w/ Brad & Desi
NATIONWIDE STUDY FINDS ALMOST NO VOTER FRAUD
Just 10 cases of in-person impersonation in all 50 states since 2000...
VIDEO: 'Rise of the Tea Bags'
Brad interviews American patriots...
'Democracy's Gold Standard'
Hand-marked, hand-counted ballots...
GOP Voter Registration Fraud Scandal 2012...
The Secret Koch Brothers Tapes...
|U.S. Chamber of Commerce 'Terror Tools' Spy Plot...|
|Wisconsin 2011 Supreme Court Election Debacle...|
|Japan Quake/Tsunami/Nuke Emergency...|
|WikiLeaks / Julian Assange...|
|More Special Coverages Pages...|
READER COMMENTS ON
"Colbert Goes 'Inside' The U.S. E-Voting Problem..."
(7 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
... Ska-T said on 11/3/2010 @ 12:52 pm PT...
This completely off topic, but I ask the question anyway. Can someone please provide a link (or links) to the definitive BradBlog posts (or other references) that discuss the fundamental problems of electronic voting and gives sufficient technical detail to make a convincing argument against electronic voting and for paper ballots?
I had a brief conversation today with a guy that heads my local county Green Party and he was convinced that electronic voting is hunky-dory and that paper ballots are just as problematic. Although probably a useless exercise, I feel compelled to provide the proof to this guy. Whether he reads it or not is up to him.
A suggestion for Brad, related to this, is to put up a box on the right that would serve as a primer, including links to the most important or comprehensive election integrity articles. It will help newcomers get up to speed, and refresh those of us who may be warding off Alzheimer's. Thanks.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
... Anti-DRE(aka gwn) said on 11/3/2010 @ 1:04 pm PT...
Oh gosh SKA-T, I wouldn't even know where to start because there are so many. Maybe under search put "electronic voting vs paper ballots" for starters.
It would be difficult to offer any one such "definitive" piece, given the breadth of our coverage here over the years. But my fairly to-the-point article at Slate last week, "The Faith-Based Vote", will likely deliver the point I believe you're hoping to make with the fellow you mention. At least in as much as it discusses the trouble with DREs (touch-screens), if not concerns about op-scanners (the battle after DREs are gone, when voters are allowed to use hand-marked paper ballots.)
If he wants more details to dig into thereafter, I'll recommend the somewhat longer and more detailed piece on DREs as they came into specific play in the Nevada election yesterday, as also published last week.
And finally, for an even broader history/overview of the dangers of e-voting, I might suggest the piece I wrote last week following the publication of a video showing touch-screen vote-flipping in Texas from Republicans to the Green Party.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
... Ska-T said on 11/3/2010 @ 2:12 pm PT...
Thanks guys. I read the Slate article earlier today and I will include that one, but there was a good overview written by Brad 2 or 3 years ago that I've posted the link to on other blogs. Oh well, I'll search hard for it later, but I gotta find a taco truck right now.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
... lmk said on 11/3/2010 @ 5:54 pm PT...
Ska-T, be aware that many minor party supporters are also big believers in Instant Runoff Voting (something I don't oppose either if done properly). Many of those same people have been sold on electronic voting as the best and quickest way to achieve that goal. I don't know if that subject came up or not, but be forewarned. "Faith-based voting" indeed!
well, gee, isn't the video "hacking democracy"
a best bet for giving the picture of electronic voting machine INSECURITY.
of course, hand counted paper ballots can be messed up, too, but at least there's a primary paper trail.
it's up on youtube in parts, one thru eight or nine, i think. it's really an excellent documentary.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
... Lisa M said on 11/7/2010 @ 10:01 am PT...
I'm not sure why IRV would work better with e-voting? It should work well however votes are counted - provided they are counted correctly (shout out to Mr. Stalin).
There are just too many ways to alter e-voting results, I would point to the 2004 presidential race and Cleland's loss to super crazy wingnut Jim Demint as races where it seemed the final results flew in the face of all the polling. I'm 99% sure Kerry actually won and not by a little, I was a poll moniter for the dems at that election and was pretty wired in to what was going on. It was all good early in the evening, republicans were glum then chango presto it all flipped.
Paper voting seems to be the way to go but even then there have to be controls over custody and counting.
A Few Great Blogs
· Baghdad Burning
· Brilliant at Breakfast
· Crooks and Liars
· Dan Froomkin
· Fired Up! Missouri
· Freedom's Phoenix
· Freeway Blogger
· Glenn Greenwald
· Huffington Post
· Jesus' General
· Juan Cole
· Washington Monthly
· Media Matters
· Nashua Advocate
· Oliver Willis
· RAW STORY
· Sanoma State's
Project Censored Sites:
· Daily Censored
· Media Freedom
· Project Censored
· Scholars & Rogues
· Skippy the Bush Kangaroo
· Talking Points Memo
· Think Progress
· Tom Tomorrow
· TV Newser
· Ben Sargent
· Bill Deore
· Bob Gorrell
· Cagle's Index
· Chan Lowe
· Don Wright
· Doug Marlette
· Glenn McCoy
· Jeff Danziger
· Joel Pett
· Mike Luckovich
· Non Sequitur
· Not Banned Yet
· Pat Oliphant
· Paul Conrad
· Ted Rall
· This Modern World
· Thomas Burns
· Tom Toles
· Tony Auth
· Stuart Carlson
Or by Snail Mail
Make check out to...
7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594
Los Angeles, CA 90028