Can America Trust Electronic Voting?

A anonymous reader writes: "The Sacramento Bee wrote an excellent article about the issues surrounding electronic voting. It was written by the Yolo County clerk/recorder and a professor of law at UC Davis. They quote sources such as Peter G. Neumann and Diebold's president Walden O'Dell."

Comments

Re:Except he was not appointed

[willtsmith]

Thats the best spin I've heard all year.

You are right in that the Supreme Court did not appoint Bush. They appointed the Florida electors that appointed Bush.

As far as frivolous appeals go, it was Bush who appealed a unanimous ruling that got the case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court got a stay on the counting claiming "irreparable harm". This is the stupidest thing EVER done by the Supreme Court. There was no reasonable way that simply COUNTING the votes could cause an irreparable harm since there was no garauntee that those results would be certified.

In the end, the Supreme Court issues no verdict. They simply printed a statement saying they would let the stay on counting stand since the count could not be done in time to certify as required by federal law.

The fact that they had delayed the counting thereby CREATING the central thesis of their reasoning seemed beyond concern.

BTW, It is becoming increasingly clear that electronic voting machines (combined with chasing black folk away from polls) in florida led DIRECTLY to president Bush's victory. 18,000 Al Gore votes were "lost" in one precinct by an electronic machine. It was later called a "glitch" and the glitchy card supposedly responsible was subsequently lost.

President Bush is clearly following the Joseph Stalin elctoral model. It doesn't matter who votes so much as who does the counting.