digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Electronic voting machines already changing Democratic votes to Republican

miami.com — Several South Florida voters say the choices they touched on the electronic screens were not the ones that appeared on the review screen -- the final voting step. Gary Rudolf touched the screen for gubernatorial candidate Jim Davis, a Democrat, but the review screen repeatedly registered the Republican, Charlie Crist.

Who dugg this? Made popular Oct 30, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

275 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -11/+136I think we should have a real election this time . . .
  • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -7/+121THIS IS RIDICULOUS!

    We are a country that prides ourselves on democracy but we can't even get an accurate system for doing just that!
  • pgoetz, on 10/12/2007, -14/+107@glych002

    You're an idiot. Also note that there is no such thing as "there loss"; what you mean is "their loss". (This isn't why you're an idiot, but it certainly contributes to the evidence.)


  • kehvin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+93it's not about excuses, it's about making sure YOUR VOTE counts.
  • Shabadoo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+85As far as excuses go, I'd think that VOTER FRAUD is a pretty damn good one.
  • Tebixan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+73@glych002
    So if you tried to vote for a republican and knew your vote was actually counted towards the democrat, would you just let it go? Don't wanna look like you're "complaining"
  • mrhaines, on 10/12/2007, -3/+73In Canada we carry our our entire election with nothing but paper ballots and a pen. Scrutineers from each party oversee the ballot counting process to ensure no mis-counting and Elections Canada referees judge spoiled ballots as they are counted. As a result we can get our elections results in a mere 2 hours or so after the elections close with little room for cheating. IMO machines and computers should NEVER be used during the democratic process. It is too difficult to validate their accuracy.
  • poxonyou, on 10/12/2007, -7/+69I'm a Florida voter. This is awful and needs to be taken seriously NOW. Once elections are over, they'll have declared a winner and do everything to move forward, ignoring the problems until next election. There are going to be a lot of voters who may not be paying close attention. I suggest recording your vote experience (not others of course) -> http://videothevote.org/

    I notice a pattern in the article (coincidence? weird):
    He touched the screen for gubernatorial candidate Jim Davis, a Democrat, but the review screen repeatedly registered the //Republican//, Charlie Crist.

    Joan Marek, 60, a Democrat from Hollywood, was also stunned to see Charlie Crist //[Republican]// on her ballot review page after voting on Thursday.

    Mauricio Raponi wanted to vote for Democrats across the board at the Lemon City Library in Miami on Thursday. But each time he hit the button next to the candidate, the //Republican// choice showed up.

    What's worse is the frequency of the problem (it sounds like it happens repeatedly to some machines even after they follow the official repair instructions) and nonchalant attitude about it, which you can read in the article.
  • rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -3/+61bgbs, if you're going to troll, at least try to be coherent. Or, for clarity, just drop the first two letters of your screen-name.

    Thanks.
  • PathDaemon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+57It's almost more ridiculous that we pride ourselves on being a technologically advanced country but we can't get essential technology to work.

    Programming of the country's voting system should be done by a group similar to that which programs the shuttle.
  • ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+53I work with touchscreens every day. I'm a software developer for handheld computers, slates, tablets, and pocket pc's. Both industrial and commercial units that are used in construction and ship building sites.

    They don't just "fall out of allignment" every few minutes, not even after being cold booted. We've got terminals we installed 4 years ago that have never had to be re-alligned once, and they have hundreds of people with greasy hands, gloves and using screwdrivers to make thier selections with.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49I've seen this before, in a flash animation....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUdpj3gJofQ
  • EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -12/+53"Anyone who has ever dealt with touch-screens knows this is a common problem."

    Excuse me? These buttons are huge, like 10% to 20% of the screen size. You're saying it's common for touch screen sensors to be off by 10% or 20%, enough to make one huge screen region register as another? I don't think so.

    Also, if these screens are so bad, each voter should then go through a quick calibration process: click one of four blank squares and make sure the one you clicked lights up. If not, call an election worker over.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+44This is why I think we should pass legislation requiring all electronic voting machines to issue a receipt. It's obvious they're just being used to rig the elections.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -18/+56"Several South Florida voters say the choices they touched on the electronic screens were not the ones that appeared on the review screen."
    "Election officials say they aren't aware of any serious voting issues."
    What would they define as a serious problem, I wonder?
    I have a premonition that the election is a disaster in the making, much like evrything else Bush has touched.
    We will all be longing for the days of hanging chads...
  • DrinkingNyquil, on 10/12/2007, -12/+49Yeah those elderly retards can't even program their VCR, why not disenfranchise them, right killinger?
  • oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/12/2007, -24/+56since you're calling US liberals (democrat) that leads me to believe YOU'RE a conservative (republican). why does it have to come down to partylines? is it too much to ask that these machines just work correctly before the election begins?

    being how all the errors (that i'm familiar with) have been reported as favoring republican, i can see how this might be less of a concern for you.
  • devoinregress, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31We don't pass the USAID standards for elections. It's pretty bad that we don't live up to the standards that we set when we help with elections in other countries.
  • fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -12/+43When you are as serious a *****-up as Bush you should come to expect everything to be blamed on you. After all, if someone blames Bush they are much more likely to be right than wrong.
  • DrinkingNyquil, on 10/12/2007, -6/+35"Head of Diebold, Walden O'Dell, told Republicans in a fund-raising letter that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

    O'Dell attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush benefactors - known as Rangers and Pioneers - at the president's Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month. The next week, he penned invitations to a $1,000-a-plate fund-raiser to benefit the Ohio Republican Party's federal campaign fund - partially benefiting Bush - at his mansion in the Columbus suburb of Upper Arlington.

    Maybe that is why?
  • EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -9/+37An error in the machines that consistently biases one way is not an error we can live with, regardless of the cause. There is no "just an error" when it comes to elections.
  • Ascus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27This election is going to be real ugly. Since there is no backup paper count, everybody that looses an election is going to challange the result. This is the just to start.

    I bet it will a record year for areas with clear party majority, it will be even more of an majority after the election.
  • pixelate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+25Programming of the country's voting system should be done by another country.

    I'm serious. I, uh, vote for Switzerland.
  • bitswapper, on 10/12/2007, -11/+36If there is no conspiracy, why do they consistently substitute a republican for a democrat?
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24ONE QUESTION to the folks working the ballot machines on voting night:

    "CAN I GET A RECIEPT WITH THAT!?"



  • DrinkingNyquil, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30Hey man, I hear you. If they lose their eyesight and their driver's license and have to wear diapers, they sure as hell shouldn't be able to vote if they can't figure out a non-linear ballot.

    Compassionate Conservatism at its finest.
  • fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32"Dude, if they don't understand ARROWS, they are pretty much a lost cause."

    Duche if you don't understand voter fraud you are a lost cause.
  • john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24indeed, if this happens frequently enough, it can and WILL tip the election in Crist's favor.. It's true some careful people will check the review screen and catch it, but what percentage of the voters are careful enough? What percentage of voters will overlook this "glitch"? One disenfranchised vote is one too many.
    You would think that software that helped decide the nation's fate would be thoroughly tested for bugs (if it's unintentional).

    The most likely reason for this is that diebold machines are programmed to default to the republican candidate whenever an error is encountered.
  • Bullsnot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23I had worked in the banking industry for a few years. I can tell you from experience in the ATM support team, the touchscreens on those lasted for years without ever needing realignment and that was technology 10 years ago.
  • TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+27Because maybe the touchscreens for these machines are faulty and align improperly into what just so happens to be the Republican canidates.

    Regradless, this needs to be fixed, we don't need claims of another stolen election, people don't believe (trust) our of system of government enough as it is anymore.
  • DrinkingNyquil, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25Yeah, and companies that offer rebates hope every single person takes the time to fill out the form, clip the UPC and mail it in.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22I don't think most Americans are "proud" of living in a democratic society, simply because they don't really know what it means. I think the majority of people in this country just think that's a "good thing" because that's what they've been taught, just like the majority of people here who think that patriotism means flying a flag on their car.

    Politicians use democracy as a campaigning platform to get more votes by trying to make the opposing parties seem as though they don't like freedom.

    By the way, it's been stated before, but the US isn't a democracy. It's a republic.
  • Matrix_Prime, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21one of two things is going on:

    1.) This is a conspiracy theory to fix the election, but people never acknowledge those.

    2.) The programmers they get to do the software for these machines are complete hacks. I mean I have a Computer Science degree, and designing this software would be a cake walk.
  • toasty168, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Just wondering... has anyone seen reports of someone trying to vote Republican but instead getting a Democrat?
  • Bullsnot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19You mean you can't make a simple program that gives a few choices and cant be broken. This "old fart" must be some elite uber hacker if he figured out how to keep shutting those machines down so that an election official had to move him to another.

    In many places, using this machine is the only choice, no manual ballots. So your saying that if someone isn't technical enough to use this crappy buggy system then they don't deserve to vote?

    what makes more sense to you? If your going to screw with systems, would you want the same screw up to happen to everyone, so it would be glaringly obvious, or just select individuals. Preferably those registered on the side you don't want to win, and the oldest voters less likely to be believed in technical issues
  • john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20"I don't give a damn who's in office as long as there's a balance between agendas and the trains run on time. Oh and my rights aren't being trampled. I care about that too."

    Well, I'm afraid you've just contradicted yourself.
  • cprincipe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17You'll see Clippy pop up on your screen.

    "It appears you're trying to vote Democrat. What do you really want to do?"
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17"Wouldn't it be easier (and smarter) to have it lie on the review screen and change the vote after?"

    Yes, of course. What's being lost in the shuffle is that there is one thing that 91% of the electorate agrees on: Elections should be fair and honest. Right wing, left wing, independent, Republican, Democrat or Libertarian. We all want fair elections and we want everyone's vote to count.

    I don't mind losing a fair fight. The problem is no one can prove the election was fair no matter who wins.

    Rigged elections are a loose cannon. What happens if the people doing the rigging decide they don't like you? Or the other party eventually gains power and the kicking boot is on the other foot.

    I'd use a double count system. The electronic machines create a paper print out. The voter then takes the clearly legible paper print outs and feeds them into another machine and the electronic and paper counts can be compared. No single company could make both the electronic and paper reading machines. If they're wildly out of whack on their counts then something is wrong.

    Without the second count the electronic machine could still be rigged to print out a paper receipt that said one thing and count the votes a different way.
  • thekarmastrike, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18unfortunately, that is just not the case. this is not a liberal or conservative issue (especially given the fact that republicans are overwhelmingly liberal in their policies, ha!), anyway.

    this is our VOTE people! OUR VOTE. this should be as transparent and clean cut as possible.

    these machines are built for fraud; if you dont know that, you simply dont know the facts. i hate to sound like a jack ass, but its just the way it is.
  • EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Mrwiggl3, you'll have to find and share where it says democrats are getting false votes. I read the article too.
  • PathDaemon, on 10/12/2007, -14/+30Serious would be if the correct vote appeared on the review and the incorrect was cast, or if no votes were recorded after election day.

    Also, it's Diebold's fault, not Bush's. Voting machines SHOULD be government-designed, though.
  • Shopko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16This is NOT an issue with touchscreens. I work in the gaming industry (video slots) and all of our video machines are touch screens. We have machines in the field that are 10 years old and do not have any problem with touchscreen "alignment".

    Either Diebold is using unbelieveably crap hardware or there is something else going on.
  • edverb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I'll put it this way...there are VERY accurate touchscreen systems in production in damn near every restaurant in the country, that handle tens of thousands of transactions daily for YEARS without a glitch, in much more rugged environs than a voting booth.

    And if restaurant point-of-sale systems were anywhere near this unreliable, there would still be regular old cash registers at your local Appleby's. Nobody would put up with this level of unreliability if money was on the line, not even for a single day. They would instantly become the vendor's worst nightmare. I can't help but wonder if the election officials screams of bloody murder would approach that of say, your local bar & grill manager who's bonus check was on the line.

    Now imagine this level of unreliability in a system that doesn't print receipts. Ouch.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15If there is ANY question about the accuracy of these machines, they should be smashed to bits. Once election results are in doubt, all is lost.
  • Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -12/+27What if they are in a hurry? What if they trust the system?

    Do you count your change every time you pay cash. Does everybody? How do people know they weren't shortchanged. People tend to trust the system(s).

    Or does being in a hurry make them stupid too?
  • zip000, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16We may pride ourselves in democracy (and technology) but that doesn't mean that we actually do it well - we just believe that we do it well.
  • starvo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16You make a great point.
    I've never had a Diebold atm ever ***** up on me. (Oh no, one was out of service once.. The horrors!). But I put in my card, ask for $40, and I get $40 every time. Never a bit more, never a bit less. I'd like to think that recording a vote is a similar transaction to withdrawing cash.. So why can't Diebold get it right? And why when it errs, why does it do it toward Republican? Why not Libertarian or Green? Too many weird things are happening to make you not think something is rotten somewhere.

  • howdareyou, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Up here in Canada to vote all you do is simply fill in a little circle beside your candidate and then this machine reads the card. No hanging chads, no tampering. Easy.
  • edverb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I want to see public information on this bug. How inconvenient that there's no database of trouble tickets.

    Things to examine:

    1) the bug reports
    2) system documentation (whitepapers, changelogs, patch dates and information etc)
    3) the system information on each faulty machine (a dump of what was memory resident, a hardware & software inventory, BIOS/firmware levels etc)

    The fact that there's a 15 step process for dealing with such issues indicates that this issue was known during testing, and they shipped the systems into production in a mission critical environment anyway.

    4) the 15 step manual

    It strikes me funny that this issue occurs on some systems and not others. Is this bug replicable in a test environment? If so, what factors must occur for a machine to go from "good" to "bad"? Why is there not uniformity in the production environment? In testing, are the systems different or uniform -- how many different type-model-features are out there?

    These are basic quality issues. Quality is not an easy thing to measure, but uniformity is one thing that objectively increases quality. If the systems are not uniform (or if that requirement is in place but is not enforced) it needs to be addressed ASAP.

    And all of this needs to be public, or at the very least independently verified by a third party ASAP. Meaning BEFORE, not after the election.

    This is not uncharted territory. Systems people deal with this stuff every day (though I can't think of any situations where systems that had known issues were released to production with 15 step workarounds for non techincal users, which may or may not work).

    As to the question of whether we're dealing with systems people who want to get it right (and who have something to lose, as any enterprise would), or political hacks? You can tell by how they respond to this critical situation. Don't let anyone tell you differently.
  • rprouse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@pixelate

    Better yet, the software and the hardware for voting machines should be open source so that anyone who wishes can inspect it for flaws and raise concerns. There should also be a backup system where the machine prints out a paper ballot so that the voter knows their vote was registered correctly. That ballot could then be deposited in a ballot box in case the machine count is called into question. Because it was printed, their would be no problems with hanging chads or other such nonsense.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 275 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.