"...the only way to have a verifiable election that can be recounted is paper ballots."
I have lived in the NYC metro area my entire life. We always (until the last election) voted with mechanical machines with little levers you'd push over to sslect your vote, it would register when you pulled the big lever to open the curtain of the voting booth. This was true in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Jersey City and Bayonne, NJ for the past 30 years. There was never a paper ballot returned to the voter. I don't know if there was a paper ballot produced that remained in the machine. All this talk of paper ballots has confused me all this time. Any enlightenment appreciated.
The democraps have been making votes appear/disappear without a trace for years.
Now the idiots that used to steal elections for them are stymied.
Just wait until they start comparing voting turnout and results in rat counties before and after the introduction of Diebold.
I have nothing against paper ballots except for the time that it takes to count them. I do have a big problem with machines that give you a 'reciept' saying who you voted for because I think that your vote should be kept completely confidential and people might be coherced into voting a certain way because they know that someone else will force them to show their reciept as proof that they voted the way that person wanted them to vote.
They are easy to use so voters like them.
Election workers like the new machines. They are easier to set up and tally.
Until it is proven in court that machines were rigged to steal an election (from a democrat)they're here to stay.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I want those nice elderly folks who volunteer at libraries and pass out ballots at voting time to count paper ballots.
I hate the idea of electronic voting.
I'm an engineer.
I'm NOT opposed to electronic voting.
The stakes are too high. No matter what is claimed, the only way to have a verifiable election that can be recounted is electronic ballots. In paper land, votes can appear and/or disappear without a trace. Votes need to remain immidiately verifiable.
---
Give people a paper receipt of their ballot.
---
Funny how we accept that every dollar I give to the FedGov disapears into a bizarre black hole that pays for ilegal immigrants and bridges to nowhere, yet we are worried about efforts to avoid the legal cheating that went on in PBC or Chicago in 2000 with paper ballots.
Why use these things when there is no reason for it.
I don't mind waiting for the results but I guess the news outfits want a quick result.
How about paper ballots, photo ID and purple dye?
You're right; there has to be some kind of physical ballot generated by the voter, whether it be a paper ballot or some other material like a punched plastic card that might be more durable during recounts. I'm a software developer myself and like you I know how easily electronic votes can be changed or frabricated.
It seems like we need some kind of hybrid voting system where an automated stylus device punches the ballot for the voters with no mistakes and no "hanging chads" and then verifies that the ballot has been properly punched with an indicator light that flashes bright blue for a good hole punch (can't use red or green because of color bindness). That's all we need, just a device to punch the ballots properly and verify to the voter that the ballot has been properly punched.
As you say, the stakes are way too high and software can be easily manipulated. Physical ballots can still be illegally cast and stuffed into ballot boxes, but at least that kind of fraud is much easier to prevent than electronic fraud. I predict eventually some day we'll get rid of voting machines and just go with an automated stylus device to punch the ballots. Maybe we should start a campaign for this on FR.
There is a proper use for databases and software technology to keep a running tabluation of vote counts and detect sudden inexplicble changes in counts that could indicate fraud. But there's no good way to replace a physical ballot and these voting machines are scary, especially considering the low level of honesty of many democRAT politicians today.