Recent Political Change May Positively Affect GA

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Sylvain wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:
So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called here)?
means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?

What is the purpose of that?

Expressing your opinion. That's pretty much the point of the
whole voting thing.

You can express the "do nothing" opinion by staying home. I can see this
if they are just voting to maintain their registration to vote in future
elections. However, as a political statement, it is pretty much a waste
of time. Not voting at all sends nearly the same message.

Hardly. Not voting at all is indistinguishable from apathy or laziness; many
who don't vote are simply content with any likely outcome. In contrast, a
blank vote (or voting for a protest candidate) shows an affirmative effort
to express dissatisfaction. If "blank" were to receive a majority of the
votes cast, the message would be profoundly different than if most people
just stayed home.

--Gary

The machines we use keeps two paper records and two
electronic records. Only the sworn poll clerk has the
device needed to turn a machine on and that is for each
voter.
We also have paper ballots and the scanner. The point is
that canvassing clerks can look at and count paper if there
is a need to recount.

Here is a video instruction
http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/elections/index.html link on
the page.

If you have honest poll workers, you'll get honest
elections. If you have crooks, any method will get crooked
results.




"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
| I worked the polls all day on Nov 7. I've got to tell
you
| that a very large number of the voters [even in an up
scale
| educated area] are idiots. As an example, after
explaining
| a woman that there were four pages on the ballot and the
| VOTE button would be in-active until she had looked at
and
|
| Snip of incredible story
|
| Here in Iowa, for the first time, we had the choice of
voting either
| electronically, using a bone-simple touch screen, or on
paper.
|
| Amazingly (to me) I was the ONLY person in line to choose
to vote
| electronically, while everyone else in this VERY left-wing
area (the
| last Republican elected here was in 1957) chose paper --
no doubt
| because of all the liberal media gibberish about how the
Republicans
| were going to "steal" the election by using Diebold's
computers...
|
| What was really hilarious (to me) was that the people who
voted on
| paper were then directed (as always) to feed their ballot
into a (you
| guessed it!) computer tabulator! I just about died
laughing.
|
| My night manager, after being told this story, went to
vote in a
| different precinct. He had to *ask* to vote
electronically, and their
| response was "Why would you want to do *that*?" They
were actively
| discouraging the use of the new system.
|
| And, as usual, no attempt was made to verify that I was,
indeed, the
| voter I said I was. Once again, I could easily have voted
multiple
| times, in multiple precincts. Yet we're spending
thousands
| (millions?) of dollars "tightening up the system" by
investing in
| computerized voting machines.
|
| It is to weep.
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

Matt Whiting wrote:

You can express the "do nothing" opinion by staying home. I can see
this if they are just voting to maintain their registration to vote in
future elections. However, as a political statement, it is pretty much
a waste of time. Not voting at all sends nearly the same message.

bow do you know the difference between someone who did stay home because
they thought about the issues, and reject all the choices put before them,
and the folks who did stay home out of apathy or laziness?

You are unfortunately right in saying that voting 'none of the above' is
a waste of time, since it is not counted differently but it certainly
ought to be.

--Sylvain

One of the minor party planks is to have a "none of the above" choice for
any office. My bet is that half of the congressional seats in this race
would have been won by None Of The Above.

Jim



"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...



Hardly. Not voting at all is indistinguishable from apathy or laziness;
many who don't vote are simply content with any likely outcome. In
contrast, a blank vote (or voting for a protest candidate) shows an
affirmative effort to express dissatisfaction. If "blank" were to receive
a majority of the votes cast, the message would be profoundly different
than if most people just stayed home.

--Gary

Jay Honeck wrote:

Amazingly (to me) I was the ONLY person in line to choose to vote
electronically, while everyone else in this VERY left-wing area (the
last Republican elected here was in 1957) chose paper -- no doubt
because of all the liberal media gibberish about how the Republicans
were going to "steal" the election by using Diebold's computers...

it is not gibberish that these machine are unreliable, and so easily
hacked that a chimpanzee can do it (as it has been demonstrated); I would
certainly never accept using these pieces of crap to vote -- note: I know
a thing or two about computer science -- and would use paper if given
a chance if only as a form of protest; the sooner these machines are
taken offline and discarded, the better, and one way to achieve this
is to refuse using them.


What was really hilarious (to me) was that the people who voted on
paper were then directed (as always) to feed their ballot into a (you
guessed it!) computer tabulator! I just about died laughing.

except that these voters' votes can be recounted if need be, since
they did leave a verifiable paper trace unlike *your* vote...


--Sylvain

Recently, Martin Hotze posted:

"Jim Macklin" wrote:

Then she reviewed her blank ballot
and voted it again. Then she "read" the last question and
pressed the CONFIRM button.


So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called here)?
means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?

If I read Jim's message correctly, that is exactly what this woman did. A
decently designed user interface would alert the voter that they are about
to do such things. However, Diebold has convinced me that they can't
design decent hardware *or* software. I'm just very glad that they aren't
involved in aviation.

Neil

Recently, Newps posted:

Mxsmanic wrote:
"Jim Macklin" writes:


The whole Muslim terrorist world has declared war on the
USA.


There are only a handful of Muslim terrorists in the world, and they
don't represent a sovereign state, so they cannot formally declare
war.

Your ability to completely and utterly miss a point is astounding.

On this, I think Mxsmanic's point is right on target. "The whole Muslim
terrorist world..." can most likely be counted in the thousands, and they
don't represent (nor are they represented by) a sovereign state. Of
course, now there are a lot of "normal Muslims" that are rather ticked off
at the inept manner in which we are dealing with those few terrorists, and
that doesn't help matters any.

Neil

except that these voters' votes can be recounted if need be, since
they did leave a verifiable paper trace unlike *your* vote...

The touch screen computer printed a hard copy of my vote, which was
verified by the operator.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"We've been waiting for you."

The Libertarian Party, not the Air Force.

Actually, Don, I'm still waiting for *them*...to find candidates that
can be elected to ANYTHING.

Of course, that's a "chicken-and-egg" problem of the highest order.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 14:00:39 -0800, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

One of the minor party planks is to have a "none of the above" choice for
any office. My bet is that half of the congressional seats in this race
would have been won by None Of The Above.

How about "yes, but" and "only if" options on the measures?

Don