i dont think that whatever type of government you have, not everyone will be satisfied with it, we will always want more out of it. THe repulbican party own supporters are die hard republicans but they hate Bush and like wise with the Dems
Printable View
i dont think that whatever type of government you have, not everyone will be satisfied with it, we will always want more out of it. THe repulbican party own supporters are die hard republicans but they hate Bush and like wise with the Dems
1 - I don't know enough about the system, actually systems...there are many in use, to comment usefully, but I would love to learn more. If you could provide any references or links (even better) to even moderately technical descriptions, I would be interested. But, in any case, I don't quite understand what you are saying above. What, exactly, could be changed by one person in 20 sec with a one line query? The results for one machine, one polling place, one precinct, one whole state? And to which of the many automated voting systems in use (even in most single states) does this refer? The diversity mechanisms alone would seem to make it a more complicated task than you describe. And are there no back-up copies, and records of input data etc for this "Access database"...just to protect against a disk failure even if not vote tampering/fraud? As you describe it, and note in the parts of your post I did not quote, it sounds far less secure than the inventory system of a typical small to medium sized company!Quote:
Originally Posted by Pryce
2 - I don't know much about it, nothing about the details, but I do know that there has been an unusually large amount of change in voting systems since the 2000 elections. A number of companies have made quite a lot of money producing and selling various "new and improved" systems to state governments all over the country in the wake of the Florida election debacle in 2000. Many states, including the one in which I live, replaced systems that they had been using for decades, so I'll bet that a lot has changed "over the past 3/4 years"...whether for the better or worse is another question, of course.
-Ww
I believe that has been tried.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleo C.
-Ww
true but since we are so divided into bascialy two camps in this country why not just make it offfical and let people be free to choice the type of government they think is best for them.
Yes a very longtime ago. Things are different now in so many ways that I think we could make it work this time, and pretty peacefuly too :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Wwanderer
Maybe I'm just an idealist?
I do think it's damn funny that somebody who isnt 100% sure that everything went legit in the election gets accused of not dealing with reality. I think its far more unrealistic to think there isnt any chance of some screwing with elections in this country.
If you are, that's not a bad thing imo. I was just being flip/silly, but if we wanted to discuss that approach seriously, we should perhaps start by asking the question that ended up causing it not to go well the last time. Namely, would each new separate country really be willing to see the other conduct its internal affairs in a way that seemed so wrong? Was it OK to have slavery in the South just because it was not allowed in the North? Would it be OK to, say, forbid gays to marry or not allow women to get abortions in the new USA-Right just because there were no such restrictions in the new USA-Left?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleo C.
I am not sure if you mean me, but if so, let me clarify that I am sure that everything was not legit in the last election. In fact, I doubt that there has ever been a major national election in which there was not some voter fraud and tampering by both parties. It is pretty generally accepted that the 1960 presidential election was decided by vote tampering in Illinois, for example. However, that is a long way from imagining that some single, large scale national conspiracy is the only reason that the Republicans are in power in the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal govt and that they improved their position in most state governments in the last election.Quote:
I do think it's damn funny that somebody who isnt 100% sure that everything went legit in the election gets accused of not dealing with reality. I think its far more unrealistic to think there isnt any chance of some screwing with elections in this country.
-Ww
nah, I didn't mean you Ww. I meant anyone who think just because say I for example am not 100% sure that nothing funny happened in the election that somehow that makes me lost in la la land. It's like saying that if I didn't vote for Bush I am not a real American or a guilty of treason.
Both are silly points of view in my opinion. But they do seem to be two sides of the same coin.