What is Digg?100 Comments
- dukeeeey, on 10/11/2007, -9/+26scrapping electronic voting machines would help
they have been used for massive vote fraud - 28dayslater, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17I guess the only thing worse than someone complaining about Bush's daily ass *****, is someone who enjoys his daily ass *****.
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Oregon has gone to 100% mail-in (or drop off) ballots. There is a deadline to have it postmarked, but generally you get about 30 days to fill it out and mail it in. All of the ballots can be kept and run through the counting machines as many times as necessary. Papers, pencils, and counting machines are all pretty cheap and cheap to maintain. You don't have any shenanigans at the polls. Messing with the mail is already a federal offense. You can also call the election board to see if your ballot arrived. Washington state is following suit with most of the counties there now mail-in ballots. I think it is the best system for reducing fraud. It would probably also increase voter "turn out." Sure, you could sell your ballot, but my guess is that selling ballots would have a very minimal impact and really it's the same thing as homeless guys being paid to go to the polls now. Another bonus would be to take money away from the people that make all those junk electronic voting machines.
- Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14Who needs electoral fraud when you can gerrymander the districts to suit your party, then use your court appointees to rubber-stamp them?
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13Here we go again. "Clinton did it." Guess what you lying son of a lying liar, the attorneys Clinton fired were Bush Sr. appointees, and you know it.
- anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9That would create a bigger problem than it solves. The reason our ballots are anonymous and we don't get a copy of them is because systems that identify voters to ballots suffer from rampant voter-intimidation problems. If somebody can say "Prove to me that you voted for Jones or I'll fire you/divorce you/kill your family/whatever," it's a problem. Basically you don't want the voters to feel accountable for their votes; you want them to be free to vote however they feel is best.
This stuff hasn't just been invented in the last ten years. We've been doing democracy in various ways and by various means for millennia. We don't have it perfected yet, but we've learned from a number of serious mistakes made in the past. Signed ballots is one of them. - SecondGuesser, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10It is my Constitutional right to vote anonymously. Personally, I won't vote if my ballot is not anonymous.
- Buelldozer, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I think you're a fool for liking the idea, and so is anyone else who does.
IF something like that is ever implemented it will lead to MASSIVE fraud. Pure vote buying, cash for a vote, will be rampant and unstoppable.
The next step beyond that is when you vote for the "wrong" candidate you and your family disappear one night.
ANYONE who wants to make voting anything other than as anonymous as possible is either a total idiot or seeking to become your "President for Life". No exceptions. - geekee, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9"People need to be tied to their vote, so they can check and make sure that it is recorded correctly."
That's a huge problem, especially in socialist countries where everyone works for the govt. If you don't vote for Chavez, it'll have consequences if you work for the govt. in Venezuela, for instance. - greenlight2001, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Why even bother to ***** sign in just to write "lol"?!
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Gonzales (under orders from Rove) fired 9 US attorneys because they weren't prosecuting "election fraud." Now it turns out the "election fraud" is a myth, and people wonder why Gonzo refuses to answer any questions about the firings?
- look4alec, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9agree, the swinging chads thing was messed up, but not *as* messed up
- ssjdoob, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7It SUCKS! I was just thinking about that last night. I was like, "Why in the world do we have to tolerate his evilness for one minute longer. Just end this crap already." So much for checks and balances.
@rosstizma - yeah that makes sense....sure - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7RTFA
- Rfriaz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4We're going to need a bigger boat.
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5RobN,
You *are* confused. The point of the article is that the problem is much deeper than *just* election fraud. It is saying that election fraud is not the most crucial issue because if you control the courts you can decide who gets prosecuted for election fraud and who does not. The article also states that we need stronger laws protecting the right to vote. The article isn't saying that election fraud is a non-issue. It is saying that until we fix the courts and the laws to be on the side of the voters it doesn't matter what happens in the actual vote. Election fraud is a red herring which hides bigger issues.
Is that more clear? - rhythmchanges, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Actually that'd be "Karl Rose."
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5And all of this would matter in presidential elections if only the public were given the ability to actually VOTE for President.
I've said this time and time again, and I'm not calling anybody stupid - but come on guys, no amendment gives you the right to vote for the President of the United States. The 13th and 14th Amendment grant everyone rights to vote for LOCAL and STATE officials only - the President is elected through the electoral college. The reason why is because they wanted to prevent majority rule from over-taking 2/3rds of the government, with the 3rd being appointed by those elected officials.
What's happened in the past 60 years, since Roosevelt was in office, is that President of the United States has slowly accumulated more power than he was ever intended to have. The Bush Administration, while I disagree with many of their choices, is certainly not the worst to have come along - Reagan and LBJ, Nixon - all three of which things are still coming out about what they did. The voting isn't what needs to change - the government does. You don't fix a larger problem by making small adjustements here and there.
You overhaul the whole damn thing. - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5i'd say they are way smarter than Nixon's goon squad because they *haven't* gotten caught. Some of these ***** even **worked* for Nixon, they may have learned something since then..
- s000t, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6What Herkimer meant to say without all the Democratic/Republican flame bait:
"Republicans are not the only ones who have "manipulated the polls" as the article description implies. Vote fraud _may_ have delivered Illinois and the Presidency to John Kennedy in 1960. And since 1792 there have been a number of cases of vote fraud that involved the Democrats (including the reports that came out of St. Louis, Missouri in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections). "
Both sides are guilty of vote fraud and it is quite apparent that some changes need to be made in the process of voting/tabulation of votes. - bsmang, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@rosstizma
Smoking pot cannot be compared to being Bush. Pot is pretty harmless. Being Bush on the other hand...
I think many of the people screaming "prove a crime!" fail to give even a thought to the entire issue of right or wrong (or good or bad if you prefer). It's a case of bad politics such that if something doesn't imply up front that their team is the best, then it just wrong, period. No exceptions. Even if we get an impeachment and the senate confirms and dresses them in stripes, some will still think they were really gods and that it was all a twisted liberal conspiracy. But it sure would be well worth letting them think that if we can pull it off. - BrutusCato, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Talk about banal nonsense, the fact is as long as people only have a choice to vote between party A and B, any other reform is nothing but a power grab for one party to get an advantage over the other. Give Americans a real choice.
- mwayne, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P.J. O'Rourke (1947 - ) U.S. Political Humorist ...
- macman01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Correction of fact here. The allegation was that "voter fraud" was not being prosecuted. That is an individual who may have wrongly found a way to vote. "Election fraud" is faking results. These are entirely different things. Words matter, especially when trying to differentiate between a woman who may have moved across the street but did not re-register to vote, and systematically denying citizens the opportunity to vote, of falsifying results. One is a small and almost insignificant event in terms of the foundations of elections, the other undermines the country.
When accusing one party or the other over which they find important I hope that the correct correlation will be made.
If this is complex, this is the answer:
Democrats: Election fraud is a bad thing.
GOP: There is a need to obsess over something that occurs more rarely than people getting hit by lightening. - Pfhreak, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"It makes no difference why they were fired. They all serve at the pleasure of POTUS. End of story. Gonzales has no obligation to answer anything more than that."
It makes all the difference why there were fired, as the DoJ says they were fired for performance reasons, but that's been proven to be false. Gonzales has every obligation to answer more than "they serve at the pleasure of the president": Congress is obligated to ensure that the laws it passed are being properly enforced, and this includes Congressional hearings into the conduct of the DoJ. This has been established by Supreme Court rulings since at least 1927.
"Just remember every US Attorney was fired by Slick Willy and Janet 'I am not a man' Reno"
Your argument is a red herring. Clinton replaced all of the US Attoneys early in his administration, as did Reagan and Bush-43. This has no bearing on these eight (possibly nine) which were singled-out, all of whom were appointed by Bush-43 to replace Clinton appointees. - Haapi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3More like those that are *likely* to vote Democratic are likely to be targets of those hoaxes. Probably the same percentage of people fall for anything, but *insert Republican-voter stereotype here* voters were not intended targets of letters warning of arrest, bogus movement of voting places, etc. etc.
- macman01, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4The headline actually accuses Rove of a serious felony. The Republican effort has been to accuse wide-spread "voter-fraud," that is people who are so committed to vote that they will fake an identity to vote. There have not been many cases of this; perhaps 10 per year in the country? I doubt that many.
What Rove has been up to is "election-Fraud," a serious felony intended to alter the outcome of elections. There is a big difference. Before the piddle-parade begins, yes there have been several republican campaign people who are serving time for election fraud since Rove entered the once White House.
Hopefully, the next President will allow prosecutors to follow the evidence and put some of these criminals in prison for a long time. If the new President decides that some activities were meant to undermine the core of American values, then these people should should be sent to Gitmo where they can enjoy the frat house atmosphere. - sickpope, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3voting day needs to be a holiday. it's absolutely ridiculous that it is not. i work in an industry where it is extremely hard to take time off work... and i hate getting up early in the morning, so i'd never make it to the polls before work. if you want to increase voter turnout, give the people time to vote. make it a mandatory half day at the very least. but something needs to be done. besides, of course, stuffing karl rove into a wood chipper.
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Care to back up any of your absurd and ridiculous statements?
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Agreed.
- brbubba, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Here we go again. "Clinton did it." Guess what you lying son of a lying liar, the attorneys Clinton fired were Bush Sr. appointees, and you know it."
Thats normal, everyone fires the old regime when they come in. Whats not normal is firing appointees who are part of your own party!!! They basically told these attorneys to do what they wanted when they wanted and if the attorneys didn't jump they fired them on trumped up grounds.
Watch this interview with one of the fired attornees. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB0LhHHs2KA. - Quidam, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Anyone remember that back in 2004, a month before elections, when they raised the terror alert level.
This kind of stuff has been going on for so many years. Not surprised. Can't wait 'til the new "terror threat" stories start popping up again in 2008!...not - mwayne, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
Those who count the votes decide everything."
— Attributed to Communist tyrant and mass murderer Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili - diggtomanjeri, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Because an ID required *specifically* for voting is called a poll tax, they're forcing you to pay money in order to cast your vote, that's illegal in this country.
- cambob76, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Two words: "Pencil" and "Paper". Instant paper trail and no hacking possible. Works for us Canucks.
- BillDoor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Just use a pencil and paper like everybody else.
- Azlen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I don't know if I like the implication in the article that those that vote Democratic are more likely to be fooled.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I wish the voting system was better ... so more republicans would win!
I bet if that happened these left-wing kooks would suddenly get real quiet on this issue. - InfamousX241, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4"Karl Rove" sounds like a name of Kevin Rose's evil twin would have.
- macman01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It will require a Constitutional amendment. I don't want to take a test and until the Constitution is changed, I don't need to take one.
Immigrants need to pass a citizenship test and likely know more about the issues raised by conwaysb0718 than most reading this post. Americans are allowed to be ignorant. - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2The USA has some of the lowest voter participation in the free world. Do you really think lowering it further would be a good idea?
- geekee, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3"Who needs electoral fraud when you can gerrymander the districts to suit your party, then use your court appointees to rubber-stamp them?"
Who needs electoral fraud when you can gerrymander the districts to suit both parties, then use your court appointees to rubber-stamp them? That's how CA works anyway. Incumbents don't lose elections in CA becuase the district are drawn such that either a Republican or a Democrat is a sure win for that district. - ElbridgeGerry, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1For some reason, I parsed "Karl Rove" as "Kevin Rose".
>_> - laserblazer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Voting fraud and the Federal ID plan are both worth opposing. What the hell is your point?
- SecondGuesser, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Good thing citizen volunteers count votes in this country. Bet you didn't think of that.
- mwayne, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"Anyone who wants the US Presidency so much that (s)he'll spend two years campaigning, bribing and making deals to win it is not to be trusted with public office."
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5I love how you use the nonsense word "moonbats" as if simply saying it proves some kind of a point for you. Go back to LGF.
- poornbroken, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1@mwayne
++diggs! brilliant comment! i agree, if there were more, involved, informed voters, maybe current president bush might not have been elected. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1To those who responded to my post, there's an old saying..."he who angers me, conquers me"....consider yourself conquered!
-
Show 51 - 99 of 99 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is