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: Kaptur Defeats Kucinich 94% to 4% on 100% Unverifiable E-Vote Systems in Toledo, OH? [View all]joshcryer
(62,536 posts)61. 100% unverifiable = FALSE, dishonest
There are no paper ballots in Lucas County. At least not as cast on Election Day
Yeah, OK. http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3506.05
(i) A definition of a voter verified paper audit trail as a paper record of the voters choices that is verified by the voter prior to the casting of the voters ballot and that is securely retained by the board of elections;
(ii) Requirements that the voter verified paper audit trail shall not be retained by any voter and shall not contain individual voter information;
(iii) A prohibition against the production by any direct recording electronic voting machine of anything that legally could be removed by the voter from the polling place, such as a receipt or voter confirmation;
(iv) A requirement that paper used in producing a voter verified paper audit trail be sturdy, clean, and resistant to degradation;
(v) A requirement that the voter verified paper audit trail shall be capable of being optically scanned for the purpose of conducting a recount or other audit of the voting machine and shall be readable in a manner that makes the voters ballot choices obvious to the voter without the use of computer or electronic codes;
(vi) A requirement, for office-type ballots, that the voter verified paper audit trail include the name of each candidate selected by the voter;
(vii) A requirement, for questions and issues ballots, that the voter verified paper audit trail include the title of the question or issue, the name of the entity that placed the question or issue on the ballot, and the voters ballot selection on that question or issue, but not the entire text of the question or issue.
(ii) Requirements that the voter verified paper audit trail shall not be retained by any voter and shall not contain individual voter information;
(iii) A prohibition against the production by any direct recording electronic voting machine of anything that legally could be removed by the voter from the polling place, such as a receipt or voter confirmation;
(iv) A requirement that paper used in producing a voter verified paper audit trail be sturdy, clean, and resistant to degradation;
(v) A requirement that the voter verified paper audit trail shall be capable of being optically scanned for the purpose of conducting a recount or other audit of the voting machine and shall be readable in a manner that makes the voters ballot choices obvious to the voter without the use of computer or electronic codes;
(vi) A requirement, for office-type ballots, that the voter verified paper audit trail include the name of each candidate selected by the voter;
(vii) A requirement, for questions and issues ballots, that the voter verified paper audit trail include the title of the question or issue, the name of the entity that placed the question or issue on the ballot, and the voters ballot selection on that question or issue, but not the entire text of the question or issue.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
151 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
Kaptur Defeats Kucinich 94% to 4% on 100% Unverifiable E-Vote Systems in Toledo, OH? [View all]
BradBlog
Mar 2012
OP
No. Tell me: did you think it was "fishy" when Obama won 92% of the DC vote in 2008,
NYC Liberal
Mar 2012
#12
I asked you this question below but you might have missed it. Were they running against other
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#17
Well, that's very different. These were two Democrats and I know for me, eg, it was a difficult
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#22
Well his district obviously disagrees with you. He has been reelected repeatedly as she has
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#29
Those numbers were vs Republicans. Which would seemingly make such a margin
NYC Liberal
Mar 2012
#20
Thanks, actually I think that it is more strange in a district that is so Democratic to have numbers
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#25
I agree and I am sure even if there were errors it would not change the results.
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#31
In the 2004 Democratic Presidential Primary DK only got 2.7 percent of Lucas County
onenote
Mar 2012
#113
That's exactly my point: Obama, Kerry, and Gore all won over 90% with no "fixing" of the vote.
NYC Liberal
Mar 2012
#53
But has she ever, or has anyone ever other than Saddam Hussein, won by this kind of margin before?
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#13
Ya know, Brad, early on in the e-voting debate, I told everyone that, sooner or later, results...
Junkdrawer
Mar 2012
#11
The insiders who worked the issue hard got disabused of the Dem vs Rep nature of the problem....
Junkdrawer
Mar 2012
#38
Democratic candidates have consistently won 85-90% of the vote in DC in presidential elections.
NYC Liberal
Mar 2012
#14
I would wonder if those numbers were tallied via an unverifiable e-vote machine...
LanternWaste
Mar 2012
#118
BULLFUCKING SHIT, if you read the link it's the machines have a voter-verified paper audit trail.
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#34
Yes, that has happened and has been done before. Ask for a public records request.
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#40
3506.18 Electronic voting machine - verified paper audit trail as official ballot in recount.
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#63
Voter verified paper audit trails shall be preserved in the same manner and for the same time period
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#67
You can request an audit. Please do. But then you wouldn't get hits on your site...
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#39
What the hell is wrong with you, dude? And why are YOU posting false information??
BradBlog
Mar 2012
#57
I have already established that you are posting misinformation. Call me a liar all you want.
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#73
You're the one contending that something fishy is going on, yet all your evidence is...
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#76
"question about the seemingly implausible and certainly unverifiable results"
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#78
Actually Brad has responded to almost all of joshcryer's posts most of which
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#127
Yes you did. "make sure to be clear that it is YOU who does not understand what he posted"
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#83
It is only YOUR opinion that the 'OP is not giving correct information' and it is my
sabrina 1
Mar 2012
#88
I have established that the information is wrong. It is not 100% unverifiable.
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#89
You have "established" nothing of the kind. But you HAVE defamed me with your misinformation.
BradBlog
Mar 2012
#98
I've yet to be convinced. See, the poll workers, in the end, are the weakest link.
joshcryer
Mar 2012
#81
I like Kucinich as much as the next guy but I'm sick of all this conspiracy shit....
FLAprogressive
Mar 2012
#54
I wonder how many here that are making uninformed comments have actually been to Toledo.
SmellyFeet
Mar 2012
#91
Well duh! We've all been here long enough to know that if my preferred candidate loses,
tritsofme
Mar 2012
#95
It may be verifiable, but is is never verified unless you actually do an audit
eridani
Mar 2012
#106
Utter nonsense. Lucas County has touchscreen DREs, which can never be verified.
eridani
Mar 2012
#132
You still haven't explained why we should trust the output of any proprietary software
eridani
Mar 2012
#137
Not at all. Unless you are suggesting that forensic analysis of programs is routine
eridani
Mar 2012
#145
You're entitled to your opinion, but it wasn't peer pressure - it was a careful review of the thread
HopeHoops
Mar 2012
#108
Issues be damned, name recognition ALONE should have been, what, 5% to 15%....
Junkdrawer
Mar 2012
#107
I'm told there are some people out there who actually don't follow issues....
Junkdrawer
Mar 2012
#117
Even if they didn't follow issues, anyone showing up to vote in a Democratic primary in Lucas County
onenote
Mar 2012
#119
Let's say 10% of primary voters voted purely on name recognition and not issues...
Junkdrawer
Mar 2012
#120
It is sad that people just refuse to realize that outside of his district in Ohio,
Ikonoklast
Mar 2012
#104
What do you want? A perfect recording of actual votes? Now that's plain silly!
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#124
Would we be having this debate if the vote in Lucas County was 75/25 for Kaptur?
onenote
Mar 2012
#129
If you knew anything about Ohio politics you would know that DK is NOT beloved in any
WCGreen
Mar 2012
#139