I’ve said it before in previous posts we’ve had over the years about voting machines. ATMs and related are bulletproof. The software literally never crashes or connects you to someone else’s account or any number of other potential problems. Voting machines — generally made by companies who also make things like ATMs — are vastly simpler on every level. If they aren’t 100% secure and work perfectly, then it’s because they were designed to not do so.

More W.Va. voters say machines are switching votes 

Three Putnam County voters say electronic voting machines changed their votes from Democrats to Republicans when they cast early ballots last week.

This is the second West Virginia county where voters have reported this problem. Last week, three voters in Jackson County told The Charleston Gazette their electronic vote for “Barack Obama” kept flipping to “John McCain”.

In both counties, Republicans are responsible for overseeing elections. Both county clerks said the problem is isolated.
[…]
Wood said some voters might not realize that touch-screen voting machines may take a few seconds to record their choices.

“The reaction time [on the machines] may be different. And when you hit the screen a second time, it cancels your vote,” Wood said. “When you get in a hurry, if you go to fast and hit it again, you can cancel what you just did.
[…]
“My son Chris said, ‘Mom, I didn’t vote for the people who came up on that machine. I wanted to go back and vote again. I called the lady at the polls and she said it was my fault because of the way I was punching the buttons.”

“A few seconds” to record your vote? What are these built with, 8008 processors? Actually, given how simple voting machine software is, even those should be fast enough.

And all this assumes you’re allowed to vote after ‘the great purge of 2008.’

Be prepared for a lot more stories in the news like this.

UPDATE: LibertyLover in comment #5 gives one explanation why these machines take so long to register and a possible reason why the bad votes. In other words they went for a system that is inherently not designed for the average user.




  1. J says:

    # 61 LibertyLover

    “I didn’t say that parallax was the problem here.” – LibertyLover

    You certainly implied it in regards to the switching vote issue.

    “A disadvantage of both is speed (or lack thereof). Another is parallax error as the screens typically sit an inch or two above the actual monitor.” – LibertyLover

    “It isn’t as prevalent now due to LCD flat screens, but I still see quite a few applications where this is a problem.” – LibertyLover

    Considering all of the voting machines are LCD based shouldn’t you have mentioned the fact that parallax really isn’t an issue with them?

    “Without actually seeing the device and the model of the screen, this is all guesswork.”

    Well instead of shooting off mouth with your lack of knowledge perhaps you should have looked it up? The systems in question are the iVotronic from Election Systems & Software. The touch layer sits less than 1/2mm over the reinforced LCD.

  2. Paddy-O says:

    All in all, the biggest area of potential undetectable/uncorrectable fraud is absentee ballots. That is, in those jurisdictions that don’t verify the voters eligibility before sending the ballots out.

    Once you separate the ballot from the envelope there is no way to trace the “vote” to having come from a person who is real, eligible, etc.

  3. LibertyLover says:

    #63, You certainly implied it in regards to the switching vote issue.

    And then corrected the misunderstanding in my later post.

    However, not really an issue. As you can’t seem to correspond without smearing fecal matter all over the screen, you have now been entered in my, “Refuse to ever respond to due to excessive anal seepage.”

    Have a good day, (J)erk.

  4. smartalix says:

    He’s right, libertylover. You sound like you don’t know shit about display tech.

  5. J says:

    # 65 LibertyLover

    “And then corrected the misunderstanding in my later post.”

    Only after confronted on the issue. Then you still try to make the claim that it could be possible depending on the machines. WHICH IS FALSE!!!!!! NONE I repeat none of the voting machines have anything close to a 1 to 2 inch seperation which would lead to a parallax issue.

    “However, not really an issue. ”

    It is a very BIG issue considering your normal spewing of political diarrhea. The problem was that it was switching peoples votes and everything you blathered on about was either incorrect or unrelated to that issue.

    It must really bother you that you can’t come on here and spread your disinformation and not get caught huh?

    “Have a good day, (J)erk.”

    Thank you I will.

  6. hhopper says:

    Smartalix – Sounds like he knows shit about shit though.

  7. Mr. Fusion says:

    #58, Cow-Paddy,

    Once again you have a difficult time with that foot in your mouth.

    First and fourth graders were tested at Stockwell Elementary in Bossier City, La., with copies of the actual Palm Beach ballot taken off the Internet. All 22 fourth graders had no problem. But, when told to pick Gore, three of 24 first graders mistakenly picked Buchanan while one mistakenly picked Bush and one the Natural Law Party’s candidate.

    So five picked a candidate other than what they were supposed to. Ya, you sure know how to pick your evidence.

    Moran.

  8. Paddy-O says:

    Yes, 12% 1st graders has a problem. Zero % of the 4th graders had a problem.

    Good point. ROFL

  9. Mr. Fusion says:

    #60, MikeN,

    Good point. The polling booth could provide a paper shredder for those concerned about their privacy. The receipts though would not need to have any identifying information on them other than say, the date and place.

  10. rabsten says:

    This news comes from the Charleston Gazette which, while being slightly to the left of Brezhnev era Pravda, is still considered to be the Newspaper of Record in West by-God Virginia. So, it’s at least marginally reliable. Kinda, sorta.

    It is pretty damn strange that all the alleged vote irregularities are being claimed by Democrat voters, especially since the responsible election officials for the affected counties are Democrats themselves.

    Just once I’d like to see something positive on this site about my State. But that’d probably necessitate moving to someplace else.

  11. Thomas says:

    #73
    > What happens if paper count
    > does match the count of paper copies;
    > you take the paper count

    That should read:
    What happens if the computer count does not match the paper count: you take the paper count?

  12. This blog Is very informative , I am really pleased to post my comment on this blog . It helped me with ocean of knowledge so I really belive you will do much better in the future . Good job web master .


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 11796 access attempts in the last 7 days.