Slashdot Mirror


Dave Barry on Electronic Voting

eggoeater writes "With the general interest Slashdot has with electronic voting machines, I thought we'd all enjoy reviewing Dave Barry's take on touch-screen voting machines and debating the merits of police officers carrying lightsabers."

6 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. I think Dave has some points by ScytheBlade1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not about the electronic voting or anything, but that is pretty dang funny.

    I think he's got some points being funny though. I mean, how many people do you know who becoome so obsessed with this election, that even a mention of "a different" canidate will get you a glare?

    Peopel need to tone it down a bit. Stuff like that really provides some needed comedy, when it's really needed too.

    I walk down the hall talking to some people, and they say that this year is going to end up sucking. "Why's that?" I ask. "Because I've got several massive projects due in the start of December, my grandma is on the verge of death, and to top it all off, Bush might get re-elected." ...

    This guy isn't even of legal age to vote, and he was literally thinking that Bush being re-elected is by far worse than anything else at the moment.

    Come on people, live a little, joke a little. Rock on Dave Barry.

  2. Doesn't anyone think it's sad by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It doesn't bother anyone else that people in this country were seriously asking for UN observers for a US election?

    Politics has always been kind of an ugly business, but I don't remember a campaign in my lifetime that was so bitter, petty, angry, divisive and deliberately misleading. We have collectively sunk to the ethical level of Karl Rove.

    Not only do we not deserve a leadership position in the world, we are becoming ugly and pathetic. We are in real danger of turning into the richest third world country on the planet.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Doesn't anyone think it's sad by cbare · · Score: 5, Insightful


      Whaddya mean third world country?

      • rampant crony capitalism
      • giant national debt
      • devalued currency
      • pointless wars motivated by crackpot ideology
      • nominal democracy characterized by shakey elections

      Naaa that'll never happen here. This is America!


      p.s. in deibold we trust.

      --
      -cbare
  3. 30 Second Commercial Spots by Izaak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The part I liked best was his rif on 30 second commercial spots. They do nothing to inform the voters, yet they are often the thing that swings the election. They are a primary reason money has become such a huge corrupting influence in politics. Like those Swift Boat Vet adds. They have been completely discredited, but many people will never learn that part of it and only remember the adds themselves. This is why I urge people to do a few google news searches and inform yourselves of the issues before going in the voting booth.

  4. Re:Excluding stories from homepage? by gilroy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Blockquoth the poster:

    So a small plea to the editors; please keep politics in their own Section until someone fixes the Exclusion?

    or fixes the election... :)

    Kidding aside, this story is about tech and its impact, not just politics. It's not inappropriate that it appear on the main page. Here's a radical thought, if you see the headline for a story and you just know you won't want to read it: Don't. Participation on slashdot is voluntary in many degrees.

    If you're so thin-skinned that you can't handle seeing the merest headline that indicates politics simply exists, then you probably would be happier unplugging the computer and TV, and simply watching the paint crack.
  5. Re:Banned by gilroy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Blockquoth the poster:

    What about us conservatives that don't?

    So you're willing to accept an invalid result if it saves you a few bucks? No wonder the Republic is in such dire straits these days.

    Look at it this way: Naturally enough, you believe your positions to be correct. If you also believe in democracy, then you have to believe that your valid ideas will win out, long run, versus the invalid ones that compete. (If you feel this is pollyanna, fine... but then you don't believe in democracy.) Since you're clearly on the side of goodness and light, if an election were to be improper, it would be The Other Guys who rigged it. These are the guys whom you believe want to raise taxes to 100% while legally mandating all sorts of moral depravities. Do you want them to get in because you wouldn't shell out few dollars?

    If you believe in your cause, then settling a contested election will lead to the "right" people being elected ... and then they can go on to slash revenues and so on. So long term, the spending for a valid election would be more of an investment, or at least, more like spending more money on flourescent bulbs: Down the road, you save more than it costs.