Blackbox Voting contesting ES&S acquisition of Diebold voting systems

[migopod]

Errr.. did you mean to imply that ALL voting systems (hand raising, paper ballot, finger print ID, Electronic computer tallying), or JUST the electronic voting machines that have been shown to have security flaws and lack of accountability/transparency?

I'd go with ALL. Paper ballots can be difficult to understand or deliberately laid out in such a way as to be more favourable to one candidate over another, not to mention mislaid ballots, ballot box stuffing and errors in hand-counts. Hand raising is a non-secret ballot, and it's pretty easy to exert pressure on people to vote how you want if you can verify that they voted in a particular way. Fingerprint ID requires you to have a database of everybody's finger prints, which sounds like a police-stateish sort of thing that would be pretty likely to run afoul of some civil libertarian ideals.

I think that's why there are and have been so many methods of voting. Because there's no silver bullet.

[migopod]

I agree, but how does increasing the number of companies solve the problem? If there are ten companies providing voting machines, you have to keep your eye on all ten versus just the one. Isn't it easier to keep the fox out of one hen house as opposed to ten?

Simply because if there's only one company with one closed-source codebase and there's an exploit in the wild then 100% of voting machines are affected. It's the old Dutch-elm (or Microsoft Windows) issue. Monoculture is bad because every individual is susceptible to the same vectors. Variation in a population of machines or organisms increases the robustness of the system as a whole.

The US FEC could (may already, but if not they should) just provide specific rules like the FIE does with scoring machines. In order to obtain certification, a machine would have to do things like produce or use a paper ballot that would be retained for recounts, the voting button would need to be held down for >15ms, no wireless technology nor access to usb/firewire/etc ports may be made available etc.

[migopod]

Actually as an addendum to my last post, why exactly is a voting machine running a Desktop OS? All it really needs to do is increment an integer and correlate it to an identifier of some kind, not play freakin' solitaire. Some enterprising EE type should try to make a sufficiently feature-rich dedicated voting machine that uses a microcontroler and see how it flies.

[Hauptman]

I agree, but how does increasing the number of companies solve the problem? If there are ten companies providing voting machines, you have to keep your eye on all ten versus just the one. Isn't it easier to keep the fox out of one hen house as opposed to ten?

That's a good question, but I would just reverse it.

If your goal is to fix the election, which is easier: gaming one voting machine or 10 different models?

[tchwojko]

Errr.. did you mean to imply that ALL voting systems (hand raising, paper ballot, finger print ID, Electronic computer tallying), or JUST the electronic voting machines that have been shown to have security flaws and lack of accountability/transparency?

Yes all have flaws. Some flaws are not as bad as others.

Hand raising - not anonymous and subject to peer pressure.
Paper ballot - Paper ballot designs all have various usability issues, and counting them can be problematic or time consuming.
Fingerprint ID - Are you going to have everyone's fingerprint? Privacy issues?
Scantron - Certainly not perfect at counting.

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable than I am can be more articulate about them, but none are perfect.

My point is that Diebold is far worse than most.

[migopod]

Yes all have flaws. Some flaws are not as bad as others.

Hand raising - not anonymous and subject to peer pressure.
Paper ballot - Paper ballot designs all have various usability issues, and counting them can be problematic or time consuming.
Fingerprint ID - Are you going to have everyone's fingerprint? Privacy issues?
Scantron - Certainly not perfect at counting.

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable than I am can be more articulate about them, but none are perfect.

My point is that Diebold is far worse than most.

If I were an outside observer, I might suspect we're getting talking points from the same source. Maybe we should start a global conspiracy!

[tchwojko]

If I were an outside observer, I might suspect we're getting talking points from the same source. Maybe we should start a global conspiracy!

How do you know we haven't already?

[migopod]

How do you know we haven't already?

By the Hammer of Thor! You're RIGHT!

[erik_blank]

By Grabthar's Hammer you shall be avenged!

[Bayou Bum]

That's a good question, but I would just reverse it.

If your goal is to fix the election, which is easier: gaming one voting machine or 10 different models?

You don't need to fix 10 different models. You can change a close election with just a few machines in key locations. While I don't like monopolies and competition would provide better voting machines, I don't see how the number of manufacturers solves the problem, except maybe for the competition to find a solution that can be capitalized on.

[Hauptman]

You don't need to fix 10 different models. You can change a close election with just a few machines in key locations. While I don't like monopolies and competition would provide better voting machines, I don't see how the number of manufacturers solves the problem, except maybe for the competition to find a solution that can be capitalized on.

That is true, but highly unlikely.

You'd have to know the election was going to be extremely close.
You'd have to know exactly where it would be close enough that you could influence it subtly.
You'd have to know that the right kind of machines that you can game will be there.
You'd have to have some sort of access to those machines.

All possible, but not a likely scenario except maybe for a local election.

Multiple manufacturers doesn't solve "the" problem; it solves one of the many problems inherent in the situation, just as using open source software would solve one of the issues.

[chase]

My sister and I were somewhat shocked and horrified to discover our mother, who has dementia, voted in the last election.

People complain about ACORN registering blacks/Democrats and complains when ACORN turns in the fradulant forms with paperwork attached noting they are fradulant, as they are required to do by law. No one complains about how the Republicans go through nursing homes and assisted living facilities, signing up people with dementia and then "assisting them" with voting.

My mother voted for county offices in a county where she has never lived and knows nothing about. [Because there's no facility in our home county.] When we talked to her later, we learned she had no clue that a woman was the VP candidate and a black man was the presidental candidate. She had, in fact, no clue at all who was on any of the tickets.

Mother is no longer living in this universe. Her body is still here but her mind is in an alternate reality and this is, unfortunately, true of many of our elderly in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. I note that the overwhelming majority of these voters vote Republican.

My sister is a solid redneck Republican and racist and I wouldn't be surprised to see her at a teabag protest. She was, however, as upset as I was that someone had "assisted" Mother with voting.

Our opinion is that Mother probably thought she was playing Bingo or possibly voting on some litle in-house thing because she hadn't a clue what was going on in the world outside.

There are many people in nursing homes whose minds are sharp but bodies weak and those people need to vote absentee. There are others, whoever, who are (imho) prey for those looking for multiple votes for their candidates and "assisting" the elderly in voting works well for them.

Nice story. Do you have any proof of this happening ANYWHERE ELSE? Also, how would they make sure she voted for a Republican if only one person is allowed in the voting booth?

[Capt. Slo-mo]

I think that's why there are and have been so many methods of voting. Because there's no silver bullet.

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable than I am can be more articulate about them, but none are perfect..

OK...that's two. One more reference to finding the best voting system, and you'll be invoking Beetlejuice---err, Peter G and his Amazing Voting System Analysis Compendium!

[Bayou Bum]

Also, how would they make sure she voted for a Republican if only one person is allowed in the voting booth?

Good question. I read the post and just took it at face value, as I am sure there are probably cases of Republicans assisting people with voting also. I just thought it was another post claiming "The Republicans did it once, so it is okay if the Democrats do it a thousand times"

[migopod]

Good question. I read the post and just took it at face value, as I am sure there are probably cases of Republicans assisting people with voting also. I just thought it was another post claiming "The Republicans did it once, so it is okay if the Democrats do it a thousand times"

You don't need a voting booth if you're voting absentee...

Are there any even anecdotal claims of Democrats having "assisted" voting like that? I've not heard any if there are.

[I_luv_saber]

I'm sure it happens. Democrats are not above the nasty political cesspool the rest are bathing in...

[lindajdunn]

You don't need a voting booth if you're voting absentee...

Family members can also "assist" disabled people who are voting at the polls so yes, other people beside the voter can be in the voting booth. If the person is alone and requests assistance, then there should be one person from each party there to assist. [This is part of why they have a representative from each party working at the polls.]

Are there any even anecdotal claims of Democrats having "assisted" voting like that? I've not heard any if there are.

Yes. There was a case at a nursing home where they were doing absentee votiing and a dispute arose because one woman insisted the voter wanted to vote for Obama while the Republican insisted the voter wanted to vote for McCain. I forget the final outcome but the volunteer who had marked the ballot for Obama for the voter was reprimended and removed from the facility.

Nursing homes and assisted living centers vote overwhelmingly Republican. I think it's at least 80% Republican.

[migopod]

Family members can also "assist" disabled people who are voting at the polls so yes, other people beside the voter can be in the voting booth. If the person is alone and requests assistance, then there should be one person from each party there to assist. [This is part of why they have a representative from each party working at the polls.]


Yes. There was a case at a nursing home where they were doing absentee votiing and a dispute arose because one woman insisted the voter wanted to vote for Obama while the Republican insisted the voter wanted to vote for McCain. I forget the final outcome but the volunteer who had marked the ballot for Obama for the voter was reprimended and removed from the facility.

Nursing homes and assisted living centers vote overwhelmingly Republican. I think it's at least 80% Republican.

Fair enough. Like I said, I hadn't heard of specific examples, but

"The Republicans did it once, so it is okay if the Democrats do it a thousand times"

seemed to imply that it was especially rampant on the Democrat side of the equation.

[Fechter1]

Nice story. Do you have any proof of this happening ANYWHERE ELSE? Also, how would they make sure she voted for a Republican if only one person is allowed in the voting booth?

Waitwaitwaitwaitwait... YOU are actually asking for PROOF? With your post history?

Do me a favor, look up the terms 'irony' and 'hypocrisy'

[jessicasimpson]

Waitwaitwaitwaitwait... YOU are actually asking for PROOF? With your post history?

Do me a favor, look up the terms 'irony' and 'hypocrisy'

last time he asked for proof, it had to be proved with a 3,000,000,000 year study before he would concede global warming exists.