Home | About | Donate

Viral Video of Mississippi Voting Machine Changing Man's Vote Prompts Calls for Paper Ballots and Election Security Reform

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/08/28/viral-video-mississippi-voting-machine-changing-mans-vote-prompts-calls-paper

1 Like

this is one of those situations that doesn’t even require tin foil. Even if this was just an accident, it’s a serious malfunction and that’s sufficient enough to justify tossing touch screen tech.

It really needs to go back to paper ballots that can be recounted as needed and archived for awhile as a safety precaution.

With or without the presence of a conspiracy.

13 Likes

Caputo tweet sez:
“These machines should not be used in a democracy.”

They’re not used in a democracy.

32 Likes

You beat me to it.

2 Likes

We live in a failed state.

7 Likes

The country is fraught with ways to screw “We the People”. I just don’t think that our voices, what little there is of them, will ever be heard again to the point where it makes a difference.

3 Likes

Anything less than paper ballots across the board is clearly a defense of being able to tamper with votes.

7 Likes

Paper ballot counting comes with a great deal of human error. I think electronic machines with a paper receipt allows more rapid and accurate counting combined with the security against tampering.

3 Likes

Known eVoting machines were hack-able and have been hacked since at least 2004. Neither Party have done anything positive about it. I remember, back then, Hartmann question democrats on his show about it and their response was that they didn’t even want to take about it because talking about it might make people give up and not vote at all. A brilliant chickenshit response. The ‘democrat’ leadership is as responsible for our failed election system as the Reich because the situation has only gotten worse over time

3 Likes

Oh, their voices will be heard; in fact, they’ll be amplified over the P.A. System in the Panopticon.
Loudly and clearly, too. In case anyone gets any bright ideas.

Sort of. My southern state uses paper ballots whereon an X is marked in the little square. During the 2012 election, when I proceeded to mark my X by the presidential candidate of my choice, someone had beat me to it. There was an X already entered beside Romney’s name. Not to say I was going to vote for Romney or the con man from Chicago. This was a beat where 90%+ voted for republicans.
The voting officials (99% republicans) sneered at me when I asked for a fresh ballot. Well, maybe the sneer was due to my snark ‘you just can’t help it’.

2 Likes

I respectfully disagree. Paper ballot counting is susceptible to human error, but not usually to a great deal of human error - and both the ballot and the counting procedure can be readily understood and examined by any person, citizen, or voter - even by a third-grader. That’s why paper ballots confer legitimacy on the voting process . In sharp contrast, no one other than the counting machine programmer and the software priesthood can tell how the electronic voting machine is handling your vote. A paper receipt proves only that the machine can read your ballot and print out the information on it. The receipt proves nothing about which candidate was given your vote by the machine, and you have no way of finding out.

7 Likes

touchscreen.
perhaps this particular unit malfunctioned - and others.
They have not been used in at least 4 months.
handling, storage, set up at polling place.

heck, even an expensive iPad touch screen can fail.

1 Like

Wired magazine, that bastion of all things computer, has unequivocally come out to say ‘paper, damn it’!

7 Likes

No surprise as to who the “malfunction” was benefitting, ex-hedge fund operator who’s never done an honest days work in his life. Another madding part of this issue, even when they’re caught, the elections still stand.
It’s not a Democracy without paper ballots, and vote count watchers from all sides involved at all precincts, with a chain of custody for counted ballots.

4 Likes

Perhaps it was just an issue with mis-calibration with certain touch screens, and not the result of some nefarious voting plot. As I was watching the video I kept waiting for the voter to try touching the 3rd name on the ballot to see what happened as that may help demonstrate a calibration issue, but the person did not, so it’s just speculation as to what may be going wrong in this instance. But if the issue is a case of simple mis-calibration, then the obvious question becomes, why were these machines not tested (and repaired) prior to going live?

2 Likes

Actually the error with hand counting is often on the order of a half of a percent which is where many elections come out.

But that’s the key. With a paper receipt that tells how that person voted, it allows for a scientific audit to take place. You can take a random sample of all of the paper receipts and see whether there’s anything suspect going on (or you can look at every receipt in selected precincts where you have suspicions of wrong doing).

The important thing here is to have the ability to efficiently, effectively, and fairly audit.

3 Likes

How much proof is needed? Beyond a reasonable doubt doesn’t get it done, apparently.
Mail-in paper ballots, etc, this is a proven system to increase participation and… oh, er, ah…never mind, these machines are better than pre-sliced white bread.

2 Likes

malfunctioning!..malfunctioning?..LMFAO…that’s no malfunction…that’s not a bug, it’s the feature.

6 Likes

99%: “Show us the ballots!”

1%: “Ballots? We don’t need no stinkin’ ballots!”

4 Likes