Y, and we can tell that receipt# Y was a vote for Z, then X's vote is no longer a secret.)
Anyone candidate wanting election results for a specific area to be thrown out - the area voted against him and nullifying its vote will turn the election in his favor - could just round up 20 people to all say that they votes were incorrectly registered. Confidence in the system would quickly become worse than with any actually rigged vote.
But couldn't the poll people assign you a PIN that would be next to the record you sign in with, and then you have to put the PIN in the voting machine, and the printout reflects your decision and PIN for tracking, and you are required to sign a post-vote list with your PIN stating that the receipt accurately reflected your choices. Yeah, it would take more time, but wouldn't it have more accuracy and trackability?
Wneglia wrote:Why couldn't voting machines be developed that print a receipt for the voter with all the information of how he voted, as well as some sort of centralized website where one could check the receipt against what was tabulated, to see if there was a change after leaving the voting booth?
Alas, that would be a nightmare.
You'll get thousands of people each election who - accidentally or maliciously - incorrectly claim that their receipt doesn't match how they voted. And since the voter's choice must be secret, you can't store any information to verify the claim.
You couldn't even verify whether the voter is using his own receipt. (If we know that the voter X got receipt# Y, and we can tell that receipt# Y was a vote for Z, then X's vote is no longer a secret.)
Anyone candidate wanting election results for a specific area to be thrown out - the area voted against him and nullifying its vote will turn the election in his favor - could just round up 20 people to all say that they votes were incorrectly registered. Confidence in the system would quickly become worse than with any actually rigged vote.
But couldn't the poll people assign you a PIN that would be next to the record you sign in with, and then you have to put the PIN in the voting machine, and the printout reflects your decision and PIN for tracking, and you are required to sign a post-vote list with your PIN stating that the receipt accurately reflected your choices. Yeah, it would take more time, but wouldn't it have more accuracy and trackability?
yes, you could do everything you suggest and the machine could still be hacked to produce a wrong result. check out the link I posted above.
your idea would increase the work and the profits to the voting machine companies
how about put each race, referendum, etc on a separate color/# ballot, fill in out by hand and stick in a box with the same color/#. keep all the boxes in sight of poll watchers from all interested parties through the voting, counting and lockup of the ballots
taking a week or 10 days or whatever to count and recount as needed has the added benefit of including the many military votes that can come in 10 days late.
sure there could be isolated fraud - but not the wholesale fraud possible with the machines
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
Colonel Taylor wrote:It's funny how the libs are already starting to compile their excuses as to why Obama will lose!
if you are referring to my comment - no way did I mean anything about this race
obama knew about the problems in 2000 and 2004 and never lifted a finger to even start a discussion after he was elected. any problems in this election are all on him.
I'm only suggesting that something simple and verifiable should be done; it seems like a non-partisan issue and should be well thought out.
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
Simple solution and you can raise my taxes for this one and I will happily pay more, even donate!
Voting is the BIGGEST and GREATEST liberties in this country. Anyone who is caught intimidating, trying to commit voter fraud or voting who isn't supposed to should be jailed for a minimum of 10 years. When one person does any of this it effects the liberty of EVERYONE.
billy.pilgrim wrote:
Colonel Taylor wrote:It's funny how the libs are already starting to compile their excuses as to why Obama will lose!
if you are referring to my comment - no way did I mean anything about this race
obama knew about the problems in 2000 and 2004 and never lifted a finger to even start a discussion after he was elected. any problems in this election are all on him.
I'm only suggesting that something simple and verifiable should be done; it seems like a non-partisan issue and should be well thought out.
Colonel Taylor wrote:Simple solution and you can raise my taxes for this one and I will happily pay more, even donate!
Voting is the BIGGEST and GREATEST liberties in this country. Anyone who is caught intimidating, trying to commit voter fraud or voting who isn't supposed to should be jailed for a minimum of 10 years. When one person does any of this it effects the liberty of EVERYONE.
billy.pilgrim wrote:
Colonel Taylor wrote:It's funny how the libs are already starting to compile their excuses as to why Obama will lose!
if you are referring to my comment - no way did I mean anything about this race
obama knew about the problems in 2000 and 2004 and never lifted a finger to even start a discussion after he was elected. any problems in this election are all on him.
I'm only suggesting that something simple and verifiable should be done; it seems like a non-partisan issue and should be well thought out.
agree 100%
simpler would probably be a lot cheaper than the way we do it now; I've never been sure why we have to know the outcome of the presidential election on election day but the deployed military doesn't have to get their ballots in for 10 days after the election. kinda like telling a kid in afghanistan that his vote doesn't matter
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
Colonel Taylor wrote:Simple solution and you can raise my taxes for this one and I will happily pay more, even donate!
Voting is the BIGGEST and GREATEST liberties in this country. Anyone who is caught intimidating, trying to commit voter fraud or voting who isn't supposed to should be jailed for a minimum of 10 years. When one person does any of this it effects the liberty of EVERYONE.
billy.pilgrim wrote:
Colonel Taylor wrote:It's funny how the libs are already starting to compile their excuses as to why Obama will lose!
if you are referring to my comment - no way did I mean anything about this race
obama knew about the problems in 2000 and 2004 and never lifted a finger to even start a discussion after he was elected. any problems in this election are all on him.
I'm only suggesting that something simple and verifiable should be done; it seems like a non-partisan issue and should be well thought out.
agree 100%
simpler would probably be a lot cheaper than the way we do it now; I've never been sure why we have to know the outcome of the presidential election on election day but the deployed military doesn't have to get their ballots in for 10 days after the election. kinda like telling a kid in afghanistan that his vote doesn't matter
Even after the debacle in Fla. a few years back some still say my vote doesn't matter. Do they not realize all the votes cast are only one vote added together.
There's that. But there's also "Obama’s lead in the Electoral College is modest, but also quite consistent across the different methods. The states in which every site has Mr. Obama leading make up 271 electoral votes — one more than the president needs to clinch victory. The states in which everyone has Mr. Romney ahead represent 206 electoral votes. That leaves five states, and 61 electoral votes, unaccounted for — but Mr. Obama would not need them if he prevails in the states where he is leading in the polls."
If you've got the polls AND the Chicago thugs going for you, how can you lose?
