Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Does your vote count?
This is from Wired magazine and worth reading for anybody who would like their vote to count. What we don't demand, we won't get!
Dennis Kucinich is paying for a recount in New Hampshire because there were voting machines there too and some questions about what the results ended up being.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
I heard about Kucinich's support for a recount in New Hampshire. I'm afraid that unless we have paper ballots, I'll never trust an election again.
This sounds very serious. The one ironic (funny) part of it is that Democrats were the ones who were saying that we all had to switch to touch screens after the 2000 election. We had a perfectly good paper ballot system before then. Now the Dems are making the most noise that the system that they wanted is flawed too. Sounds to me like if you don't like the results then you challenge the system instead of trying to get more votes.
ingineer, you find some way to blame democrats for everything. What happened in 2000 Florida was not a good system. It allowed ballots to not be marked properly and easily allowed fraud which gave the election to Bush. It let anybody who wanted to make a ballot not count to just punch out one more hole which happened with those who voted for Gore and then had Buchanan punched out (excuse me but you think thousands of people were that dumb or liked Buchanan and Gore? come on. Have you ever gotten it through your head. Bush fraudulently got that election.
And then in Ohio, the concern was that the guy who made the electronic systems had no paper trail, no way to know who was not counted properly as this article points out for today. That guy said he'd do anything to help Bush win. Well he just might have. Bush would have had the most votes but if Ohio hadn't gone his way, he'd have lost the election as Gore did in 2000.
Some states still have paper trails. I live in one of them. We all vote by mail and we mark out the hole of who we want with a pencil. Every state could do this. Then if there is a recount, there is something to count.
Bush was never elected the first time by a majority and he didn't win Florida. He stole it. Get used to it.
It isn't the first time as JFK didn't win in Illinois or Texas either but fraud gave it to him. Where do you get the idea only democrats would do such a thing?
Hope you enjoy it now though if it's the Clinton machine that uses the same tactic. I know I won't but I didn't when Bush stole the one he got. or rather bushies as he may not have had a clue. He still doesn't appear to
Rain I agree with you that this is grave cause for concern!! And I say this as a man who leans to the right. :-)
You are right Rain. I have had a few tough days this week and I was just trying to get your goat with that comment.
It is very serious that there is not a traceable paper trail and that it is so easily tampered with. But it sure has cost the taxpayers plenty of money to have to switch to the touch screens and then switch back all because some knucklehead politicians had to have things their way now! Instead of waiting for the technology to catch up. Kind of like many issues facing us today.
We had the ballots where you mark the spots and they are scanned too, but the "Democrat" controlled California legislature mandated the use of touch screens for every county. Now we have to switch back to the scantron ballots and the machines were all sold off as surplus.
Bush was not much different than Kennedy, but Nixon chose to not dispute it for the good of the country but now 7 years and an election later people are still complaining. And there were other problems in Florida too, such as not counting votes from Active Duty Military personnel who mostly vote Republican. Why doesn't everybody just Move On and get over the 2000 election. The Supreme Court ruled and that is it. And personally I am glad that Al Gore was not our President on 9/11. The Taliban would still be ruling Afghanistan and the FBI would still be in Kabul looking for evidence to issue subpoenas for Osama Bin Ladin and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the others.
you brought up the 2000 election, ingineer which led to my rebuttal. The discussion is still going on as it was about the one Kennedy won but didn't but Nixon didn't contest it and neither did Gore.
As for what Gore would have done. He'd have gone into Afghanistan after bin Laden as Bush did but maybe he'd have stuck to the job and we know he'd have not attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. How you Republicans can keep defending that is beyond me. We are heavily in debt, our military stretched beyond thin, thousands of men and women facing a lifetime of needing care, millions in cost for that alone and you still defend that bush did better than Gore would have. Gore could NOT have done worse on any level. We sure wouldn't be facing the situation with the debt like it is and climbing, infrastructure wearing out, and a president who is oblivious. Sometimes I think Bush is mentally off. Maybe ADD for adults or it's the mental aspect to his reading problem. Whatever it is, we could not have been worse served than we have been by him as president and time will show that to be even more true than it is today
Yeah, it was us culprits in Florida and out infamous "hanging chad" that brought about the electronic voting.
Personally....give ME the good ole fashioned way....a paper ballot and a pencil. Makes sense to me. SO what that we won't have the results at THREE minutes past 8:00. At least they'll be legit!
Terri
http://www.islandwriter.net
You are right Terri. The media will just have to stay up until midnight or whatever they used to have to do to report the results. Heck inauguration day used to be in March because it took that long to count the votes and assemble the Electoral College. Why do we have to know the winner in 10 minutes or before the election is even held i.e. the polling that has been so wrong lately.
I think it's another thing for which we can blame the media as they are the ones pushing for instant results. I am sick of them and frankly am turning them all off because the jabber gets to me. They just talk to hear themselves talk.
I just watch the Daily Show and can get a rundown in a few minutes of all the talking heads saying the same thing. The media have become the news and the stars instead of just reporting the news. When the News Anchors are pulling down $5 to $10 million a year they cannot possibly have any relation to what is important to most people.
i saw daily show and it was very funny how they showed the pundits saying the same thing over and over and over. If their ratings go down, less of them will continue to exist. I also agree with Ariana Huffington-- don't answer pollsters when they call. Those polls are not serving our needs at all but only theirs. They poll every 10 minutes and what does it accomplish for the people? Nothing that I can tell. Vote on your issues, the character of the person you favor and forget whether they aren't ahead. Maybe they are. It's time to take back our country and it's not just from the politicians
Kucinich is My Man! For me, he is the only one who is honest and wants to do all the things I would like to see happen.
These Voting prolems are just crazy making! In fact, everything about the whole election process is crazy-making now, more than ever!!! OY! Where is this all going to lead us to?? I fear for our beloved country, more and more!
Oh, and Rain, I LOVED your answers to ingeneer...Indeed! How anyone can still be talking about how we SHOULD be in Iraq is totally insane.
Maybe they put something in the water of ALL tegistered Republicans...All the Republicans I know---and there are not that many, admitedly----ALL still support this Mentally Challenged Presidents actions.....!
I tell you, the whole world has gone nuts!
Excuse me but I think you need to read my comment again. I did not say anything about Iraq as I know that they had nothing to do directly with 9/11. I was speaking of Afghanistan. And if you look at the terrorists from the FBI most wanted list they are almost all from the Embassy bombings in Africa during the Clinton Administration. Where are all the terrorists from 9/11. Oh they are dead or in prison. Because this president whether you like his policies or not declared war on Al Qaida after they attacked us. He didn't send the FBI to investigate, he sent the Delta Force to kill and capture them.
Reread what I wrote. I didn't say you said that. I said that is another thing Gore would NOT have done. As for the terrorists of 9/11, they killed themselves and you give Bush credit for getting them? Say what?
Did Bush make getting bin Laden a priority from the moment he got in office or put off those who said you better? I didn't add to my difference of Gore to Bush that maybe Gore would have acted before 9/11 happened because no one can know such but Bush we know did not. IF we had not gone into Iraq, we would not be so limited on what we can afford to do about places like Darfur. We are paying for an ongoing war there which has now become a let's make it a democracy after all the other excuses for being there failed. What you said about gore was that he'd have been worse than bush and I am saying he could not have been. And going into Iraq instead of dealing with the actual problem has been a number one mistake of the Bush administration-- and when did getting bin Laden not become a matter of importance? During bush, that's when and he said it didn't matter if we got him because he knew he hadn't made it a priority. Not to mention Bush people don't truly want a democracy in Iraq as they might find some group like Hamas winning the most votes!
You have every right to like Bush, to be part of that diehard 30% who always like him or one of those who swings with the wind on whether he did right or not, but for me, I think you will see the true cost of bush in the future. He's counting on history to vindicate him. I think it'll show truly corrupt and horrible his administration was.
And even worse is what they have gotten many Americans to agree to have happen as they have traded freedom for what they hope will be security. For conservatives, the bush administration has put a lie to everything they used to say they believed-- if they actually still support him. And if you dont' know what I meant by that I mean our Bill of Rights losses; the imperial presidency; bigger, far more invasive government; wars that they aren't willing to pay for; increasing the debt exponentially to the point that our children's children's children don't have a hope from getting out from under it; losing respect all around the world; and going around the world supposedly building democracies-- where there happens to be oil anyway. How truly noble and how very conservative.
I meant the old lady of the hills needs to re-read my comment that it was not about Iraq. I am not happy with many of the things that W has done. I hate the loss of our rights and freedoms in the name of security.
I keep hearing reports about how we have lost respect around the world but I have talked to a few people that travel a lot and most everybody loves Americans.
As for the terrorists I meant the organizers such as KSM. Not the actual suicide bombers and hijackers.
so you think that our American government is respected abroad? Our president? Interesting as it's not what I have read or heard, but there is a difference in how people see their government vs the individuals in a nation. Many people do separate this out although some were pretty disgusted with us voting in Bush a second time after knowing what kind of leader he had turned out to be.
We have probably beaten this topic into the ground, and then some, but I'm sure it'll arise again. *s*
Post a Comment