Critics worry voting machines could mar midterms
- Thread starter CTV News
- Start date
Like I said on another thread, the pre-election polls in 2000 and 2004 had the Democrats ahead by only a percentage point or two. Somehow, they "lost" both elections. This time, however, they are ahead by at least 18 % points in those polls. If they lose this time it will prove that those voting machines are rigged. This should make Bush apologists and every one else very nervous as it will mean much more war and trouble for all.
Usually atleast in Canadian elections as far as i am aware, representatives of the canaidates called scruitneers (or something of the sort) are able to monitor the process to insure that it is being done legitimately.
i don't see why they cannot have some method of verifying votes are cast correctly and that a machine is not malfunctioning (as is posible with technology)
thus it only makes sense to have scruitneers and machine runners verify that votes are being recorded correctly. although letting the bulk of voting being done by machine assistance. some votes or "test votes" should also be cast, then deducted from the total votes.
although i think votes should be cast openly and registered. and that the people should not fear partisan attacks for exercising ones opinion.
I think practice of secrecy is a slippery path. also couldn't the NSA just monitor the devices? and if there was electoral fraud step in.
I'm in favour of real time changable and verifiable voting (meaning a vote isn't just once every 4 years, it is every second of every day.
i don't see why they cannot have some method of verifying votes are cast correctly and that a machine is not malfunctioning (as is posible with technology)
thus it only makes sense to have scruitneers and machine runners verify that votes are being recorded correctly. although letting the bulk of voting being done by machine assistance. some votes or "test votes" should also be cast, then deducted from the total votes.
although i think votes should be cast openly and registered. and that the people should not fear partisan attacks for exercising ones opinion.
I think practice of secrecy is a slippery path. also couldn't the NSA just monitor the devices? and if there was electoral fraud step in.
I'm in favour of real time changable and verifiable voting (meaning a vote isn't just once every 4 years, it is every second of every day.
There is this wonderful new technology. You have this paper thing printed. It's called a ballot. The voter marks an X for the candidate he/she is voting for in the appropriate place on the ballot and then he/she refolds the ballot and puts it in the box.
Later, with the scrutineers watching, the votes are counted.
This marvelous technology allows Canada to do all the voting, and all the counting, on the day of the election. As I understand it, in the last election, Florida was still trying to count 2 weeks later. We should help them..
Later, with the scrutineers watching, the votes are counted.
This marvelous technology allows Canada to do all the voting, and all the counting, on the day of the election. As I understand it, in the last election, Florida was still trying to count 2 weeks later. We should help them..
Well as usual the obvious has been selectively forgotten....The numbers of voting population
I'll take California for instance because its voting age population is approximately 25 million - (21,588,460 in 2003 and growing)....plus they have a huge military population who vote absentee style and it takes a while getting the votes all in from the outposts around the world.
The accommodations made for the languages also plays a factor in the kinds and styles of ballots used:
The languages are English, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Tagalog, Korean and Vietnamese.
There are over 25,000 precincts in California alone, and more than 60,000 ballot "types" for submission choice. Farther to the west is Hawaii which adds to the time references - and Alaska which does not.
I have used California because the numbers most closely resemble the voting age population in Canadian elections - and while the huge geographic span accounts for some delays, there isn't the large military absentee population to account for as your large group military is primarily based in one location.
Therefore when you compare the numbers of a possible 30 million Canadian ballots vs. 300 million U.S. - in very round and fluffed up approximations..... your argument is misinformed and rather childish.
My neighbor's kid could have told you why the voting is so massive and cumbersome.
But do send along your rumors and innuendo - it is so "interesting".
I'll take California for instance because its voting age population is approximately 25 million - (21,588,460 in 2003 and growing)....plus they have a huge military population who vote absentee style and it takes a while getting the votes all in from the outposts around the world.
The accommodations made for the languages also plays a factor in the kinds and styles of ballots used:
The languages are English, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Tagalog, Korean and Vietnamese.
There are over 25,000 precincts in California alone, and more than 60,000 ballot "types" for submission choice. Farther to the west is Hawaii which adds to the time references - and Alaska which does not.
I have used California because the numbers most closely resemble the voting age population in Canadian elections - and while the huge geographic span accounts for some delays, there isn't the large military absentee population to account for as your large group military is primarily based in one location.
Therefore when you compare the numbers of a possible 30 million Canadian ballots vs. 300 million U.S. - in very round and fluffed up approximations..... your argument is misinformed and rather childish.
My neighbor's kid could have told you why the voting is so massive and cumbersome.
But do send along your rumors and innuendo - it is so "interesting".
Thank God we have the writen votes in Canada.
Machines should not be used, to easy to tamper with. Also you dont have any personal evidence of a vote being casted.....nothing tangibale...I hate the idea.
Machines should not be used, to easy to tamper with. Also you dont have any personal evidence of a vote being casted.....nothing tangibale...I hate the idea.
EastSide
True enough the hand written ballots were and are preferred but fraud is so rampant I think the train of thought is machines will cut down on illegal voting.
The numbers cannot be overlooked when comparing the two nations however - it is something we cannot change to suit our preferences.
True enough the hand written ballots were and are preferred but fraud is so rampant I think the train of thought is machines will cut down on illegal voting.
The numbers cannot be overlooked when comparing the two nations however - it is something we cannot change to suit our preferences.
My post was mostly tongue in cheek but if you want to take it as an insult, go for it.
Now you're not thinking. The U.S. has more people....so what. The number of people is irrelevant, you simply increase the number of poling stations.
You want to compare California with Canada? Sounds fair to me. The populations are about the same. Canada's population numbers are maybe ten million higher, but that's not a problem.. Canada covers a lot more ground than California. The distances between north and south are greater, as well as from east to west. The logistical problems in Canada are far greater than in California. Getting vote results from the far northern communities is difficult at times but we do it. On top of all that, a greater percentage of our population actually vote. Discounting the five and a half time zones, I would say we do a quicker, more acurate job, and we do it without machines.
This has turned into a my stick is bigger than yours kind of topic....
There is no comparison as who is "best" in voting - they are nothing like each other.
Counting 25 million or less is certainly an easier task than 250-280 million.
Canada would take weeks to accomplish what is done in the U.S. due to your land mass if you had the same number of ballots to count.
There is no comparison as who is "best" in voting - they are nothing like each other.
Counting 25 million or less is certainly an easier task than 250-280 million.
Canada would take weeks to accomplish what is done in the U.S. due to your land mass if you had the same number of ballots to count.
You are not reading. I compared California with Canada who have roughly the same population.
I have watched Canada's population grow from 14 million to 34 million, and the vote still takes about the same length of time because we keep adding poling stations and the people doing the counting still count about the same number of votes----there are just more people counting.
Gopher
If anyone other than your favorites win - you will cry "rigged" machines?
You are simpy amazing in your depth of understanding. How do you do it?
If anyone other than your favorites win - you will cry "rigged" machines?
You are simpy amazing in your depth of understanding. How do you do it?