Sharpe
3332
When I lived in Orange County CA 3 years back they had touchscreen voting.
It’s all mail-in here in WA for me. I haven’t been to a booth since the law changed.
Virginia uses the scan-tron type of thing – you mark your choice on the paper by filling in the bubble, then feed it into the machine where it tabulates your vote electronically.
So electronic voting (allowing instantaneous vote-counting) with a built-in paper copy if there needs to be a re-count.
Missouri has a mix of stuff. In my voting district, I fill in the multiple choice answers and put the paper ballot in the machine when I’m done.
I’ve heard from co-workers that Kansas is all touch-screen now. But there was concern about that in 2016, so in the last election, I heard there’s a paper back-up now. So you still vote on the touchscreen, but it prints out your choices for you, you make sure they’re correct, and you put them in the machine. That’s the way it should be, I think. That way they have that paper backup in case a recount is needed, and the voter has already made sure (hopefully) that the correct choices were on the paper.
rowe33
3337
How long before these Red state touchscreens start having weird issues if your finger isn’t white enough on the screen? Or is that already happening?
Sounds like what we have in Nevada. After you cast your votes, it prints out a paper “receipt” which scrolls behind a window next to the main screen, and you can verify your selections there before submitting.
Miramon
3339
MA uses paper and ink. The forms are scanned, of course, so there’s an opportunity for hacking, but the paper is right there to check in case anyone wants to. In theory there should be no problem with a voting machine that produces hard copy for the state to archive and to show the voter what they voted for, but if it’s more expensive than the MA approach, it’s silly. And if a machine doesn’t produce an archival record, it’s criminally bad design in more ways than one.
Menzo
3340
The preferred method is to prevent those folks from reaching the machine in the first place.
lessons learned, oh wait…
rowe33
3342
I mean jesus fucking christ, how is this not impeachable? He said he’d work with a foreign government AGAIN. How is that not fucking collusion?!
Oghier
3343
It may not be an actual crime. The remedy to this sort of thing is supposed to be voters.
I don’t think the authors of our Constitution really contemplated a situation where a political party would willingly engage with a hostile foreign power in this way.
Rick ain’t wrong here.
<snip to tweet 5 in thread>
Yes. Covered here at least as part of an interesting story about why computers can produce weird results.
Here, someone noticed a weird vote total for one candidate (exceptionally high in just one district, and more votes than people living in the district) and they did a recount of the paper records.
One of my “give me supreme ultimate power” wishlists is to ask the elite schools to come with with a completely tamper proof “analog counting computer” with gears and knobs (something with completely deep but testable complexity that little old retired ladies could handle, that you feed punch cards or some such into) sort of a modern babbage engine, and then get a Supreme Court ruling to force every district to comply with these new standards, and then move the whole system to analog.
Why reinvent the wheel? Just modify the old lever voting machines to punch a card for a physical record, and you’ve got the perfect voting machine. Ker-chunk!
