Comments on: Just An Oversight?

By: Bryan

Bryan — Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:30:36 +0000

The machines used in this county are optical, not the magnetic that need special pens, and are tested before and after elections to ensure they are good. Several passes are made before the results are reported as official. This system was set up by a Supervisor of Elections who would try anything, but rejected Internet voting as insecure, electronic voting machines as defective, magnetic scanners as flaky. She stayed with this system because it is also used by the school system for testing which provides a high level of confidence in the result. We are small enough that hand counts aren’t onerous.

By: paintedjaguar

paintedjaguar — Mon, 30 Oct 2017 10:05:46 +0000

Bryan, the tabulator machines you are talking about have been known to be unreliable since at least 2000 (see Black Box Voting). There’s no compelling reason to use computerized tabulators, especially since both those and the even more unreliable touchscreen voting machines are all proprietary, not public or even open source. For now at least, the most robust method is still supervised hand counts of paper ballots.

Internet and/or mail-in voting is a different discussion, presenting other problems, as does the availability of recounts, which like third-party access suffers from both systemic and deliberate obstacles.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Mon, 30 Oct 2017 01:36:05 +0000

There is hope the FBI did have their image. The best way is the way we do it in my county – machine readable paper ballots. If there are questions, they can be counted by hand.

By: oldwhitelady

oldwhitelady — Sun, 29 Oct 2017 22:05:48 +0000

Dang! That is really irritating!