posted on December 9, 2000 05:17:06 PM
We have inconsistent election laws, carzy voting machines and paper ballots......dimples, chads, etc. HOW does the US public want election law AND MORE importantly PRACTICE to evolve for 2001?
Log on pollitical brothers and sisters.........................
We can't change what has happened but maybe we can change the future.
posted on December 9, 2000 05:34:40 PM
OK guess nobody gives a $#*[email protected] is par for the course for Americans, nobody appreciates their *rights*,,,,,.................until they are tromped on.
posted on December 9, 2000 05:43:15 PM
To say that nobody answered you soon enough is par for..... whatever the hell course you are on is ding dong wong. Give us a minute
posted on December 9, 2000 05:47:49 PM
how can you do it any different? I thought about voting on the web with ones ss number and a cookie to make sure a vote wasnt cast again. BUT, face it not everyone is on the web and that type of voting would be wide open for abuse.
posted on December 9, 2000 05:49:01 PM
Plain and simple, "Election Reform". The problems in Florida are most likely a good glimpse into what goes on in most states. I'm speaking of the voting confusion, dimpled chads, undervotes, etc. There really needs to be a way to vote for every state that is the same. Good well written regulations for how to handle the voters, the ballots, how to count them etc. Poll workers need to be educated in handling abnormalities and unusual problems as well.
Sweeping reform, that is what needs to happen.
These problems are not new, they're just much more important when an election is so close.
posted on December 9, 2000 06:11:30 PM
anybody just see CNN with the elecion official (female) who just told her *official* counters * if you can't feegure it our ya'll jes ;e me know, I can figgure it out*.
Jesus ACHE Cripes~ so we let this offociall election *gal* figure it all out for us?
posted on December 9, 2000 06:18:40 PM
dejavu - I didn't see what you're talking about, but what's up with making such a point that the election official is female?
posted on December 9, 2000 06:26:01 PM
rainy bear~ I understand, now know where your question came from, forgive my slant but the election official WAS a woman and as a former female election official I am HORRIFIED by her behavior.
My apologies, I hope to Chri$st that we will not make the same mistakes in the future , any of us..................of such ignorance & venality.
posted on December 9, 2000 06:38:33 PM
oh rainy one~ you are EXACTLY RIGHT~~~~~~ this is about who has the best LAWYER, damn the votes to hell. People proclaim Gore wants votes counted, what a crock. He had his good friend take on the case in FL court, GWB doesn't want Gore's wacky idea of a dimpled chad..............................when the heck will we find out?
I propose that SOMEONE come up witha DAMN NEAR FOOL PROOF way to vote.
One not subject to idiots (exludung the voter ok) If the voter wants to screw it up AMEN.
posted on December 9, 2000 06:54:42 PM
Many counties in this country are using 1960 technology, i.e. Vote-A-Matic machines, with the premise of "if it ain't broke don't fix it."
I saw an interview today with the Asst. Election Supervisor of Leon County who said their county invested in ballot scanning equipment in 1990. They had only 153 undervotes countywide, which they were in the process of sorting out from the other ballots. That process was going to take them just a few hours.
Sweeping election reform, as in legislation, isn't as important, IMO, as is helping counties nationwide to find the funds necessary to equip themselves with updated ballot processing equipment. If all counties had been using this equipment Nov. 7, none of this would have happened.
posted on December 9, 2000 06:54:46 PM
I think all the problems that arose in Florida happen all over the country. It's only because it was a close race that they were even looked at twice. We vote with paper ballots in California (most areas anyway) and there's no way to know if your ballot was eventually discarded for whatever reason. No one I know will ever have a hanging chad again, that's for sure.
Regarding dimpled ballots, here in California, the law states that if any of the holes are punched cleanly through, then the dimpled chads do not count. It's only when all the chosen chads are dimpled do they assume that the voter did not know how hard to punch the ballot and decide from there.
So, if states feel they want to keep the punched paper ballots, a lot more needs to be put in writing as far as what standardized system will be used to count machine-rejected ballots and this system needs to be used by the entire state, not just selected counties.
*************************
posted on December 11, 2000 08:29:51 AM
Part of the problem was that this was a really close vote for a change. But, was the closeness due to the even split along party lines or was it due to voter apathy? Does anyone here have some numbers as to what percentage of voters actually turned out? Too, wouldn't better candidates have increased these numbers?
I live in TX and frankly know a lot of people who didn't vote because they knew their vote would be wasted, since the state would go to Bush. I'm sure there are lots of voters in other states who feel that voting just doesn't matter any more. The Electoral College process is part of the problem, but at the same time we don't want to eliminate the balance that the E.C. helps maintain.
I too like the idea of voting by computer but it could be so fraud-ridden that we would never sort things out. Too, in spite of the high level of computer literacy displayed on these boards, a large percentage of the American public still isn't very literate. I mean, if the Florida voters can't push out a simple chad, how in heck are they supposed to log-on to an internet provider, navigate their way to a webpage, find the appropriate box, mark it, an push the enter key?!
posted on December 11, 2000 08:49:58 AM... a lot of people who didn't vote because they knew their vote would be wasted, since the state would go to Bush. I'm sure there are lots of voters in other states who feel that voting just doesn't matter any more.
I have heard this comment about "wasted votes" often enough that I want to smack some (well, more than some) people upside the head. Why why why do people insist, if their candidate isn't expected to win, that they aren't going to vote because their vote is just "wasted"? Is the only goal of voting to be able to say you voted for the winner? Arghhhh.
Until someone can convince people to vote for the person or party that is most aligned with their own personal viewpoint (it doesn't necessarily have to be a choice between just the Republican and Democratic party, either) regardless of the projected outcome of the election, nothing is going to change.
posted on December 11, 2000 08:54:13 AM
lswanson...this past election, up in Riverside County, they had computers set up at some of the polling sites which used the touch screen format. Even though many people are not computer literate, they are familiar enough with a tv screen that they could utilize the system. And for Palm Beach residents, they could even include the candidates' pictures!
For this election there were 8,752,717 registered voters, of which 5,963,108 voted for somebody for President. Assuming (which I don't, but anyway) everybody that voted, voted for President, turnout would appear to be 68%, slightly higher than the 64% average, but hardly the 83% of the 1992 election - the highest since at least 1954.
edited to add: njrazd, you really trust a system so easily disrupted by e.g. hacking? You want to see contests and protests, try using a touch-screen system in a close election, where there's no ballot-by-ballot proof outside the system the way there is with the OCR ballots. OTOH, it would completely eliminate the possibility of a manual recount - what's there to count manually? Maybe you're right
[ edited by HartCottageQuilts on Dec 11, 2000 12:13 PM ]
posted on December 11, 2000 12:45:58 PM
I agree that reform needs to happen.
Standardization of the process would help tremendously. In terms of how folks actually vote; election laws across the country; education and supervision of poll workers; standards for counting ballots and resolving disputes.
Here is a thought. The income tax $1 checkoff for funding the candidates for President.
Why not make that a $1 checkoff for funding a nationwide reform and standardization of the process?
