<< THREE OUT OF THREE ~ MAIN ~ BOSSY MARK >>
FREE DRINKS FOR DIEBOLDERS
There may be an upside to this, at least for poll officials and Diebold staff; presumably Diebold voting machine keys can open minibars. That was probably the plan all along. In other scandal news:
Two Muslim clerics purportedly caught on camera allegedly taking bribes for declaring fatwas were suspended as ulemas on Monday ...
From ABC online:
French Fashion Federation president Didier Grumbach says fashion cannot be regulated and a similar decision would be laughed at if it was taken in France.
“If Jean-Paul Gaultier wants to have fat girls parade, nobody is going to stop him,” he said.
“When Galliano puts people in his shows who are not pretty, no-one says a thing.”
Didier, mate, in 20 years time, the only thing the models of Paris will be wearing is Burqas.
But black is very cool.
Posted by Apparatchik on 2006 09 19 at 03:27 AM • permalinkElectronic voting machines will do whatever the engineer with the biggest motive for fraud wants them to do.
http://www.acm.org/classics/sep95/
Moral : don’t let people like me write compilers.
Blessings be upon you blogstrop, you have cast a light into my darkness.
Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 09 19 at 08:02 AM • permalinkThey’re also cranking up their multiple dead voter campaigns.
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 09 19 at 10:05 AM • permalink#7, Of course a simple solution to that would be to not use machines that are obviously not tamper proof.
Some how the damn ACT manages to do it right: http://www.elections.act.gov.au/EVACS.html
While America uses machines which are just asking for electoral fraud and have no mechanisms to detect let alone rectify such things.
listen up my fellow australians. when some politician suggests that we have electronic voting, remember that such systems can be rigged or subverted with great ease & no audit trail. no amount of blathering about security precautions will ever convince me of the wisdom of replacing eagle-eyed party scrutineers standing around in polling booths after the vote & watching every ballot be counted. even if the compilers tried to fudge the figures at the central count, it would be detected by parties comparing the overall outcome with individual booth figures & smelling a rat in the adding up. there is rarely any point to being a luddite, but this is one of those rare cases. stick with the pencil & paper folks
Does the election-day ban on alcohol sales include mini-bars?
Posted by nofixedabode on 2006 09 19 at 10:38 AM • permalinkChads or mini-bars. What a decision to make!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 19 at 11:54 AM • permalinkI’m as technophile as can be, but I just don’t get the push for electronic voting. Of course, I also don’t get why voting commissions would use idiotic non-electronic ballots like those Palm Beach ones from 2000.
Seriously, what’s wrong with being bog-standard and simple here - big circles or boxes for each candidate, in one of which voters place a checkmark or a cross.
Diebold is based in Canton, Ohio.
Ohio decided the 2004 Presidential election.
RebeccaH is an unabashed neocon
positionedlocated in Ohio.Coincidence? Oh sure.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 09 19 at 12:58 PM • permalinkSeriously, what’s wrong with being bog-standard and simple here - big circles or boxes for each candidate, in one of which voters place a checkmark or a cross.
Nothing, PW, except that it ain’t sexy (”oooh, lookie, touch screens!”), and it doesn’t put huge contracts on the street. Washington State still uses the paper “fill in the circle” ballot with scanners to tally results. This is an excellent blend of old and new technologies, very quick, and God knows a lot more secure. Oh, and it works. Wotta surprise.
If I sound cynical about this newfangled voting system, it’s not because of the technology. I’m probably at least as much of a technophile as you are (possibly more, although I won’t bet on it).
No, it’s the process by which we put ourselves in this mess. Anyone who understands computers knows that the only way to completely secure any computer is unplug it from the LAN, turn it off, and then lock the hard drive in a safe. Yet we have put the basis of our political system in something as easily penetrated as a wet paper bag.
The mind boggles at how stupid people can truly be.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 19 at 01:25 PM • permalinkHey, wronwright, aren’t you from Ohio as well?
There’s a conspiracy in here someplace. I just gotta keep on digging….....
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 19 at 01:26 PM • permalinkYikes, I’m late to the party again !
I’m going to have to start reading the Hindustani Times earlier in the morning to stay ahead of the fatwa/bribe arc….
Posted by Harry Bergeron on 2006 09 19 at 01:44 PM • permalinkWashington State!?! Weren’t they the ones that couldn’t elect their governor without making a hash of it?
If we were serious about voting fraud, Philadelphia wouldn’t be allowed to open one polling place until they explained how they have more registered voters than they have eligible voters. That happened last time.
Oh yeah, and politicians who had previously won elections using paper ballots wouldn’t be allowed to suggest fraud when they’re denied re-election using the exact same paper ballot system (ex: former governor Gray Davis of California).
Washington State!?! Weren’t they the ones that couldn’t elect their governor without making a hash of it?
Alas, the very same, Blue Hen, I am ashamed to admit. But while I was out of country at the time, I recall that the hashed up recount included “misplaced” ballots, not a penetration of the voting system a la’ wronwright and Rebecca. ;-P
I recall a similar excess of registered voters in other jurisdictions (Chicago for one, maybe Wisconsin), so Philly ain’t alone when it comes to voter fraud.
As for Davis…..he’s another whining S-O-B from the left side of the political spectrum. So incompetent, he couldn’t even keep his office for the full term. A real loser…..in all senses of the word!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 19 at 01:55 PM • permalink#18 I agree it’s wierd. In Australia we don’t know the results of the senate for weeks. The 2004 election was on the 9th of October and the Queensland results weren’t done until early November (the 2nd or 3rd I think).
And you know what, no one cares. It takes time to count so you take the time. Well, the media probably likes it they get to report election news for weeks after the election :)
One thing I think the US does manage better (or at least tries to - I have never actually voted in a US election, trying to is grounds for deportation after all) is support for non-english speakers the disabled…
18 PW
Seriously, what’s wrong with being bog-standard and simple here - big circles or boxes for each candidate, in one of which voters place a checkmark or a cross.
Sure would seem a bit better, but someone, some how, would screw it up OR deliberately do so.
Wrong crayon, wrong color, I need a left handed crayon, I’m allergic to crayons, I stayed inside the lines, I went out side the lines, my cat died this morning, the police barricade 43 miles away intimidated me, on and on.
To this day, what I can’t understand about Florida election 2000 IS, the very same people that CAN control 30 BINGO cards, all at the same time, on any given night, couldn’t push a pointy stylus, through a piece of paper…thusly the hanging ‘chad’.
Speaking of hanging ‘chad’...
First penis transplant reversed after two weeks
LONDON (Reuters) - Surgeons in China who said they performed the first successful penis transplant had to remove the donated organ because of the severe psychological problems it caused to the recipient and his wife.There had been no signs of the 10-centimetre (4-inch) organ being rejected by the recipient’s body. But Hu said more cases and longer observation are needed to determine whether sexual sensation and function can be restored.
“The patient finally decided to give up the treatment because of the wife’s psychological rejection, as well as the swollen shape of the transplanted penis” Hu added.
Well now, I could be mistaken and it could have been coyote ugly, but I though the swollen stuff, is/was the whole (gratuitous puns and/or plays on words intended) idea.
via
#26 JeffS
I recall a similar excess of registered voters in other jurisdictions (Chicago for one, maybe Wisconsin), so Philly ain’t alone when it comes to voter fraud.
FWIW, regarding Wisconsin, in case you were referring to the ‘04 election - IIRC the deal was that officials in Milwaukee ordered something like double or three times as many ballots as they had registered voters, even though the number of eligible voters was far from that high. I think I even bought the Journal-Sentinel on the day that little problem made the front page…
#27 sam:
I agree it’s wierd. In Australia we don’t know the results of the senate for weeks. The 2004 election was on the 9th of October and the Queensland results weren’t done until early November (the 2nd or 3rd I think).
And your Senate elections are a pretty big exception due to the voting system used. I mean, one of the reasons cited for electronic voting is that it’s faster. (Nevermind that, as JeffS mentioned, optical scanners can provide for that just as well.) But - we’re using exclusively paper ballots here in Germany, counted by actual humans, and for federal elections it takes all of about 10 hours from the moment the polls close to the announcement of the full official results (though provisional due to foreign ballots and the like). And the great majority of polling places tend to report within 6 hours.
I fail to see how shaving off a couple of hours every few years justifies exposing the political system to situations that would make Florida 2000 look like a minor skirmish - especially if the “no paper trail” voting systems win out.
I fail to see how shaving off a couple of hours every few years justifies exposing the political system to situations that would make Florida 2000 look like a minor skirmish - especially if the “no paper trail” voting systems win out.
Exactly right, PW. It strikes me that any appearance of weakness in a voting system erodes voter confidence in it….and leads to conflict. We already have that with a paper based system, for crying out loud! With no paper trail? The screams of voter fraud and vote stealing will be deafening.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 19 at 05:34 PM • permalinkBTW, PW, I was thinking about the 2004 elections in Wisconsin. There the mere appearance of wrong doing raised questions, not to mention hackles. Too bad election officials don’t learn from the mistakes of others.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 19 at 05:36 PM • permalink#31 I realise our senate elections are on the extreme side of complexity of decoding the ballots into something that can be counted. What I was trying to say was that the only benefit machines have is speed of counting (there are arguments for accessability as well, I guess) and yet who cares about counting speed.
Sure if it took months and months, but waitig a few weeks in Australia for senate results doesn’t seem to worry anyone. Getting the results a few hours early and undermining the entire perception of fair elections (if not the fact) seems pretty silly.
#11- Which goes part of the way to explaining this.
I doubt there’s much need to fiddle an election though in a town populated by shiny-arsed clock-watchers, smack dealers and their clients and blow-in revenue hoovers and their fixers.
In the (possibly apocryphal) words of the former owner of the site of Canberra (a Scottish grazier), when shown the redeveloped site in the ‘30s and asked his opinion-
“a fookin’ gud bluddy paddick rooned”.
Never a more truthful utterance has ever been made in that benighted region.
In 2000 they cocked up their butterfly ballots and claimed they accidently voted for Buchanan instead of Gore (despite the ballot having been developed by a Democrat). Oh, and state troopers with mirror sunglasses and German shepherds kept them away from polls. Then in 2004 they screamed about the Diebold machines, because their own exit polls told them they won. What’s it gonna be this election?
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 09 19 at 10:26 PM • permalink#38 - the First Daughters will go campaigning for Dad, and Democrat voters will be mesmerised by their hair rays.
Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 09 19 at 11:11 PM • permalinkThe problem with optical scan ballots is that they end up in a big box that can be mishandled prior to counting. The Washington Governor’s debacle is an old tradition.
Posted by Some0Seppo on 2006 09 20 at 08:13 AM • permalinkSome0Seppo, that’s true for any paper ballot system. My point is that at least with a paper ballot system, you have a physical trail to follow. Electronic systems are far more open to tampering which may be undetectable.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 20 at 09:47 AM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Is ‘as ulemas’ one of those foreign phrases like ‘a la carte’? Does it mean something along the lines of ‘dangling upside-down over an open fire with a rope around your nuts’? Because if it doesn’t, it probably should.