Rigged or Hacked Voting Machines

Yes to most of the reasonable stuff, especially paper ballots only, automatic registration, and making voting day a holiday (I'd prefer it be a Wednesday). To not be discriminatory, it should be a paid holiday, and any public transport be free that day. Finally, given North Carolina, mandatory state-by-state audits by some other state, maybe even another country.
 
I think any state, no matter where they are what their history is, should have to submit any voting requirements to a neutral third party to ensure they aren't "inadvertently" targeting certain demographics. Like we had with the VRA for Jim Crow states before SCOTUS killed that provision.
 
theprestige said:
They're obviously more secure than voting machines.


See what I mean? ATMs don't have these problems.
Click to expand...

The thing is, ATMs are not secure. If someone skims your card and steals your number, it's going to be detected because charges start deviating from your usual spending habits.

If someone steals your vote, what happens? Do you want the government recording and analyzing your voting history to determine if it thinks your vote is wonky? And how would they do that when you only vote a few times in a year? There really isn't the kind of data banks have to determine variance from a trend.
 
Upchurch said:
The thing is, ATMs are not secure. If someone skims your card and steals your number, it's going to be detected because charges start deviating from your usual spending habits.

If someone steals your vote, what happens? Do you want the government recording and analyzing your voting history to determine if it thinks your vote is wonky? And how would they do that when you only vote a few times in a year? There really isn't the kind of data banks have to determine variance from a trend.
Click to expand...


Indeed. And especially the highlighted.

lomiller said:
What makes you think ATM’s are secure?


Setting aside the fact that many of the published hacks involve Wi-Fi or exposed USB ports that can easily be exploited using the type of access voters require. Even setting aside the fact that a myriad of people need access to the machines to move them, set them up and store them, and most of these have all the access they need to hack them.

BY FAR the most common culprit for cheating in an election is the people running the election, in which case none of your points apply. Even plausibility of the reported results doesn't prevent the winning party from simply ignoring the complaints. TBH it doesn’t’ matter how many anomalies there are, you can bet that if Republicans win an election Fox will be on the air 24/7 telling the faithful that there is nothing wrong with the results, and most Republicans will not just accept it many will come to forums like this one and fervently defend the results even though they are completely bogus.
Click to expand...


Paper counts with candidates or their representatives present is about as transparent as it gets.

Elections need to be transparent, so that people can trust that they are valid.
 
theprestige said:
Maybe from ahhell you can, since he's the one who actually seems to think it's a bad thing.

But this is the same problem all over again.

I have no animosity towards the idea.

I don't think it's a bad thing.
Click to expand...

You opposed the idea when you answered no to it. No matter how the question is phrased, you seen unable to explain why you oppose it. Yet you don't think it's a bad thing.

Again, I was hoping you had some sort of reasoning as to why you oppose automatic voter registration. Apparently you do not. Oh well.
 
ahhell said:
I do have animosity towards it, mostly because I'm from CA where they've taken democracy to the its nearly stupidest extreme. Automatic registration wouldn't actually matter if you don't have mandatory voting, the initiative process, or legal vote harvesting.
Click to expand...

It matters because it makes registering to vote easier, rather than harder, for legal voters.

ahhell said:
I used work with a women who I would describe as stupid, ugly, lazy, and mean(I wouldn't bother with the first two if she hadn't been the last) any rate, she was registered to vote but had know idea what if any party she was registered in. Fortunately, she'd never voted. So, who cares really. I would be very concerned if she had actually been required to. And recently the state has made it legal for someone to go collect her vote, so she may actually be voting, or someone might just be collecting her ballot and turning it in. Sure, anecdote, I know but still. That does concern me, I really don't understand why anyone thinks its a good idea to register folks to vote who have literally know interest in doing so, unless its for just base politics in because they figure those folks, if they vote, will vote for their side.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but you don't actually need to register with either party to vote in the general election.
 
wareyin said:
I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but you don't actually need to register with either party to vote in the general election.
Click to expand...
That's fairly insulting but as I said, she didn't know what if any party she was registered in.
 
ahhell said:
That's fairly insulting but as I said, she didn't know what if any party she was registered in.
Click to expand...

You don't need to register as a party to vote in the general, and you don't need to register in a party to register to vote at all. Her lack of knowledge of something irrelevant to voting doesn't mean she should not be voting.

I've heard it said that if you don't care or are ignorant of the issues, you should not be making decisions about those issues, nor should you be given the opportunity to without some effort on your part to demonstrate at least an interest. I'm not sure I'm as comfortable as you arewith some sort test to demonstrate effort or understanding of the relevant issues, as I think it might just come back and bite a proponent of that idea in the rear end.
 
wareyin said:
You don't need to register as a party to vote in the general, and you don't need to register in a party to register to vote at all. Her lack of knowledge of something irrelevant to voting doesn't mean she should not be voting.

I've heard it said that if you don't care or are ignorant of the issues, you should not be making decisions about those issues, nor should you be given the opportunity to without some effort on your part to demonstrate at least an interest. I'm not sure I'm as comfortable as you arewith some sort test to demonstrate effort or understanding of the relevant issues, as I think it might just come back and bite a proponent of that idea in the rear end.
Click to expand...

You keep missing something, I fully understand that you don't need to register in a party to vote in the general. She didn't even know if she had or had not register in a party. She was registered to vote but wasn't engaged enough to do more than check a box. I'm not sure I would call knowing what your party affiliation is, irrelevant to voting considering that's pretty much all most people need to know before making a decision.
 
ahhell said:
You keep missing something, I fully understand that you don't need to register in a party to vote in the general. She didn't even know if she had or had not register in a party. She was registered to vote but wasn't engaged enough to do more than check a box. I'm not sure I would call knowing what your party affiliation is, irrelevant to voting considering that's pretty much all most people need to know before making a decision.
Click to expand...

Wait, is checking a box demonstrating an understanding of the issues or not? You seem to think it does not for her, but it does for most people.

And again, you seem to not understand that you don't need to fill in a party to register to vote at all. It's irrelevant to understanding the issues you are voting on. It does not matter. If you want people to understand the issues they are voting on before making a decision, your insistence that she must vote party line for whichever party she registered as whenever she registered to vote does not demonstrate any understanding of the issues at all.
 
wareyin said:
Wait, is checking a box demonstrating an understanding of the issues or not? You seem to think it does not for her, but it does for most people.

And again, you seem to not understand that you don't need to fill in a party to register to vote at all. It's irrelevant to understanding the issues you are voting on. It does not matter. If you want people to understand the issues they are voting on before making a decision, your insistence that she must vote party line for whichever party she registered as whenever she registered to vote does not demonstrate any understanding of the issues at all.
Click to expand...

Oy vey.
 
ahhell said:
Oy vey.
Click to expand...

That response never seemed to work well for TBD. I don't think it's doing you any favors either.

Let's try this a different way. You claimed that this woman shouldn't be voting because she doesn't remember which party, if any, she wrote down when she registered to vote. Rather than me pointing out in some other way that this doesn't matter, how about you explain why you think it does matter?
 
In support of wareyin's position: I like to think I'm a reasonably well informed voter. Sure, there are many things I could stand to learn much more about, but I think I'm informed enough to at least not make a bone headed decision (like voting for Trump).

I honestly don't know if I'm registered in any particular party. Back in 1988 I voted for GHWB. I don't think I voted Republican in the primary, but I can't say for sure (I live in VA, not even sure if they had a primary that year).

In 2016 I voted for Bernie in the primary. I'm pretty sure in some states you have to be registered for the specific party if you want to vote in the primary. I don't recall if VA is one of those states. Maybe I was automatically registered as a Republican if I voted in the 1988 primary. Maybe I was automatically registered as a Democrat when I voted in the 2016 primary.

I voted in the primary. That was important to me. It's not important to me whether or not that constituted a formal registration into that party.

So there you go.
 
ahhell said:
I'm not sure I would call knowing what your party affiliation is, irrelevant to voting considering that's pretty much all most people need to know before making a decision.
Click to expand...

This sounds like you think voting should be based on what “team” you are on, when in fact it should be completely irrelevant. People should vote based on the candidate’s position on the issues, not who “the party” tells them to vote for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom