Sunday, November 5, 2006 5:13:42 PM
Yes, paper ballots would just be a lot better, however I read about a movement on the net, where people are now going to take cameras and video their votes in case of any tampering. One person won't make a difference, but a couple hundred thousand might especially in places like Flordia and Ohio that have been tainted by this controversy. This whole article is really discusting. Not shocked though.
Saturday, November 4, 2006 5:07:03 PM
he he he... and yeah, for every general election for our MP's here in England, we got postal votes, and that works out fine... why bother doing it electronically? it`s inevitable that something like this will happen eventually...
Saturday, November 4, 2006 12:16:16 PM
Ughhh! Can you say "paper ballot?"
In Canada, they're handed a square of paper with the list of candidates and a circle beside each one. You check off the one you want to vote for in the voting both, then you come out and put the paper in the box in front of the election official.
There`s none of this crap when it comes time to tally the votes.
Saturday, November 4, 2006 2:43:34 AM
Oh, and mellisswoog; it is evident you didn't even READ the post. It says here: "Sequoia`s voting machines are perhaps the most widely used in California, in some 19 different counties, including both Tehama and Riverside, which is known as the `Home of E-Voting` as it was the first county in the nation to deploy such systems. But identical Sequoia machines are also used in dozens of other states around the country including Florida, Illinois and elsewhere.
"Thanks to the diligence of Watt and Courbat, it is now confirmed that all such systems are completely vulnerable to virtually anyone who wishes to cast as many votes as they please."
Whoops! As a resident Californian, I was eager to believe you, but Alas...