Slashdot Mirror
Indecision 2002
The most common story submission about the U.S. elections held today seems to be that the consortium which typically conducts and reports exit polls has encountered technical difficulties. If only they'd had an open beta program... There have also been a number of stories highlighting problems with new electronic voting machines, a topic Slashdot has hit several times in the past. CNN, the NY Times, and essentially every other U.S. news outfit are following the election results as best they can.
Track the results.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
I'm curious, has someone audited the code for these devices? How do I know that some employee ,who's a hard democrat, republican, or independent, hasn't added his or her little hacks. Like every fifth vote that doesn't agree with his or her view gets changed.
I guess with something as valuable as my vote, I want the source to be public.
You guys could have posted a reminder to vote today. The election results are all fine and dandy, but a well-written summary of "Remember to vote," voting locations, etc. posted this morning would have been appreciated.
I'd appreciate it if you could keep this in mind for next year. The more informed voters we have out there, the better. Slashdot could really help get the word out (especially on the issues that matter most to geeks!)
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
Wasn't Indecision 2000 the name of the campaign news on the Daily Show?
. . . Dewey really didn't defeat Truman.
Exit polls are oftened cited as a problem in our elections. How many times have you seen an exit poll while the election was still going on? All the time and often it simply discourages voters from casting their votes... Why bother is Candidate X is leading in the exit polls. I actually am interested to see if the mid term turn out is greater than normal as a result. Mid term elections are always crappy.
Thalasar
I thought this was interesting. In Lafayette Parish in Louisiana, they are "beta testing" new electronic voting machines for absentee voting.
I think that the "if-voting-could-change-anything-it-would-be-illeg al dept." shows how irresponsible and juvenile /. really is. If everyone thought like you, anyone who felt like it could decide what happens to us. Your voice individually doesn't matter, but don't you realize that it matters when its a part of a group, no matter how large or small that group is. For shame.
__________________________________________
Take comfort in your ignorance.
Grandmaster Plague
There is a series of very interesting papers on voting theory, both on paper and electronically, written by a computer science professor and election commissioner. I recommend them highly:
http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/
In particular, I recommend the essay on Paper Ballots, that's the theoretical basis for the current electronic systems.
The most interesting thing I've heard on the news today is that one of the international organizations that monitors elections in the Third World is monitoring the election in Florida this time.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Vote for Bill Gates! He'll buy Iraq to end this madness!
I'm the Devil the Windows users warned you about.
As for voting glitches, I only have this to say. If you have a complaint about an election process, better to voice it before the election, not during or after when your party's candidate is losing or has lost. The reports that lawyers are on standby for each major party infuriates me. Either the process is goofed to begin with or it isn't. Maybe I'm just an idealist, but I believe any discrepencies with the voting processes are going to affect all candidates, not just losing ones.
That's the one thing I simply don't understand about modern voting rhetoric. How could we possibly place more trust in voting systems simply because they are electronic? All this would require is a single person with a single clue somewhere along the data chain to manipulate the results.
It seems that fraud would become even simpler with computerized voting to me. It's like everyone is jumping on a train without thinking about its destination, or, more to the point, the path it will take to its destination.
Where do the results go? Do they go to separate databases, preferably several separate databases, as soon as a vote is cast? This would seemingly allow for "diffing," for lack of a better term, between multiple sources of final vote counts.
I'm in no shape at the moment to define how the electronic/computerized voting results should be quanitified, but PLEASE, at least let us consider these things, rather than saying to ourselves "Well, it's computerized now, so at least there will be no more fraud."
If we're going to redesign how the votes in this nation are counted, and I believe that we are all in agreement that this system of voting desperately needs to be revamped in this modern age (please feel free to tell me I'm wrong), that we can sit down and discuss how it should be done, rather than allowing our morbidly ignorant "representative government" to tell us how it should, and will be done for us.
Oh, wait, this is the US. I forgot, we have no say. Ah, well, cross your fingers and hope for the best.
1) Ballotscape creates the most innovative and foolproof voting software.
2) Ballotscape's software becomes installed on voting machines nationwide.
3) Microsoft releases "innovative" MS-Vote for free.
4) Microsoft embeds MS-Vote into Windows.
5) Microsoft gives away Dell voting machines to the States as a condition for overcharging for licenses.
6) Gates/Dell presidential ticket mysteriously captures 90% of the popular vote (Jobs/Feiss ticket only receives 5%).
If the general public learns as a matter of habit to just go to bed and find out the full count the next day, the United States will be a great deal better off.
Iraq just went through a vote last month. Even the dictators make you vote for them so that they can get 100% of the votes to boost their ego.
I'll probably be showing my Republican bias here, but if you want state by state results FROM THE STATE, the only place I've found them is http://www.drudgereport.com ...
I wouldn't touch the Drudge Report with a 10-foot pole, and yes, you're showing your bias. The Drudge Report is basically unsubstantiated gossip posing as news; why would I want to check it for anything?
And, as a Minnesota Republican: UP YOURS MONDALE...
I know you're both a Republican and a Minnesotan, so it may be hard, but try to show at least a little dignity, ok?
Republicians and Open Source together the new ANTI-TRUST.
I can see it now you go to touch the screen for a non-republician canaidate, and the order on the ballet changes. Kind of like those joke dialog boxes that the OK button moves when you try to click it.
And of the two, despite diseases like Alzheimer's, who could get the job done? Ronaldus Magnus.
1. Polls close at 7pm like they're supposed to.
2. Democrats challenge poll closing, say there are still more voters who need to vote (for the democrats, of course).
3. Democrats go to Democrat/liberal judge and get an ex parte injunction, keeping the polls open a few more hours.
4. Republicans challenge the extension, say any vote cast after the polls were supposed to have closed should be discarded.
5. After several hours of bickering, whining, and screaming, Republicans win. Late votes discarded.
6. Democrats accuse Republicans of closing polls to keep the hard workin' man (who votes Democrat) out.
7. Republicans say "no, we really love the hard working man, and we respect the rules -- the polls should have closed when they were supposed to. The time of poll closing was announced weeks ago!"
8. Democrats respond: "no, you hate the hard working man, and we were just trying to fight for him."
9. Republicans crawl away.
10. Repeat next election.
---------------
It boggles my mind that this same scenario happens each and every election day, in countless cities across the country. You'd think the republicans would have enough brain cells to get the democrats to agree (or at least give them certified, return receipt notice) as to the time the polls are going to close. I guess the Democrats have some pretty hard numbers that show a vast majority of people who intend to vote after the polls close are democrats (go figure), so even in bad faith, it is to the democrats' advantage to make every effort to extend the time of poll closing. If they push it through, they get more votes, and if the republicans oppose, worst case scenario is they get to say "the republicans tried to close the polls on the workin' man!"
It's shameful, but what's even more shameful is the republicans not figuring this shit out.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Now, if VNS were as good at predicting the outcome of software development projects, as they are at predicting election results... Hmmm, maybe the problem is, they are.
Speaking of elections--Today was the election, but slashdot didn't even run a story asking geeks to vote. You'd think that a site that cares so much about "Your Rights Online" would at least point out a couple of candidates who have either very bad records on such things or very good records. You know, if all we do is whine about the DMCA, congress-critters will continue to screw us over. Voting, and getting other people to vote will make them sit up and take notice. Well, maybe 2004.
The exit poll service that suddenly announced they would have no polling data late this afternoon is a monopoly owned by the major TV news outlets. Instead of nearly all the election outcomes being known when the polls in CA closed an hour ago, most races are still up in the air and the TV coverage is going full tilt. This has to be very good for ratings.
You post is completely idiotic.
1. Poll don't close at 7:00. In CA they close at 8:00 which often isn't enough time to have everyone vote. If people arrive at 7:45 and there is a line for voting booths? Should their vote not count? For example today an Arkansas decreed the polls stay up till 10:00 PM because at least one county ran out of ballots. If your polling place runs out of ballots, does that mean your vote doesn't count?
In major cities getting off work to go to you polling place can take time and cost money. Since voting is not a holiday, not everyone can afford to take time to get to the polling place early. Why on earth should late votes be discarded? What's the point of disenfanchising someone? Because the polling place is supposed to be closed? This is democracy in action not a 7/11. The sort of rules bound thinking you are displaying is dangerous in a democracy.
Here's another clue -> Check the legal precedents for late ballots. You will find that even the currnet Supreme Court tends to error on the side of equal protection.
As far as the republicans trying to close the plls on the working man, isn't that EXACTLY the case? Are you saying,"Can't take time off for work?" Well screw you, we are going to make sure you don't get to vote. I find it amazing that this is OK for you. Are you sure you are in the right country?
I don't think you realize how dangerous it is to "discard" votes (and why almost all the time those votes are counted, not discarded). Democracies like ours operate on the principle one person, one vote. Any attempts to disenfranchise the right to vote is wrong. From poll taxes to roadblocks in Florida, thwarting the democractic process is extremely damaging to society in the long run.
Thalasar
If Slashdot did a good job of publishing information on who to vote into/out-of office (based on geek issues), then they wouldn't be able to post stories bitching about how much proposed bill yadda-yadda-yadda sucks for geeks. And then we wouldn't be able to read the dozens of responses posted bitching about slashdot not doing anything to harness their readership in politically.
I mean what fun would that be?
"And like that
I think this is a good thing. Pre-election polling and exit poling tends to compromise the "sanctity" of the democratic process. In other words, if my vote has been counted before I've cast it, then, really, how important is my participation? At the risk of baiting, I would go as far as to say that there that a large number of (voting) Americans think of elections as a horse race: They pick (and vote for) who they think is going to win. This is pretty counter to what the "secret ballot" is supposed to be. Seriously, this country has some serious problems, and its not "the man" that's behind it.
There are also problems with the mechanical voting machines and "scan-in" ballots as well.
There's no such thing as a perfect voting system.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
The 93,000 people that were not allowed to vote during the 2000 election in Florida were still on the list this time around. The company who created that list of supposed felons and dead people for Katherine Harris says that if Harris had not crossed off most of their checking processes off of the contract and they were allowed to process that list that the end result would be a list of approximately 3000 names. Ninety-one thousand people (mostly African American Democrats, curiously enough) would be allowed to vote today (and two years ago) if they were allowed to do their job.
The State of Florida, when confronted with this information, admitted that the list was flawed and that they would get it fixed...some time in 2003. After the current election.
For more information check out Greg Palast's book "The Best Democracy Money Could Buy". It's a heck of a read. There was also an article over at Salon late last week but it is in their premium contect section.
a state can't legalize something that is federally outlawed.
The federal government can't outlaw commerce within a state, can it? According to the U.S. Constitution, article 1, "The Congress shall have power ... To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes ... To declare war ... To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers" (my emphasis). The 10th Amendment gives the states the right to regulate anything not in Congress's exclusive domain. (The 14th Amendment limits that slightly by applying most of the Bill of Rights to the states.)
If banning beverages containing ethanol required an amendment to the Constitution, then how can Congress get away with banning pot? That should be the State of Nevada's right to put on the ballot.
Case law citations welcome.
Will I retire or break 10K?
(One quick clarification: I hate using the term geek.)
/.-eers hates Senator Hollings? Do you find yourself actually paying more attention to politics now than you did even 3 or 4 years ago?
Call it flamebait/offtopic/troll/whatever if you want, but it's an honest question:
When was the last time having a good working knowledge of senators and politicians was necessary for the average geek? Is this the first time period in American history where politics play a vital role in our daily lives insofar as the comingling of our PCs and freedoms? DRM? Napster? RIAA invasions into our home PCs? The Patriot Act? Before recent years, can you think of the geek community despising someone for the same reasons as a great deal of
It's not really an issue of the technically-literate (is that better? Yeesh) being socially responsible citizens, but I'll bet that at the past 2 or 3 elections, geek turnout has been higher than normal at least in part because issues that directly affect us have been in the spotlight. Perhaps we feel that it's our responsiblity to at least sort of steer things in what we believe to be the proper direction? I dunno. I'm stuck at work until 3am, I'm bored and I thought I'd see if anyone would bite.
nearly all laws congress makes that seem to have no authority to to do so, are based on this precedent. The intra-state activity could effect inter-state commerce. But this has been streteched to the breaking point. For example, why is it a federal crime to use a hand gun near a school, or to commit a "hate" crime. there is nothing in the constitution that seems to permit this.
scooby snacks all around!
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
One of them was if we should ban cockfighting or not.
Be careful: if you vote "Ban it!" then, depending on the way the bill is worded, Nintendo may be banned from selling its animal combat simulation products in your state. Yeah, sure, Nintendo's official line is that it's based on the Japanese sport of beetlefighting, but American kids know what really happens, especially in a Pidgeot vs. Fearow match.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Damn straight!! It's time people start reading the constitution and not taking for granted that the federal government can just do what it pleases. The constitution carefully sets bounds on federal power for very good reason. We have become so inured that we just let them do whatever they want, without asking if it's constitutional. It amazes me that we don't see judges throwing fits over the liberties the feds have taken with our liberties.
Thanks for the link; that site is really good. 'Specially the "Paper Ballots" essay, as you said.
It's pretty interesting to see just how much thought and design has gone into the current (paper) system to guard against even highly rare/improbable forms of election fraud. Taking all that into account, it seems unlikely that any electronic voting system will ever achieve the transparency necessary to replace paper.
(Not only to protect against fraud, even, but also to make it obvious to distrusting observers that fraud isn't being committed.)
iSKUNK!
Any proof to these claims? No links from salon please, we all know which direction they lean. By the way I read a book about how the holocaust was faked. Its not true but yet its a book. I can't believe people like you can continue to exist without imploding from the vacuum in your head.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I've got two words that should fully capture how encouraged I would be by that prospect:
John Ashcroft
The Republicans had the Senate for a few months and it brought us the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act, some of the most frightening abrogrations of basic constitutional protections, gutted antitrust enforcement, and who knows how many other goodies.
Fritz Hollings will be perfectly capable of doing damage whether the Democrats stay on top or not. As I recall, Republican Congresses didn't stop the DMCA or the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension act from sailing through.
This push to legalize marijuana is being secretly funded by Frito-Lay and Hostess.
Just to clarify, this happened in Arkansas today.
You seem to keep forgetting that Democrats are complete shysters.
This is the state that repeatedly sent Jesse Helms back to chair the Foreign Affairs committee. Clearly, there's been very little intelligent thought there for a while.
Actually, I kind of like the idea of Liddy and Hillary across the aisle in Congress. How appropriate. Bill and Bob, the Senate husbands. Heh heh.
A proper voting system administered via computing with adequate security measures would be fine. This means primarily NO INTERNET CONNECTIONS. If the voting machines were hooked up to any network, then the results could be tampered with by crackers or others.
... ... ...
A proper voting system also means using Linux or OpenBSD as the OS, not Windows 2k/XP, both of which aren't nearly as secure (or as stable) as a well-configured Linux or OpenBSD system. Also, they aren't controlled by proprietary interests like MS which would find nothing wrong with tampering with an election.
Also, of course, a proper program is needed, with an easy to use interface, with clear instructions.
Something like this would do for electing the Congressman:
1. Choose a Candidate for the Congressman by touching his name with your finger: X, Y, Z
Click preview to preview your voting selections.
2. You have selected:
For Congressman: X
3. If these are the candidates you want to vote for, touch YES! with your finger. If not, touch NO! with your finger.
If person touches NO!, back to #1, with previous selections highlighted, and allowing user to change it.
Very simple. Very effective. Even someone in Florida could figure it out. At the very least, you won't be counting divits and chads.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
I suppose you're one of those who champion the Reagan lore, heralding his "anti-tax", smaller government crusade that was neither. The Reagan regime enacted one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history AND increased the scope, size, and debt of the federal government to record levels.
The personal interest deduction phaseout that was a result of the 1986 tax act had the effect of increasing taxs anywhere from 10-25% for the average working American. Student loans, car loans, credit card payment - the interest on those loans was deductable - this change boosted the tax paid by Americans while implementing a horde of special interest loopholes for the elite.
AZspot
> Btw, anybody else depressed about their selection of candidates?
Yep. And it may be worth our time to ask why.
Issues weren't an issue in my state. They started out with the Republicans running on the "I'm a Bush suck-up" ticket and the Democrats running on the "I'm going to give you everything and charge you nothing" ticket. But as soon as they saw each other's ads they added each other's pitch to their own, and you couldn't tell which party anyone was from by looking at the content of their ads. Finally they ditched all that and all just ran on the "I'm a better mudslinger" ticket.
Which raises the question of where they got all the money for those expensive ads. Someone has a lot of money and wants these people in office really bad. I think the reason we're getting bland candidates is because we're merely voting on whose puppet is most appealing.
> It was a tough choice. Voted green.
As neutral advice, I recommend everyone voting on one of the minor parties or independents. Even if you're not 100% behind their agenda, you can send a message to the major parties that way.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I don't know about the current race in NC, but the Democrats could have had that Senate seat a long time ago. They always ran someone who was as extreme liberal as Helms was extreme conservative. They never gave the middle of the road and disenfranchised Republicans someone they could consider.
I voted earlier this afternoon in Colorado (city of Lakewood). The system was very easy to understand, much as you alluded to.
There was no internet/network connection to each voting booth box. The people running the voting would take a hardware cartridge (like a Nintendo cartrigde of old) and plug in into the voting booth tablet to activate it, and then they remove it. Apparently they first "activated" it in some main computer. It was a touch-screen tablet PC with a straightforward interface... click the candidate you want with your finger. It then showed a big X next to who you voted for. If you wanted to change it, you could click a different candidate, and the X would move to their name.
Several pages of votes later, you get to review a list of all of your votes. If they look satisfactory, you push a "VOTE" button at the top of the tablet, which flashes red when you are ready to finish voting. Press it and you are done. I didn't see what happens after that. I imagine the computers keep a tally of votes on each, and they are plugged into the main server at some point, or the "cartridges" can be used to download the vote data and they plug into the main server.
But the main point is, there was no internet connection, no keyboard, a proprietary "cartridge" system for passing some kind of voter data or to activate the terminal for voting. Obviously I don't know the OS it was running, but it did seem fairly straightforward with no obvious ways to mess with it. Not to mention that there were 4 election representatives there overseeing everything and it would be way obvious if anyone tried to mess with the machines in any way.
I don't know if they had any kind of built in UPS, because someone could pull the plug out of the wall easily... but overall they looked like good voting machines with proprietary hardware, which is a good thing IMO...
Mark
>You must be new around here. The problem is that many with the worst records (Hollings) are democrats.
You must be newer. The "Worst coders in Washington" story lists the lawmakers behind the bills slashdot tends to complain about and its something like 90% Republican.
Source: http://www.aotc.info/archives/000152.html
>They would rather ignore one or 2 issues for the "greater good" of keeping the democrats in power.
Remember to turn down your radio before you call Rush Limbaugh.
hmm, I just read the actual article. It says:
Democrats asked for the initial order because some precincts in Pulaski County ran out of ballots.
In other words, people are showing up on time and not being able to vote because the equipment isn't working/available. The Democrats are trying to fix the problem, and the Republicans are trying (successfully, it seems) to stop them.
Florida, anyone?
Twenties Retirement
Well, it's hard to tell how well it's working. At the very least, I think they've improved their prediction system. It seems to be a combination of exit polls, a calculation of how close the race is, and how the vote goes historically. There's a page on CNN about it, but I have to admit I only skimmed it. =)
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2002/pages/how.html
~ Leilah
In Alameda county, the only CA county to have electronic voting, it went really well. I couldn't tell what OS they were using, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't windows. People were commenting on how easy it was to vote. Nice job whoever made the system!
Slashdot 's editors are dickheads
owned his own land, consumed his own food, raised his own seed and even made his own farming implements. Yet when he grew a federally banned crop they cracked down.
Wickard v. Filburn was not about a banned crop but rather about private growth and consumption competing with a rationed crop. Marijuana, on the other hand, is banned; therefore, the precedent may not strictly apply.
Besides, the Lopez case seems to represent a turnaround in the Supreme Court's view of the loose interpretation of Congress's enumerated powers. A win for the "good guys" in Eldred v. Ashcroft would also show that there still exist some things outside Congress's enumerated powers.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Most countries in Europe (and, I assume, the World), have been successfully experimenting with a revolutionary voting method:
1. Voters are given a piece of "paper". On this "paper" are the names of the candidates or parties, followed the respective picture or symbol, followed by an empty square.
2. Using a device known as "pen", the voters proceed to make a "cross" (a highly optimised mark, consisting of two straight lines) inside the "square" that corresponds to the person or party they wish to vote for.
3. The voters then fold this paper two or three times and insert it in a large "box" (a device for storing pieces of paper).
4. Once voting is over, advanced counting machines known as "people" (usually groups of volunteers, with one or two official representatives) take the pieces of paper out of the box and look at the marks made with the pens. They write down how many "votes" there were for each candidate. This process typically takes less than six hours, including one recount.
5. (This part will sound obvious to most people familiar with democracy, but americans may find it surprising) The candidate with the most votes wins.
It's a relatively inexpensive and ecological process, since the paper can be recycled. But, most of all, it works.
RMN
~~~
As an undergrad in college, I worked on some of the software written to tally votes in Missouri (back when I was a pascal coder!). The way the system worked is as follows:
All the individual polls fed their ballots into punch-card readers. When completed, those readers would then dial up and connect to a central server over plain ol' voice line. They would then upload a tab-delimited ASCII file to the server which would then collate the votes and print a report. There was (as far as I could tell) no system to authenticate that the tallies recieved by the server were from the polls that they were supposed to be from. If you wanted to, there's a million ways you could defraud this system that have nothing to do with paper vs. electronic ballots. At some point, all the votes get counted by a computer, and if you want to fix an election "h4x0r" style, that's where you would do it, regardless of how the votes were collected in the first place.
Electronic ballots reduce the rate of ballot error, not voter fraud; Which is a human problem, not a technical one.
The Tribune was the one with the early deadline, Republican ownership, and cavalier attitude. And I don't think they've ever quite lived it down.
But I'm grateful to them for an all-time best political photo.
Please repeat after me: CONGRESS IS THE LAWMAKING BODY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Now tell me, oh enlightened one... who was it that controlled Congress during the Reagan presidency? Who was it that was responsible for tying up every trivial bill with enough pork to choke a small horse? Who was it, in fact, that did each and every thing you blame on Reagan?
C'mon. I know, it's hard... you can say it with me, if that helps:
D - E - M - O - C - R - A - T - S
There! See how easy that was? Now, let's try it again: who was in control of the lawmaking body (Congress, remember?) during the Clinton years? You remember - booming economy, low unemployment, everyone happier than a pig in poo? OK, OK, we'll say it together again:
R - E - P - U - B - L - I - C - A - N - SWhile I'll admit some might consider a mere 20 years to be too short a time to draw any strong conclusions, the evidence seems to indicate that while a Democratic controlled congress spends money like a compulsive shopper with bad math skills [1], a Republican congress is actually fairly good for the economy in particular and the nation in general.
[1] Actually not a very good analogy. I've seen compulsive shoppers, and even they have trouble flinging money around with the same abandon as a Democrat-controlled Congress.
"Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
I saw one of these machines on the news. They do allow for a write-in. When "write in' was selected, a qwerty keyboard would pop up on the screen, and that would let you enter in the candidate.
Can't you people fill in a fucking circle?
As of now, about 3% of California voters voted Green in the race for Governor. But Simon (R) is leading Davis (D) by about 1% of the vote. If Simon wins, it's going to be because some of his voters voted for the Green candidate.
--well, first time for me today. I live in georgia, got to "enjoy" our closed source no way to verify it anymore computerised voting machine. We had paper ballots before, relatively easy to count with any old random pairs of eyeballs and really never a problem before.
After I finished voting I asked ror A - a paper receipt with my recoded vote, and B a copy of the source code used on the computer for outside audit to see that it wasn't trojaned or set up to manipulate the votes in anyway. No receipt available. Poor poll official in this small county was flabbergasted. Called folks, eventually got shuffled to some guy at the computer company. He wouldn't give me a copy of the code because it was propietary, well, that's the point sez I no way to verify it. If there's a dispute how do the people at the polls recount it-run the flash card through the same maybe compromised machine? And if the flash card itself is changed already? All they need to pull off the scam is get the total number of votes cast to match the numbers hand entered at the head of the line, the RESULTS are un-verifiable. This is a duh really, it's just totaly bogus.
The poll official really didn't get it, I honestly don't think they understood what the whole point was, see it's the magic infalliable computer that no government or other party would ever manipulate, no, that's just not possible, and the corporate dude I talked to on the phone was kinda sorta smarmy and was indignant, so no source code. He KNEW what I was saying but was play acting dumb. ButI made sure at least I protested for the record.
Earlier on drudge before I went and voted he had a headline of big problems in georgia with the machines already, casting and changing votes from one party to the other, etc-what I think a lot of hipper people expected to happen- but now I can't find it cruising some other news sites, it poofed from drudge as near as I can see.
Take a look at this for a quick introduction to CNN's methods: How does CNN make election projections?.
Jouster
You have a lovely sense of taste. So you think, what, that Senator Wellstone and two members of his family dies because he was a "socialist"? You dare to class him with Hitler? I suppose you think his death was divine justice?
"Welfare recipients" do NOT receive EIC -- it's call the Earned Income Credit for a reason.
Clearly you have no dignity.
As a friend of mine once said, "When they outlawed alcohol, all the rowdy drunks went to Washington and fucked shit up till it was legal. When they outlawed pot, all the stoners were too laid-back to care."
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
I went and voted earlier, and it went pretty smoothly. The machines were made by Diebold (go figure). However, I must say that I am not comfortable putting my vote in the hands of a completely unaccountable corporation.
However, much worse than that was what happened after I finished voting. The machine used a smart card, that was locked into the machine while I was voting. After I was done, it was ejected, and one of the nice volunteers took it from me -- by hand -- while another handed me an "I voted" sticker.
It appears that the smart card does nothing more than "enable" the voting machine, and the votes are stored in the machine until read out. The question is, I have no info on how that process works, so I have no idea if my vote is even being counted properly. Further, I don't think that the State is very forthcoming on all the gory details of the process, for fear of someone finding a weakness and exploiting it. So, again, no accountability.
While I do understand and appreciate the need to replace the tedious and often error-prone manual processes in our voting systems, I am still uncomfortable with trusting in methods and equipment which have ZERO accountability anywhere in the chain.
I predict the obvious here.. lots of lawsuits by angry losers contesting the election and the new processes utilitized in it.
Oh well.. such is the way of "progress".
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
You know, we could always just keep all polling places open longer. Or move everything to Saturday. You know, so more people can actually get away from work to vote?
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
For shame, michael. Many people in many, many countries (China? Cuba? Large swaths of Africa?) would die (and have done just so) for the right to have an election run in a manner remotely close to what we take for granted in the USA. For all the cries about the "rigged" presidential election in 2000, it was *nothing* compared to the military-style elections in other countries. Look at the way Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe, folks) has stayed in office for decades. Look at how other countries basically had to step in to ensure a fair election within this country a few years back. Call me a young, idealistic fool if you wish, but if you're gonna live here, you've got to believe in the system, man! Else perhaps you're better off moving to warmer climates...
Wrists killing you? Not in 2 weeks. Learn Dvorak.
Actually most of the stoners, get busted for pot, loose thier right to vote forever. (most states)
Nothing like haveing millions of people in the USA who cant vote. Hell in my state alone, 24% of the Black population cant vote due to Felony Disenfranchisement Laws. And it wont change with all the Republicans in office.
human rights watch has more info.
> a touch screen interface [...] the X magically appears [...]
> a card with a magnetic strip is activated [...] you go and
> stick that in the machine [...]
This was probably invented by Wallace & Gromit, right? It sort of reminds me of the NASA program to create a pen that could write in space. NASA (and american taxpayers) "invested" close to one million dollars on that. The russians used pencils.
> it eliminates multiple votes for the same office,
Huh?
> it allows you to *change* your vote if you've pressed the wrong box,
If you make a mistake, ask for a new piece of "paper". They're free.
> and it allows you to *verify* that you have voted for the right canidate!
I assume you mean "right" in a practical sense, not in a philosophical sense. In which case, using the "paper" method, you can use your "eyes" to look at the "paper", and you'll know if you've voted for the right candidate.
Also, computers are known to sometimes misplace some bytes. It's extremely rare for a cross made with a pen to jump from one part of the paper to another.
Sometimes low tech is good tech.
RMN
~~~
How many times can the Democrats pull this crap?!
Both sides pull this shit. And I'm afraid this wont change till something make the public make elected officals accountable.
No big suprise here. CNN just predicted incumbent Gray Davis the winner of the California Gubenetorial election through statistical analysis of currently tallied votes.
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
here
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Some points:
The President submits a budget to congress (what exactly did you think Reagan was talking about when explaining his "trickle down economics" program? An Econ 101 paper he was writing?)
The President appoints the leaders of the departments of the executive branch (such as that Dept. of Defense, which accounts for 43% of federal spending)
The President gets to veto any law passed by Congress (like the ridiculous defense pork that the Republican congress kept trying to pass during the Clinton years -- despite the fact that our military is grossly over-prepared for any realistically plausible enemies)
Its interesting that the Republicans are the ones that spend money hand over fist (that little 43% number again) and then when caught with their hands in the cookie jar, grin and point at the Dems.
I posted an idea two years ago after the whole presidential debacle which people seemed to like. Fill out a simple voting scantron type of form (online, or at the polling place). Feed it into the scantron voting machines at the polling place. The voting machine prints out the actual ballot, as well as a copy for you to keep. You check the ballot to make sure it is correct. Drop it in the ballot box. That way you get instant electronic results, as well as paper ballots to check for programming errors, fraud, etc... It involves a few extra steps and a little more paper, but not much more than we use right now, and that way, hard proof of the ballots exists to mitigate electronic tampering.
In case anyone likes to follow the results this late at night.. it appears that the GOP is now in the majority of the House and Senate. And CNN provides overall statistics for the exact numbers between the two major parties.
I also find it interesting that as of right now (3:11am est), MSNBC isn't ready to assume that the GOP has control of the Senate and the House. But everyone knows CNN leans towards the right anyways.
To get back to software issues, some of the stations had a fixed display format that could only handle two candidates (whether the numbers were correct or not), while others were more flexible (which they also needed for things like city council races, which here in California are usually Vote-for-N-of-M non-partisan.)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
From poll taxes to roadblocks in Florida, thwarting the democractic process is extremely damaging to society in the long run.
No.
Wrong.
What's damaging to society in the long run is cynical losing candidates and their backers defaming the process with irresponsible and unfounded allegations. If you want people to take elections seriously, establish rules and go by them. Don't play games after the fact. Don't expend thousands of words explaining why the whole thing was a fraud.
Actually, that is an urban legend.
My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
We'll have to get past the stage where electronic voting is merely emulating a process developed around the constraints of managing physical artifacts. For example, it could be used to get feedback about what parts of a bill or proposal people like or dislike. You even have the potential to find out why. Since the computer is doing the counting, this is no longer unfeasible.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
http://www.tse.gov.br/eleicoes/eleicoes2002/
The results were known within hours. The code is digitally signed, and the parties were allowed to check the source code. There is no wires, the device generates a diskette that is encrypted and signed before being sent to TSE. Some cities was experimenting a printer attached to extra security.
Diebold voting terminals
Brazil's vote - fast but fiddly
If you can read this, thank an english teacher.
This whole electronic thing was supposed to end the "chad" problem which was never a problem in the first place. IOW we were fixing a problem that didn't exist. I bet the same people who wanted to change to electronic will now scream to go back.
We need to accept that a) some people are too stupid to vote and b) the problem for the loser is the election results, not the methods.
If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
For example, why is it a federal crime to use a hand gun near a school,
because it's NOT! This law was overturned on exactly the 10th Amendment argument you are making. Sadly there are still lots of laws that completely ignore the concept of federalism but at least the Supremes are *starting* apply it here and there.
From that point of view last night's election is good news. With control of the senate GWB will likely get to appoint much more conservative judges than he would otherwise - judges who are strict constructionists and much more likely to uphold the 10th ammendment in all it's chaotic decentralized glory. States will be much more free to follow their own course - more libertarian in AZ, more theocratic in GA, maybe even more progressive in VT.
I guess the Democrats have some pretty hard numbers that show a vast majority of people who intend to vote after the polls close are democrats (go figure)
It's not that late voters trend Democratic but that they are only keeping Democratic strongholds open. So Democratic party officials complain about Democratic officials running the election to a Democratic judge to keep a Democratic stronghold open longer so that more Democrats can vote. At no point in the process are Republicans involved in this little drama.
For all those saying "well there really are problems, people are waiting in line" that is often true, they have to have *some* excuse after all (a cynic would wonder if the "problems" aren't done purposefully just for that prupose). In any event, the standard ruling of the Democratic judge is to keep the polls open for another 1-1/2 to 2 hours NOT to let the people in already in line vote. As it is the party usually use these "problems" as an occasion for an aggresive last minute get-out-the-vote drive with the added urgency that "they" (the Democratic!!! officals responsible for the SNAFU?) are trying to "steal the election - don't let them!" In Arkansas this year they almost immediately rushed out a (pre?)recorded message alerting Democratic voters of this attempt by "them" (Democrats!) to suppress the minority vote.
You'd think the republicans would have enough brain cells to get the democrats to agree (or at least give them certified, return receipt notice) as to the time the polls are going to close.
Well of course they DID it's just that the Democrats will always look for that little advantage. The Republicans do as well of course, there are all sorts of dirty tricks the parties pull on each other. But screwing with the actual mechanisms of the election is beyond the pale IMHO. The polls should close on time - if there is a line at the time of the closing the law should let those *already* in line vote but not allow anyone new to get in line (I don't know but I'm willing to bet that is exactly what the law DOES say) These cheap little lawsuit tricks before partisan judges cheapens and undermines the whole process. The rank-and-file Dems believe their disengenious leaders that the Republicans attempted to rig the election and the Republicans feel the same of the Dems - all for the sake of a few hundred votes.
Congress's ability to make laws the regulate personal behaviour and practices entirely within a state ALL stem from the constitution's allowance for the feds to regulate inter-state commerce. And this was originally put in the constitution as a sweetener to join the union (i.e joint a free trade zone! much like reason everyone joined the EU or why nafta happened. scary).
Excerpted from www.fff.org: Enter Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio dairy and poultry farmer, who raised a small quantity of winter wheat -- some to sell, some to feed his livestock, and some to consume. In 1940, under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the central government told Mr. Filburn that for the next year he would be limited to planting 11 acres of wheat and harvesting 20 bushels per acre. He harvested 12 acres over his allotment for consumption on his own property. When the government fined him, Mr. Filburn refused to pay. Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it -- and that affected interstate commerce. It also argued that if the price of wheat rose, which is what the government wanted, Mr. Filburn might be tempted to sell his surplus wheat in the interstate market, thwarting the government's objective. The Supreme Court bought it. The Court's opinion must be quoted to be believed: [The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce. As Epstein commented, "Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is 'commerce among the several states?'" For good measure, the Court justified the obvious sacrifice of Mr. Filburn's freedom and interests to the unnamed farmers being protected: It is of the essence of regulation that it lays a restraining hand on the self-interest of the regulated and that advantages from the regulation commonly fall to others. After Wickard , everything is mere detail. The entire edifice of civil rights legislation stands on the commerce power. Under this maximum commerce power, the government has been free to regulate nearly everything, including a restaurant owner's bigotry. The Court has held that if Congress sees a connection to interstate commerce, it is not its role to second guess.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Next you're going to tell me Wallace & Gromit aren't real either?
RMN
~~~
Before you got to vote on that touch-screen gizmo, did you have to accept the EULA first? :^)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
The people of North Carolina were obviously not prepared to elect a guy named "Foreskin"....
ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
I wish I were as optimistic as you are about the future of federalism....
I'm cautiously optimistic. It depends on three factors 1) Who retires on the court (effected by how long the Reps control the process) and 2) How willing Republicans are to put forward conservative/strict-constructionists.
As to who will retire - I think Rehnquist will definitely get out while the getting is good. Even if Republicans go all out in pushing a conservative on the court I doubt you will get much better from a federalist point-of-view. BUT, O'Conner may also get out while the going is good. Considering that she is usually the one who decides which way the usual 5-4 split goes this is a big gain for federalism IF the Republicans stick by their guns in sending them to the court. All of this is really offset if Stevens retires - even in the most ideologically committed Republicans will probably cave (to a degree) to the idea of preserving some sort of balance on the court so I would expect that they would put of a more "moderate" justice - probably someone like an O'Conner, still a big win for federalism.
Of course Stevens & other liberals will probably try to wait out Bush, hoping they can retire with a Democratic Prez and hopefully Senate. This could happen but it is important to remember that we are in (or just coming out of) a recession NOW and what comes after a recession? Just in time for W's re-election campaign we will probably be enjoying the inevitable up-turn after a recession just like Reagan's landslide in '84. Republicans in the Senate will finally catch a break with only 15 seats to defend v. the Dems 19, A decent number of Dems are in strong Republican states - Daschle in ND, Edwards in NC, Hollings in SC, Miller in GA, Reid in NV, and Dorgan in ND. Daschle, Miller and maybe Edwards win easy if they run BUT Daschle & Edwards might try for Prez and Miller could retire or even switch parties.
Finally it comes down to how far are Reps willing to exploit their oppurtunity to shift the ideology of the court. I think they are MUCH more willing than they had been in the past. The Dems have politicized the court far more than was common in the past (when Republican appointees were as likely to end up liberal as conservative) and have managed to alienate even the more moderate Republicans that they could have persuaded previously. There is a strong feeling among Reps that "turnabout is fair play" and if Democrats are willing to blatantly apply a "litmus test" (previously a taboo) on an issue that is ultimately a federalist issue (almost any federalist will be anti-Roe for federalist if not pro-life reasons). Republicans will return the favor (albeit more subtly) - I think they are FAR more willing to fight for conservative nominees than they have ever been before.
... and of course, euro-slashbots, who think there is any need for electronic voting in the US, or in fact think there is a technical problem at all.
There isn't. US jurisdictions use and have used a variety of methods, but most commonly a punch card counted by machine, and there is nothing wrong with this method. It works fine.
The supposed "problem" was an attempt to overturn the results of an election. The media and the lawerly clas were fully on board, but it didn't work. It almost worked, though, so they're going to keep trying.
Trouble is, euro-slashbots only get to see what is in the media. So they (because it is in their interest) sneer and agree with the talking heads. Only the media and a tiny hardcore group of Democrats actually nurse the belief that election "irregularities" benefited Bush. I think we all know who the dead people and the non-citizens voted for, and it sure as hell wasn't Bush.
5. (This part will sound obvious to most people familiar with democracy, but americans may find it surprising) The candidate with the most votes wins.
Har har. And in countries of any size, where a true federation makes sense, the candidate with the most votes in a region wins an elector. Which is what happened. Bush won the most votes in Florida, no matter how many times Democrat canvassing boards got all metaphysical and postmodern with scrutinizing ballots. By the way, those are your "people" who would be counting the pen marks in the boxes. Yeah, that would be better, I guess, if you are the cheater.
I can't remember the last time I voted on Election Day...was probably '94 or '96. I've taken advantage of early voting ever since it was introduced...polling places are set up in malls and other public places ~2 weeks before an election.
If early voting isn't available, I suppose there's absentee voting (which is admittedly somewhat more vulnerable to manipulation, as when Gore tried to get the military absentee vote thrown out in Florida in 2000)...either way, I don't see that there's any excuse to complain about not being able to vote. I'm one of the worst procrastinators you'll ever run across (never do today what you can put off until tomorrow :-) ), but that doesn't stop me from getting my vote turned in ASAP.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
And Satan is laughing his festering ass off.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
You don't trust any new ones.
You don't trust the Electoral College. (No, you don't understand OR trust the Electoral College.)
And you don't have any ideas about a better way of doing things.
But you ARE willing to critique the system? My, how sporting of you. Here's the skinny, Erik, politics is work. It's the business of getting things done that are too big for any one person to do, the job of making the least-objectionable or least-hazardous decision about things that will affect us all. That job will continue to be done, despite your boycott, because it has to be.
Go ahead and complain, if that's all you've got. Just don't expect any sympathy from those willing to make the effort.
Hmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
We don't have many 'name' candidates- Pollina ran previously for Governor, so he ended up being the front-man. We also had a neat Attorney General candidate, Cindy Hill, though she didn't win.
40/33/25. I call that a message to the major parties. On the one hand, we can tell the Republican to act right or maybe next time we'll be that 40% number- on the other hand, we can suggest to the Democrats that for the sake of party unity they should all quit and support the Progressive candidates, because we are obviously a lot better at getting people out there working and voting :D
There's lots of other interesting stuff that happened- for instance, BECAUSE the Democrats lost control of everything (PLURALITY SUCKS! Make them stop acting like it is a goddamn wrestling match!), it turns out our dear old senator from Disney Fritz Hollings (remember HIM?) will no longer be heading the Commerce Committee. So ironically, some of the geek-hostile interests LOST power because of this.
It all warrants a lot of mulling over I think. But it's really eye-opening what the Progressives managed to do here in Vermont. The biggest irony is- suppose that Libertarian group had in fact moved to Vermont and ran a guy for Lieutenant Governor themselves- taking votes from both Democrats and Republicans, mostly Republicans, definitely NOT many Progressives?
Our guy might have WON.
Politics is weird! :D
For senator, I had a choice between Warner(R) and two independants who I never heard of.
For representative, I had a choice between Goodlatte(R) and nobody. Even the tinfoil brigade stayed home.
We had two consitutional amendments, both so bland that the aforementioned tinfoil hatwearers were the only opposition.
Ok, I did get to vote on two bond measures, one of which was actually important.
Whoohoo! Democracy in action.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
What I really want to know is: who is selling these electronic voting machines and how can I get a share of the profit?
RMN
~~~
But oddly enough, only in the Mission, the Tenderloin, and Hunter's Point. All strongly democratic precincts.
Last election, a dozen empty ballot boxes turned up in the bay afterwards. The elections department claimed they had taken them to the docks for cleaning(?!?) and they had washed away in a storm.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I'm not sure how open source code helps the problem any since you can't verify that the open code you are looking at is the same code used in the machine.
Al-Qaeda receives some funding from illegal drugs, but this is mostly from middle-eastern opium.
Marijuana (at least the one you see in the States) comes mainly from Mexico, grown by poor farmers that have no other choice but to grow pot for the Tijuana and Tamaulipas drug-overlords.
So if you smoke pot, you are supporting the drug cartels, who are mainly concerned in mantaining the current US status quo. They were certainly pissed at the 9/11 attacks, because sales went down and border patrols went up!
Also it has been decisively proved now that marijuanna induces schizophrenic like symptoms among a majority of users. Most often these present as a particularly violent form of schizophrenia.
Sorry, but could you back this up with a link to a respected research paper? (not funded by the US goverment)
No sig for the moment.
Stop reading Starship Troopers!
If you cant see that it was actually a cautionary tale and _not_ a serious political platform then you need to read something else
No sig for the moment.