Maryland Governor Wants Paper Ballots

supabeast! writes, "Fed up with all the problems in the state's electronic voting system, Maryland Governor Robert Erlich wants the state to scrap the entire system and return to paper ballots. He's threatened to call a special session of the legislature to change the law to allow paper ballots. What makes this particularly interesting is that Erlich is a Republican — the party often maligned for exploiting flaws in electronic systems — and his attempts to clean up Maryland's voting problems are being opposed by Democrats, the party that is usually complaining about electronic voting!"

Comments

Re:Partisanship

[spun]

Say what? If Democrats were well known for exploiting paper ballots, why would they be protesting moving back to paper ballots?

Re:Partisanship

[Dave21212]

Your big mistake here is that you seek only to malign (and yeah, it usually implies lying) people and confuse any real discussion. Your tendency to cite random incidents, without any real context, appears only to be done in order to try to prove some personal point and had added nothing of value to the discussion. This behavior of yours leads me to think that you may just be another troll, and I probably shouldn't be replying at all here, but many folks in this thread are on my friends list, so it stood out.

Here's the thing, no matter how extremely biased you may be, or how blind you are to reality, and no matter how much you think "the other side" is at fault, what's needed is a solution to the problem. If you work to eliminate the problems with the voting system, then your side wins (you want to win don't you???), if you ignore the problems and play the Blame Game, then you lose (we all lose).

Please give the Blame Game you are playing a break, it's distracting people from talking about solutions...

Re:Pudge, please look up malign in the dictionary

[spun]

You lose, sorry. Let me refresh your obviously deficient memory. This is what you stated: 'There's nothing "false" necessarily or even usually implicated by the use of the word "malign." Not sure where you get that from, but it wasn't a dictionary.'

You managed to find a dictionary that got you out of "necessarily." I will concede that point. I put that in because you had used that word, and the first three dictionaries I happened to look at online include it as a necessary part of the defintion. But usually? When most of the dictionaries referenced by me or you include falsehood as part of the definition, it's a safe bet that that is the accepted useage. Are you at least capable of conceding you were wrong on that point?

My favorite part is where you say, "Not sure where you get that from, but it wasn't a dictionary." Obviously, I got it directly from not one, but three dictionaries. You have been proven completely wrong on that point, though I'm beginning to suspect you are incapable of admitting it.

Re:Pudge, please look up malign in the dictionary

[spun]

Arguing with you is pointless. I said 'Look up the word malign. It means to maliciously and falsly accuse. ' You said, 'there's nothing "false" necessarily or even usually implicated by the use of the word "malign."' You were the first to use the word necessarily. I simply repeated it because you had used it and a cursory glance at some online dictionaries seemed to indicate it was a fairly necessary part of the definition.

The more telling point is that you said it doesn't usually mean false, and I think I have shown that it does usually mean false. You cleverly used dictionaries that are not available on line, so no one can check the veracity of your claims. I used only online dictionaries, so my claims are easily verifiable. Sure, dictionaries may be wrong, but the first three that come up in a google search for online dictionary? That's a big coincidence, if true.

I will admit that I was wrong about malign necessarily meaning false if you will admit to being wrong about it usually not meaning false. The best argument that you can make that malign does not usually imply false is that most dictionaries are wrong, and that is a very weak and pompous argument.

Re:Paper ballots makes dead people voting difficul

[Profane MuthaFucka]

You love my O face. You love my O face. If you didn't love my O face, why do you guzzle so much cum?

Republicans suppress the minority vote to keep Democrats home. I proved it, it's too embarassing to you. You'd rather eat my man-goo than debate that point.

Republicans suppress the minority vote because minorities are Democrats. Also, Pudge supports a racist party. I'm not going to say that Pudge is a racist, because he's probably, very very likely, not racist at all. His party sure is though. How does it feel that someone like me is disgusted by you?

No point in arguing anymore, Pudge just wants to stubbornly ignore the facts that I posted. All that's left is name calling. Pudge, why didn't you just come out and say what an asshole you are right up front and save us some time? I could have been stroking my man meat into your gullet 4 posts ago!