Poll Stories Thread

mykevermin

mykevermin

CAGiversary!
Feedback
34 (97%)
Any problems/mischief this morning? Any fruitcakes screaming? Post 'em here.

Pretty uneventful on my side of things. We woke up at 6 to go get in line (a very short one, thankfully). This is the third time I've voted in this high school gym equipment closet (I'm not lying).

We had two machines this time around; ol' bessie (a push button ballot) and a newfangled Diebold device.

True to form, some guy was throwing a fit that the Diebold machine fucked up his vote, and there were three people working on the machine to try and register his vote. Delightful piece of technology. And we got to the polling place at 6:10, so it had only been running for 10 minutes (with people using it, anyway) before it broke. While I understand the man's frustration, my lack of coffee made me hard to find sympathy in.

So, luckily (and I would have demanded it anyway), we used ol' Bessie. One thing I don't get about the hubub over the Diebold machines not giving paper receipts is that ol' Bessie doesn't either. I push a button adjacent to candidate X, and a red light appears in that box (think back to that child's toy called Alphie). I trust that it is genuinely tied to candidate X, but have no certainty. While I understand the grievance that a computer-based machine is easier to manipulate (especially given the evidence that Diebold voting machines are easier to hack than the Dreamcast was to pirate); nevertheless, I still don't have a paper receipt displaying my vote either.

It was a crappy rainy morning; rain does have a depressing effect on voter turnout, but it doesn't impact those (1) upright citizens that feel the need to vote or (2) party diehards on both sides. I don't see the weather *changing* the vote here in terms of percentages, but, rather, just bringing down the number of overall votes cast.
 
I won't vote until after classes (so around 6 probably). Probably won't be crowded and AFAIK there won't be any diebold machines so nothing good will happen.

Honestly how hard is it to make a computer tally a fucking vote? Coming from a company that has made fucking millions of ATMs it's pretty sad.
 
Myke, I don't think the point is for you to have a paper receipt of your vote, but more for the polling place to have a paper record in the event a recount is needed. We don't want the public to have to bring in their receipts if everything goes haywire. That would make Florida 2000 look well-organized.

Here's to hoping everyone's votes will be counted correctly.
 
I'm going around 10:30... Between the soccer moms dropping their kids off at school, and people dodging lunch hour to go vote. I seriously hope that there's campaigners crowded around the place so I can fuck with them.

I need the cheap entertainment. :/
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']Myke, I don't think the point is for you to have a paper receipt of your vote, but more for the polling place to have a paper record in the event a recount is needed. We don't want the public to have to bring in their receipts if everything goes haywire. That would make Florida 2000 look well-organized.

Here's to hoping everyone's votes will be counted correctly.[/QUOTE]

My mistake; that is, of course, what ought to be the case.

Tiph (you still ain't Hex, darlin'), most states have law prohibiting campaigning (even signs) within 300 ft (or was it yards?) of a polling place. You bet your sweet ass they're waving those signs at 301, though. I saw that sign this morning ("no campaigneering within 300 feet") and wished I had one of those several months ago.
 
My polling station had some left and right wing nutjobs handing out flyers. When I refused the GOP sample ballot and picked up the Democrat sample ballot I got some cheers from the Dems. Also, the young ladies checking that I am registered were flirting with me. Overall, a fun and easy voting day.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']My mistake; that is, of course, what ought to be the case.

Tiph (you still ain't Hex, darlin'), most states have law prohibiting campaigning (even signs) within 300 ft (or was it yards?) of a polling place. You bet your sweet ass they're waving those signs at 301, though. I saw that sign this morning ("no campaigneering within 300 feet") and wished I had one of those several months ago.[/quote]

Yeah, I heard Colbert talking about that last night. Considering the distance from the parking lot to the Ace Hardware where it's being held.. there will be asshats to wade through.
 
[quote name='MadFlava']I the young ladies checking that I am registered were flirting with me.[/QUOTE]

2004's "Vote or Die" should have been 2006's "Vote and Get Some."
 
[quote name='mykevermin']2004's "Vote or Die" should have been 2006's "Vote and Get Some."[/quote]
Free T&A for voting! Ingenious! :D
 
O noes double post. Just got back from voting. There was only one crowd, but they were like. Three blocks away from the facility, and all republicans. I initially refused to use the Die-bolds, but even more so when four of them had "Out of Order" signs on them. I was kicking myself for leaving the phone in the car, since it would have made a perfect picture. I voted how I thought I would, although it asked about 6 or so judges that I'd never heard of, but since I'm an asshole, I voted to throw them all out. :D Shortly after leaving the place with my boss (we voted at the same time) a few strippers came up and gave us a pair of post-election hummers. I didn't feel so bad for voting for Musgrave after that.

Remember people: Vote and get sex. :D
 
Nothing interesting ever happens at my polling place. At least during the primary there was a toothless guy handing out flyers for a candidate, but her wasn't there this time. That candidate won too.

There was a funny thing I noticed inside the building I was at. On the corkboard next to the sign indicating that voting machines were in both English and Spanish was a picture of John Wayne standing in front of the American flag with the quote saying something to the effect of "why the hell do I have to push 1 to hear Enlglish in America". I live in a wonderfully tolerant area of the country.
 
I made my way down to the polling place at around 10:30 EST. As I’m playing stay-at-home dad today, I had my 21 month-old in toe. Due to the facts that SC is nigh-irreparably Republican and it was raining; there was no one handing out flyers. I parked in the bus lane at my local elementary school, scooped up my toddler and shuffled into the gymnasium. There was no line to speak of and my only hindrance was the two older ladies manning the A-M check-in table who cooed at my son for a few minutes. I was escorted to my voting machine, made my selection via the greasy touch screen, punched the button, got my sticker, and was back home in minutes. The process was as painless and uneventful as I’ve come to expect.
 
Other than moving my polling place (again) I have no complaints.

I wonder how many people just give up after learning that they have been moved though.
 
[quote name='hinkbert']

There was a funny thing I noticed inside the building I was at. On the corkboard next to the sign indicating that voting machines were in both English and Spanish was a picture of John Wayne standing in front of the American flag with the quote saying something to the effect of "why the hell do I have to push 1 to hear Enlglish in America". I live in a wonderfully tolerant area of the country.[/QUOTE]
:rofl:
 
ROUNDUP TIME!

Kentucky voter choked, pushed out door

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) _ A poll worker was arrested Tuesday and charged with assault and interfering with an election for allegedly choking a voter and pushing him out the door, officials said.
It apparently started as a dispute between the two over marking the ballot, said Lt. Col. Carl Yates of the Jefferson County sheriff's office.
The voter told poll worker Jeffery Steitz that he didn't want to vote in a judicial election because he didn't know enough about the candidates, but Steitz told him he had to vote in the race anyway, Yates said.
Steitz, 42, eventually grabbed the man by the neck and threw him out of the polling place, Yates said.
''The poor guy went back in and he threw him out again,'' Yates said. ''At least it wasn't over a Democrat or a Republican being on the ballot.''
Election officials called police.
Click to expand...
http://blogs.kansascity.com/crime_scene/2006/11/voter_choked_pu.html

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxCI9hJKXno[/media]
Jean Schmidt can't submit her vote.

South Carolina governor's goof delays his vote
POSTED: 4:53 p.m. EST, November 7, 2006

SULLIVAN'S ISLAND, South Carolina (CNN) -- A sheepish Gov. Mark Sanford was turned away from a South Carolina polling place Tuesday because he forgot his voter registration card.

The casting of ballots in front of the news media is a well-worn tradition for politicians, but it was no Kodak moment when Sanford discovered he had left his card behind.

Off camera, South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford could be heard telling her husband that she had reminded him to bring it. (Watch his wife's stunned reaction -- 2:09)

Eventually, the poll manager at Sullivan's Island Elementary School politely told the governor that he couldn't vote unless he had a registration card.

The first lady's identification was in order, and she was allowed to vote, said poll manager Bob Crawford, according to The Associated Press.

Later, Sanford told reporters that his card was in the capital, Columbia, but he planned to obtain a replacement immediately so he could cast a ballot.

"We had the number, we could read it over the phone, but as a credit to the poll manager, she said that ain't enough -- you've got to have the card," the governor said. "I'll vote here shortly."

Sanford said he admired the poll manager for being conscientious.

His office later said the governor had returned to the polling station and successfully voted.

According to the South Carolina State Elections Commission's Web site, voters can obtain a duplicate registration card -- even on Election Day -- if their card is lost or stolen.

The Republican is expected to win his bid for re-election against Democratic state Sen. Tommy Moore.

Sanford has had a tough few days.

Bright stage lights injured his eyes on Sunday, forcing him to skip campaigning on Monday to go to the doctor and recuperate, AP reported.

Sanford's eyes were red and watery as he stood in line at the voting site on Tuesday, but he told AP, "It's behind me and the prognosis is good."

Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.
Click to expand...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/07/sanford.votes/

Sung to the tune of "Yakkity Sax," of course.
 
Why all the fuss over the Diebold machines? A third-grader could use it. The process isn't that hard, I wonder why there is such a discrepancy over people with no issues and those who can't register their vote.

Our precinct uses the Diebolds with the reprogrammable cards. I didn't hear anything while I was there about difficulties (and I was delayed leaving by everyone gawking over our girls).
 
No lines at all at 6pm in my 'burb, the motherly types asking your name were courteous & efficient, the push-button machines worked as well as they always do, and the entire affair took a whopping 5min, if that.

The excitement never stops. ;)
 
(stretches hands over head and yawns, cheese-eating grin on face)

I live in Oregon, which has vote-by-mail, so I dropped my ballot off over the weekend.

You lose some of the election-day pomp and circumstance, but it's more than made up by the convenience.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Why all the fuss over the Diebold machines? A third-grader could use it. The process isn't that hard, I wonder why there is such a discrepancy over people with no issues and those who can't register their vote.

Our precinct uses the Diebolds with the reprogrammable cards. I didn't hear anything while I was there about difficulties (and I was delayed leaving by everyone gawking over our girls).[/QUOTE]

:whistle2:|

Because electronic machines never have glitches, break down, etc. and not having any sort of paper trail is absolutely great for democracy!!!
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Why all the fuss over the Diebold machines? A third-grader could use it. The process isn't that hard, I wonder why there is such a discrepancy over people with no issues and those who can't register their vote.

Our precinct uses the Diebolds with the reprogrammable cards. I didn't hear anything while I was there about difficulties (and I was delayed leaving by everyone gawking over our girls).[/quote]

It's not the so-called ease of use that people hate, it's the fact that the damn things break if you so much as fart in one's direction. Additionally, I'd never trust something digital with my vote- There's no firm way to tell if my vote goes to Candidate A when I select that option. Paper is just more reliable.
 
[quote name='evanft']:whistle2:|

Because electronic machines never have glitches, break down, etc. and not having any sort of paper trail is absolutely great for democracy!!![/QUOTE]

I receive all my bills electronically, should I be worried?

I've never had a problem with them. But then again, I research my canidates, so I guess I'm in the minority there, too.

I haven't had an experience that would question my trust in them. How does a piece of paper ensure trust that your vote is counted? It's just another box that can get misplaced like everything else. Then again, I don't look for the black helicopters.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Why all the fuss over the Diebold machines? A third-grader could use it. The process isn't that hard, I wonder why there is such a discrepancy over people with no issues and those who can't register their vote.

Our precinct uses the Diebolds with the reprogrammable cards. I didn't hear anything while I was there about difficulties (and I was delayed leaving by everyone gawking over our girls).[/QUOTE]
Watch this movie, it was on HBO the other night:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8367786376074634512&q=hacking+democracy&hl=en

Visit this site:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Then get back to me. Diebold machines are notoriously insecure and easy to manipulate. The movie demonstrates one such way. They also completely lack transparency, and they lack any real paper trail.

The only voting machines I believe in consist of two parts. A paper ballot, and a bic pen. If you insist on using a machine, have it print your selection on a ballot, which you can review to make sure its accurate, then you deposit it into the ballot box. Make the paper ballots the primary means of counting the vote, and use the electronic count as an accuracy check.

Voter fraud has gone on for years with paper ballots, but its considerably harder than with a computer. Insecurity is the nature of the beast with these machines, there can be changes made with no evidence, no trace.

A Diebold machine counted negative votes for Gore in 2000. What kind of voting machine counts negative votes? That was either gross incompetence or fraud. Either way, these machines can not be trusted.
 
I laughed when I saw the three polls that had Beauprez in the lead...

blahyq6.jpg


I bet I know who's houses they called. :lol:
 
[quote name='RBM']thank God we have a new senator. Rick Santorum lost. I can't stand that guy.[/quote]

He and Teddy were the ones I wanted to lose most, glad to hear at least one got booted.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']Watch this movie, it was on HBO the other night:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8367786376074634512&q=hacking+democracy&hl=en

Visit this site:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Then get back to me. Diebold machines are notoriously insecure and easy to manipulate. The movie demonstrates one such way. They also completely lack transparency, and they lack any real paper trail.

The only voting machines I believe in consist of two parts. A paper ballot, and a bic pen. If you insist on using a machine, have it print your selection on a ballot, which you can review to make sure its accurate, then you deposit it into the ballot box. Make the paper ballots the primary means of counting the vote, and use the electronic count as an accuracy check.

Voter fraud has gone on for years with paper ballots, but its considerably harder than with a computer. Insecurity is the nature of the beast with these machines, there can be changes made with no evidence, no trace.

A Diebold machine counted negative votes for Gore in 2000. What kind of voting machine counts negative votes? That was either gross incompetence or fraud. Either way, these machines can not be trusted.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, I'm at a time constraint to watch the whole thing. I'm sorry, but the amount of people who have trouble with the Scantron machines, I would have to theorize that the irregularities are a wash. You have humans who in charge of voting, there is always going to be someone who has an agenda

So where does the blame lie? The ITAs? Diebold? The people hacking into these machines? Our precinct has the small tablet-style diebold machines, and we have a choice of voting with another style, most likely a punch, but I don't know for sure.

I've placed votes now four times in two states (three different areas) on these machines, and not ever had a reason to question them. The small tablet-style machines I used (in 2000, and twice this year) are much better than the bigger, easel-style I used in 2004. The easel-style (IIRC) was much more difficult to review your selections, but the tablet-style is supremely easy, it gives the summary and makes you review it before you hit submit. I'd really like to know what the ATM cards actually do, though.

You don't trust the machines, I don't trust the humans. I don't believe a national hand-count system would get rid of the errors, and has any chance of ever being considered.
...Unless we want to find out who won the election a few days after they were supposed to be sworn in.

What I find nice is that our SecState posts the individual precincts, something they complain about on bbv.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']So where does the blame lie? The ITAs? Diebold? The people hacking into these machines? Our precinct has the small tablet-style diebold machines, and we have a choice of voting with another style, most likely a punch, but I don't know for sure.[/quote]

Diebold. When they put an .exe on their memory cards which will change votes depending on how many are recorded for one candidate or another, they're completely fraudulent. Besides, the entire structure of the way the votes are tallied and read was found on the internet by an old woman, despite the fact that not even county officials could look at the machines because they were 'secret'.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Unfortunately, I'm at a time constraint to watch the whole thing. I'm sorry, but the amount of people who have trouble with the Scantron machines, I would have to theorize that the irregularities are a wash. You have humans who in charge of voting, there is always going to be someone who has an agenda

So where does the blame lie? The ITAs? Diebold? The people hacking into these machines? Our precinct has the small tablet-style diebold machines, and we have a choice of voting with another style, most likely a punch, but I don't know for sure.

I've placed votes now four times in two states (three different areas) on these machines, and not ever had a reason to question them. The small tablet-style machines I used (in 2000, and twice this year) are much better than the bigger, easel-style I used in 2004. The easel-style (IIRC) was much more difficult to review your selections, but the tablet-style is supremely easy, it gives the summary and makes you review it before you hit submit. I'd really like to know what the ATM cards actually do, though.

You don't trust the machines, I don't trust the humans. I don't believe a national hand-count system would get rid of the errors, and has any chance of ever being considered.
...Unless we want to find out who won the election a few days after they were supposed to be sworn in.

What I find nice is that our SecState posts the individual precincts, something they complain about on bbv.[/QUOTE]

The election results wouldn't have turned out the way they did if there was massive and widespread maniuplation via the Diebold machines. The Democrats' sweeping of the house and small possibility of controlling the Senate is evidence enough for me that there is no conspiracy to behold.

Part of me was hoping that it would be nationwide and blatant - like having Ken Blackwell, who has been polling 20+ points below Ted Strickland for 2 months plus somehow win the governor's race of Ohio. Y'know, something so over the top that people would storm their state and federal buildings, even if there is a brand new episode of "Heroes" on tonight.

Didn't happen, and thus given the "blowout" (at least on the House side of things, given that Republicans will be lucky to have 200 seats come January), I don't think we can take seriously claims of voter fraud (save for the intimidation tactics used prior to Tuesday).

Does this mean I trust the electronic machines? Nope. Too many problems were resorted to yesterday that suggest that they aren't to be trusted, and there is a "back-end" manipulation available that makes them all too unreliable, as well as untrustworthy.

Now, sure, if we do human counts there is error all around. The good thing about that is there is a high probability that the error is randomized (that grandma betty and grandpa luther, both counting votes with no bias, balance out each other's human error as a result of the errors being distributed evenly on both sides of the political spectrum; even if betty and luther count every 5th Republican vote as a Democrat, there is a high likelihood of another pair of oldies doing the same thing in the opposite direction somewhere in the nation). I understand the apprehension that human counts provides, but hand recounts, while expensive and time consuming, can be checked and rechecked and rechecked. The electronic machines don't afford that luxury.

Let me paint it this way: if I do research and find that the average time from prison release to recidivism (going back to prison) is 12 months (this is the kind of stuff I do), another researcher who has access to my data set finds that it's really 8 months, or 18 months. That's called "testing for reliability." Just because I present my results, that doesn't mean they're gospel truth. If you take a sample of released offenders again and again and again and again, and find that they recidivate on an average by 12 months after release, then you have *high* reliability. It's simply the notion that your measurements/test are accurately getting at the phenomenon you measured. If they're all over creation, that's low reliability. The same can be said of hand recounts. We won't expect to see Allen or Webb somehow gain a mysterious truckload of 300,000 votes for them that were missing or miscounted; in the end, Virginia is going to the person with less than 10,000 votes more than the other guy. It's gonna be 50.1% to 49.9%.

Hand recounts aren't perfect, but it's the only solution that begins with a tangible and visible record of *each and every vote cast*, so that reliability can be tested for. Not only are the electronic machines hackable, but they do not allow for reliability to be accounted for.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']

Let me paint it this way: if I do research and find that the average time from prison release to recidivism (going back to prison) is 12 months (this is the kind of stuff I do), another researcher who has access to my data set finds that it's really 8 months, or 18 months. That's called "testing for reliability." Just because I present my results, that doesn't mean they're gospel truth. If you take a sample of released offenders again and again and again and again, and find that they recidivate on an average by 12 months after release, then you have *high* reliability. It's simply the notion that your measurements/test are accurately getting at the phenomenon you measured. If they're all over creation, that's low reliability. The same can be said of hand recounts. We won't expect to see Allen or Webb somehow gain a mysterious truckload of 300,000 votes for them that were missing or miscounted; in the end, Virginia is going to the person with less than 10,000 votes more than the other guy. It's gonna be 50.1% to 49.9%.

Hand recounts aren't perfect, but it's the only solution that begins with a tangible and visible record of *each and every vote cast*, so that reliability can be tested for. Not only are the electronic machines hackable, but they do not allow for reliability to be accounted for.[/QUOTE]

Outliers. Gotcha on that one. I don't think the fault lies with electronic voting, but perhaps with the current state of it. You have memory cards that can get lost, you don't have anyone keeping a close eye on those that adminster the code. I never thought there was a conspiracy to it, but we are still talking about humans that program and run them.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Outliers. Gotcha on that one. I don't think the fault lies with electronic voting, but perhaps with the current state of it. You have memory cards that can get lost, you don't have anyone keeping a close eye on those that adminster the code. I never thought there was a conspiracy to it, but we are still talking about humans that program and run them.[/QUOTE]

Oh, no. I think there's a fascinating schism in "misvoting" between left and right allegations. Lefties point to Diebold's hackable machines and certain statements made by Diebold's CEO that indicated a peculiar sort of GOP support several years ago, as well as voter intimidation (those robocalls, and voicemails telling people in districts they'll be arrested if they vote, among other things). Righties complain about voter fraud, where there appears to be evidence of deceased people being registered, or people being registered in multiple districts, etc.

Lefties complain about voter "suppression," while righties complain about "fraud."

The hard thing about ensuring the fairness of the electronic machines is, in some part, the same problem in finding people to fairly handcount ballots: how can you be certain that you're hiring someone who is genuinely interested in protecting the integrity of the electoral process?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Oas well as voter intimidation (those robocalls, and voicemails telling people in districts they'll be arrested if they vote[/quote]

Holy crap, when did that happen? :shock: I do hope that the people they called were smart enough to know it's bullshit.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9i-_3TiN9g

Not the most unbiased presentation of it, but the first link I found. ;)[/quote]

Good lord. Biased or not, that still sucks. :roll:

I almost want to listen to Savage tonight to hear how the entire election was rigged ad how a few fringe liberal pinko voters turned the House Democrat. :D
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9i-_3TiN9g

Not the most unbiased presentation of it, but the first link I found. ;)[/QUOTE]

I think I'm missing where Allen is involved.

I'm not saying one of his supporters didn't do it, I just want to know where it immediately falls on him. If I've missed a news excerpt, please show it to me.
 
I volunteered at the polls yesterday and I was asked numerous times by the same person, if she could "redo" her vote, because she voted for the wrong candidate... Then my friend next to me almost got slapped for no apparent reason, I wasn't paying attention.

That's about the most exciting it got there yesterday, at least our machines didn't screw up
 
No real excitement at the polls, although there was a pretty long line. Only thing that happened is a poll worker politely told me to stop playing Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones on my DS (she first thought it was a cell phone, then told me no electronics). Of course, let's make rules that make it more unpleasant to wait in line!

Anyway, we've had touch-screen voting for years in my county and I can't recall any problems. Very easy to use all around IMO. I have no idea what company made them though.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9i-_3TiN9g

Not the most unbiased presentation of it, but the first link I found. ;)[/QUOTE]

Well, if that isn't genuine, then I'm not a millionaire. And I'm NOT a millionaire. But, it was on the interweb, so it must be true.

You think digital vote counters are ripe for fraud? The place where I first voted, many years ago, there were 3 enormous machines that took up an entire hallway. Seriously, they must have had a footprint of 6 foot square by 7 feet tall. You stepped up to the beast and drew a lever to the left which extended a curtain around and behind you. The ballot was a permanent plastic covered, printed grid splayed out accross the enormity of the machine's table. Within each section was a toggle switch which you flicked to record your choice instead of filling in a paper oval. When you were through, you drew the lever to the right, your vote was "recorded", odometer style on the rear of the machine in a replica of the ballot panel on the users' end, and the curtain recoiled back to it's original position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top