Argus Posted October 14, 2008 Report Posted October 14, 2008 Not if it's OPEN. The government could ask you to verify your vote online. Look, when the ballots are counted now, all three parties can be there to watch and participate. But you can't watch numbers going up on a board with any affect because you don't know what's going on inside the machine. Any little piece of rogue data can alter the numbers significantly, and there's no way to verify them. As for the government - you want to leave it totally up to the government of the day to oversee these electronic machines and verify what the votes for and against it are? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Posted October 14, 2008 (edited) How gradual? I have friends in their 20s that don't even own a computer. What about an internet-enabled cell phone? Sure, that's probably the exception; however, they're out there and they're just as entitled to vote as anyone else. If the government makes it mandatory to vote online are they going to provide funding to people to purchase computer and pay a monthly internet bill? There could be multi-purpose government electronic stations in shopping malls that could be used for voting. How much do you think it would cost to issue these electronic IDs or setup biometric identification systems? It would certainly be so prohibitive that this is not a viable solution. Regardless, what about people who do not wish to be fingerprinted or have biometric information in a government database? How would they vote? Personally, I've never been in any sort of legal trouble, but I would be iffy about having biometric info at the disposal of the government. I think the government collecting and keeping biometric info (including DNA) of all of it's citizens is just a matter of time. Besides it should be in the citizen's best interests anyway - no identity theft or credit card fraud would be possible (or at least they would be a LOT harder). Edited October 14, 2008 by PoliticalCitizen Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted October 14, 2008 Report Posted October 14, 2008 PC, you seem to be inexplicably drawn to finding complicated ways to fix what isn't broken. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Posted October 14, 2008 There is a difference between me trusting the bank to keep my invidual financial records straight and having the population trust the system of voting. A democratic government does not have legimacy if the people don't trust the voting system. Right now people do trust the voting system in Canada. There are a number of reasons for that but one of the big ones is the paper trail that can be idepedently verified after the fact.The US has a mish-mash of electronic voting systems and you are see people lose trust in the system. It will only get worse. I understand where you're coming from: "If it's not broke, don't fix it". But just how verifiable is the paper ballot system today? Could you identify the voter by the style of the X they used? Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Posted October 14, 2008 PC, you seem to be inexplicably drawn to finding complicated ways to fix what isn't broken. So you're saying there's a fundamental difference between our way of counting ballots and USA's? Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Posted October 14, 2008 Look, when the ballots are counted now, all three parties can be there to watch and participate. But you can't watch numbers going up on a board with any affect because you don't know what's going on inside the machine. Any little piece of rogue data can alter the numbers significantly, and there's no way to verify them. As for the government - you want to leave it totally up to the government of the day to oversee these electronic machines and verify what the votes for and against it are? You bring up a good point. But by the same token, do you trust the mutual funds with your money? Who oversees them? A commission could be formed to include members of all parties that participated in the election to oversee the process. Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted October 14, 2008 Report Posted October 14, 2008 So you're saying there's a fundamental difference between our way of counting ballots and USA's? Fundamental....yes indeed. All of our ballots, from province to province are paper and are counted by hand. In the US voting methods differ state to state. It is more complicated because they are voting not just for the POTUS and the VPOTUS but for Governors, senators, REPS, Judges, Dog catchers, Trustees, etc etc.... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted October 14, 2008 Report Posted October 14, 2008 I understand where you're coming from: "If it's not broke, don't fix it".But just how verifiable is the paper ballot system today? Could you identify the voter by the style of the X they used? There is no need or desire to indentfy a vote or how someone voted. Voting is secret for a reason. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Posted October 14, 2008 There is no need or desire to indentfy a vote or how someone voted. Voting is secret for a reason. So what prevents a paper ballot from being forged? Quote You are what you do.
Riverwind Posted October 14, 2008 Report Posted October 14, 2008 But just how verifiable is the paper ballot system today? Could you identify the voter by the style of the X they used?If someone had access to the ballots after the fact they could potentially use fingerprints to identify the voter but that is irrelevant because it won't happen. A useful comparison would be the lock on your front door which would likely never stop someone who really wanted to get in but it makes it sufficiently difficult to ensure that you feel your home reasonably is secure. Similarily the paper ballot system allows people to feel reasonably certain their choice is secret. No electronic system could provide the same kind of assurance. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Posted October 14, 2008 If someone had access to the ballots after the fact they could potentially use fingerprints to identify the voter but that is irrelevant because it won't happen. A useful comparison would be the lock on your front door which would likely never stop someone who really wanted to get in but it makes it sufficiently difficult to ensure that you feel your home reasonably is secure. Similarily the paper ballot system allows people to feel reasonably certain their choice is secret. No electronic system could provide the same kind of assurance. Do you think India and China are using paper ballots (not that it would matter in China ) Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted October 14, 2008 Report Posted October 14, 2008 So what prevents a paper ballot from being forged? Scrutineers. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
TCCK Posted October 15, 2008 Report Posted October 15, 2008 As it sits we have a system that is quick and reliable. The threat of ballot box stuffing is lessened by keeping count of people at the polling station. The fact that ID is now required tightens it up even more. We don't have allegations of fixed machines or "hanging chads," why should we change our system? Oh my god, where do you think e live people SOMALIA???? There has not been any case of voter cheating, fraud, of any significance (except the Liberals in BC in the last federal election may I remind you!! Dead people voting!) Canadians as a whole are not that type of people, HELL only 56% of us take the damn time to get off our butts to bother to vote. So to start some new method of voting so everyone can be checked up on and the government can know ho anyone votes, NEVER!! It is called a democratic secret ballot for a reason. Can you imagine a corrupt government getting ahold of who voted what way. Can you say extra tax audits, miraculously you do not qualify for that government program or in the other view tax windfalls or government contracts/jobs handed out to those that should not even qualify. No a secret hidden vote it should stay. Argue all you want but your arguement sounds too much like Big Brother to me and I NEVER put on a tinfoil beanie!!! (I am allergic to them LOL) Quote
kengs333 Posted October 15, 2008 Report Posted October 15, 2008 So what prevents a paper ballot from being forged? Have you ever voted? Quote
Wild Bill Posted October 16, 2008 Report Posted October 16, 2008 No one seems to have considered how electronic voting from home could lose the freedom that comes from anonymity! Consider, some control freak male from a culture or temperment that debases women forces all the women in his house to vote through his computer for his choice. How do you prevent this? How do you even know it happened? Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 16, 2008 Author Report Posted October 16, 2008 Have you ever voted? Huh? Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 16, 2008 Author Report Posted October 16, 2008 Oh my god, where do you think e live people SOMALIA???? There has not been any case of voter cheating, fraud, of any significance (except the Liberals in BC in the last federal election may I remind you!! Dead people voting!) Canadians as a whole are not that type of people, HELL only 56% of us take the damn time to get off our butts to bother to vote. So to start some new method of voting so everyone can be checked up on and the government can know ho anyone votes, NEVER!! It is called a democratic secret ballot for a reason. Can you imagine a corrupt government getting ahold of who voted what way. Can you say extra tax audits, miraculously you do not qualify for that government program or in the other view tax windfalls or government contracts/jobs handed out to those that should not even qualify. No a secret hidden vote it should stay. Argue all you want but your arguement sounds too much like Big Brother to me and I NEVER put on a tinfoil beanie!!! (I am allergic to them LOL) I never said it was a problem in Canada, but in US - we've lived 8 years of wars and aggression because of the fraudulent vote count. Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 16, 2008 Author Report Posted October 16, 2008 No one seems to have considered how electronic voting from home could lose the freedom that comes from anonymity!Consider, some control freak male from a culture or temperment that debases women forces all the women in his house to vote through his computer for his choice. How do you prevent this? How do you even know it happened? You have a point. But honestly, if these females cannot stand for their own choice in their own house they should seek help. Quote You are what you do.
Wild Bill Posted October 16, 2008 Report Posted October 16, 2008 You have a point.But honestly, if these females cannot stand for their own choice in their own house they should seek help. Oh geez, now you've done it! If any female posters see what you wrote then we are going to get flamed, flamed and flamed! You sure know how to poke sticks at 'em! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
M.Dancer Posted October 17, 2008 Report Posted October 17, 2008 I never said it was a problem in Canada, but in US - we've lived 8 years of wars and aggression because of the fraudulent vote count. That is an opinion without merit. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted October 17, 2008 Author Report Posted October 17, 2008 That is an opinion without merit. So you're saying Bush winning while Gore had more votes is OK? Quote You are what you do.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.