Was the Vote Hacked?

No one actually votes for the president. We vote for electors of the state, who one day gather with other electors to choose the president, so in a practical sense it is just like the UK.I agree with razd that there is no necessity for computerized ballot systems, especially not as they are currently designed. I guess I'd say, if the UK can do it, why couldn't we?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Paper ballots have accessability issues, for one thing. I favor computer interfaces, with open sources and standards, that generate paper ballots. If we could, wouldn't we?

But your population is only five times greater in size...

You arrogant patronising bastard!!!!"If I understand it correctly."Well you do not.The party leader, in the case of all (major) parties now, is elected by the members of that party, in the case of the labour party approx .6% of the electorate. The party, also with the votes of the party members (although not the whole membership in each ward) select a candidate for each parliamentary district (ward). The general election is then an election for each ward, generally fought by the three main parties. The party that garners the overall majority of wards is the government and it's then leader recommended to the monarch for the job of Prime Minister (a shoe-in).At no point (now) do MPs vote for who is Prime Minister, all votes are counted (even with a manual count of over 27 million ballot papers the majority of results are declared within 4 hours), there are over six-hundred wards to count. The last US election had 122 million ballots cast (a larger turnout yes, but a smaller percentage of the electorate, and a proportionately larger number of people to count them), is it beyond the realms of possibility that this number could be processed manually within 5 hours of the last ballot cast? Then it could reach the east coast news by 9am? For such a major country, your democracy seems to pay lip service to the time schedules of the TV networks.As for comparison with Wisconsin, it has less than 1/10th the population (in fact it has a population less than London - in fact its whole population is equal to the electoral turnout of greater London), its major city is smaller than the fourth biggest city in England (in fact after Milwaukee no place is larger than an electoral ward) , and it is less than 2/3rds the area of the UK.(UK about the size of Utah or Minnesota)As for a system working so well for our little island, it has worked considerably longer than yours, with fewer problems and more accountability.It is a shame because I have generally agreed, or at least sympathised with your posts in the past. I find your current post offensive and more importantly for this forum inaccurate and stupid. (none of the information within this post is outside of a google search).Does the idea (or need) of an accountable vote in a democracy diminish with the increase in size of a country or its's media?

See the forum rules, especially rule 10.

---

No, just typical american understanding ... nothing patronizing about it.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Ah, yes. There's that British mindset - the one that's absolutely certain that your little island is the cultural nexus of the English-speaking world. Oh, it's that simple? Shit, how could I have been so wrong? Granted. As I said, it's a problem of scale. No, of course not. If you think I intended to defend American electoral practices, you let your nationalism get in the way of your reading. The way we do it here is deplorable. But it's the result of trying to apply your election schemes to our ideosyncratic politics and larger population and geography.We're the largest democracy in the world. Of course it works better in smaller democracies. They're smaller.

It was patronizing since the UK is so densely populated and you'd think people would know that. But then again, the UK has had it's problems too.This message has been edited by randman, 01-23-2006 01:01 AM

Actually, India is. But I think they have even larger problems. Maybe it's size or something else.

Some of the info on Common Dreams is misleading and makes me think the vote probably was not. For example: Ask yourself why a county called Dixie county would have so many more democrats. Baker, Dixie and Franklin counties are not places you would expect a northeastern liberal to outperform a sitting president that was Texas governor being vilified for being too conservative. Sorry, but look at those states on a map. Thinking that they wouldn't be overwhelming for Bush is just silly.It ain't the optical screens. This isn't transplant Florida here. This is as Deep South as it gets, and just to prevent the obvious, and no, it was not race or racial. The fact is though these communities are not going to elect a liberal Yankee, ever, or at least not for another 30 years.This message has been edited by randman, 01-23-2006 01:11 AM

Oh I could certainly agree with that. That's what I was hinting at with not as currently designed. They are currently being used to replace the paper evidence, which is a secondary check. It is that part I am opposed to. In another thread I specifically suggested a mechanism to razd which was similar to what you mention above. No. We could get socialized healthcare, we don't. We could use intelligence correctly, we don't. The idea that we are doing all we could do, or the best that we could do, is not supported by the fact that we aren't choosing to do something else.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Or you don't want to confront the reality of your government. What an outstandingly absurd argument. The name of your county determines how you will vote?

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Duh! Oops. Well, I fell for my own nationalism this time.

If they don't, then how do you explain the pattern of registrations? Then why did it happen only in places with optical scanners?

RAZD, these counties consist of Dixiecrats. There is no way a Northeastern liberal like John Kerry was going to get these "democrats" to vote for him. The analysis is thus severely flawed in that respect. Look at a map. These counties are as Deep South as you can get, and Bush is probably considerably to the left of these counties. Plus, some government money in the form of contracts, as a result of Homeland security spending, went to some of these counties for things like fencing around old air-strips, etc,..