Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I voted yesterday on new voting machines, and I liked them [View all]diva77
(7,880 posts)15. You like having a private corporation come between you & your vote?
A corporation, ES&S, originally financed by the wing-nut evangelical Ahmansons and owned and run by rethugs? Do you expect them to run fair, clean, transparent elections?
Don't drink the koolaid. Lots of people have spoken out about these diabolical devices, but the "mainstream" media has failed to report on this. Here are some links to visit so that you are not duped into thinking that these ballot marking devices are "good."
------------------
Important info:
Ballot-marking devices (BMDs) are not secure election technology
Barcoded BMD Ballot Battle in GA as Legislative Session Nears End: 'BradCast' 3/27/2018
https://bradblog.com/?p=12525
SNIP Longtime election integrity expert MARILYN MARKS, whose nonpartisan Coalition for Good Governance is suing the Peach State to force them to do away with their unverifiable Director Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines, joins us to warn about the proposed new scheme to replace them with similarly unverifiable touch-screen Ballot Marking Devices (BMDs) and why she sees that as "going from bad to worse."
"People today at least understand that their system is unverifiable, unauditable, and really a lot of guesswork," she tells me. "Unfortunately, this new system that they are so determined to find a way to put in, kind of has the look, from a distance, of a paper system. But it really is just as unverifiable."
Marks explains that the new legislation introduces computer-printed ballots with barcodes on them, which cannot be read by humans. Deceptively, the paper ballots produced by the new touch-screen systems also include a summary of the voters' votes in human-readable form. But, it is the unreadable and impossible to verify barcodes --- rather than the human-readable voter selections --- which are used by the system's computer optical-scanners to tally results. "What can be embedded in those bar codes may be very different from the human-readable list that is printed out," she says.
Even if the barcodes weren't printed on the paper ballots, Marks explains, the computer-marked ballots would still be unacceptable and unverifiable as reflecting any voter's intent after polls close on Election Night, as Jennifer Cohn recently detailed in a must-read article at The BRAD BLOG. Marks offers action items for preventing the passage of the bill, for those both in and out of the state of Georgia (as summarized here in this Twitter Moment.) SNIP
https://bradblog.com/?p=12525
SNIP Longtime election integrity expert MARILYN MARKS, whose nonpartisan Coalition for Good Governance is suing the Peach State to force them to do away with their unverifiable Director Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines, joins us to warn about the proposed new scheme to replace them with similarly unverifiable touch-screen Ballot Marking Devices (BMDs) and why she sees that as "going from bad to worse."
"People today at least understand that their system is unverifiable, unauditable, and really a lot of guesswork," she tells me. "Unfortunately, this new system that they are so determined to find a way to put in, kind of has the look, from a distance, of a paper system. But it really is just as unverifiable."
Marks explains that the new legislation introduces computer-printed ballots with barcodes on them, which cannot be read by humans. Deceptively, the paper ballots produced by the new touch-screen systems also include a summary of the voters' votes in human-readable form. But, it is the unreadable and impossible to verify barcodes --- rather than the human-readable voter selections --- which are used by the system's computer optical-scanners to tally results. "What can be embedded in those bar codes may be very different from the human-readable list that is printed out," she says.
Even if the barcodes weren't printed on the paper ballots, Marks explains, the computer-marked ballots would still be unacceptable and unverifiable as reflecting any voter's intent after polls close on Election Night, as Jennifer Cohn recently detailed in a must-read article at The BRAD BLOG. Marks offers action items for preventing the passage of the bill, for those both in and out of the state of Georgia (as summarized here in this Twitter Moment.) SNIP
Most recent items:
Link to tweet
?s=20
Read column & listen to podcast here: https://bradblog.com/?p=13169
There is a lot more out there about Ballot Marking Devices (BMDs) and/or election integrity.
3 sites to visit & explore:
coalitionforgoodgovernance.org
bradblog.com
fairfight.com
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
63 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I guess you could alert a poll worker and let them investigate what happened.
Liberal In Texas
Oct 2019
#5
Presumably, you just start over. Nothing is counted until a ballot is scanned.
TreasonousBastard
Oct 2019
#6
doesn't matter - once you feed the "ballot" back into the machine it can change your vote after the
diva77
Oct 2019
#37
it does NOT show voter intent. the paper you submitted might not be the one that ends up being
diva77
Oct 2019
#41
Which is pretty much no different than ballot box stuffing with paper ballots.
Liberal In Texas
Oct 2019
#43
It is waaay different -- the difference between changing a spreadsheet with an algorithm
diva77
Oct 2019
#52
I would prefer pure paper ballots hand counted that would take days and be a physical record of
Liberal In Texas
Oct 2019
#60
I don't have link on hand, but a study found that vast majority do not check their votes
diva77
Oct 2019
#47
Florida already uses optical scanners, but unfortunately there is no statewide
Blue_true
Oct 2019
#38
Looks good. Ours you have to fill out by hand and put in the scanner...
TreasonousBastard
Oct 2019
#3
Of course, faster than and and none of the error problems with hand counting...
TreasonousBastard
Oct 2019
#9
Yes, in the 2000 election, Ion Sancho put up images of all the questioned ballots
csziggy
Oct 2019
#21
Hand-marked or machine-marked paper ballots (that the voter checks before getting the vote tallied,
Blue_true
Oct 2019
#42
I don't see how you can conclude it's a step in the right direction if you read up on these
diva77
Oct 2019
#26
Will be using similar new machines in Georgia next year. Looks like folks got message after 2016.
Hoyt
Oct 2019
#23
The solution to this problem is not to invest hundreds of millions in republican owned
diva77
Oct 2019
#39
How hard would it be to program the machine to give the voter his choices in a printed form and
fierywoman
Oct 2019
#34
If that is the ES&S Express Vote machines, that is what they will have us use here in Philly
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2019
#49