I'm an Election Day Tech in Ohio and this past Primary, every precinct was forced to carry paper ballots in case someone wanted to vote on paper instead of the machine. Out of 5 precincts, roughly 10 people wanted to vote that way. This cost our county an additional $20,000 just to do the paper ballots.
Jennifer Brunner wants to get rid of the voting machines in the worst way.
Doesn't anyone think it's just too convenient that Jennifer was the only one to find this problem out?
The voter cards are all encoded with the same ballot in November since it's a general election.
How could hers have this problem and not her husband's if they both had the same ballot?
This is just her way of making the voting machines look bad so she can get rid of them. What a waste of tax payers money. Each machine costs around $6000 each.
The paper optical scan ballots also have probelms. Before the election, the optical scanner failed on 3 test runs. Why don't we just try to improve the machines instead of scrapping all together?
I'm an Election Day Tech in Ohio and this past Primary, every precinct was forced to carry paper ballots in case someone wanted to vote on paper instead of the machine. Out of 5 precincts, roughly 10 people wanted to vote that way. This cost our county an additional $20,000 just to do the paper ballots.
Jennifer Brunner wants to get rid of the voting machines in the worst way.
Doesn't anyone think it's just too convenient that Jennifer was the only one to find this problem out?
The voter cards are all encoded with the same ballot in November since it's a general election.
How could hers have this problem and not her husband's if they both had the same ballot?
This is just her way of making the voting machines look bad so she can get rid of them. What a waste of tax payers money. Each machine costs around $6000 each.
The paper optical scan ballots also have probelms. Before the election, the optical scanner failed on 3 test runs. Why don't we just try to improve the machines instead of scrapping all together?