I did early voting for the first time ever on Wednesday. Stood in line for almost 3 hours.
This morning I went with my wife to repeat the process.
In Oklahoma, we get a paper ballot with little boxes out beside each candidate / question. You fill the chosen box in with ink, then after your entire ballot is complete, feed it into an electro…
I did early voting for the first time ever on Wednesday. Stood in line for almost 3 hours.
This morning I went with my wife to repeat the process.
In Oklahoma, we get a paper ballot with little boxes out beside each candidate / question. You fill the chosen box in with ink, then after your entire ballot is complete, feed it into an electronic machine that records the votes and stores the ballot.
If any marks are made outside the boxes, or you try to write in a candidate, or try to vote for more than one candidate per election, the ballot is automatically voided and spat back to you.
No receipt is given to you so you just have to trust that it was tabulated correctly.
So the part of your process where you vote on paper is legit, your problem is letting the machines count it. LIkely, you also have no opportunity to do a manual hand count to verify the machines? See, I would be okay with the machines doing a count as long as a 100% hand count was also accomplished. But here in AZ the courts (yes the courts not the legislature) has ruled that only 2% of 5 races can be hand counted!! It's unbelievable and it happened right here in Cochise when a judge was sent here from Pima, a corrupt son of a bitch by the name of Mcginley who totally misinterpreted what it says in the legislation, which is that a minimum of 2% must be checked. Which means you could check all the way up to 100%. But he "interpreted" it differently and was not challenged by the county supervisors. They just fell in line.
Yep. We should have a counting verification process for the machines. Maybe not even for each machine but a random selection.
A poll official counts while someone from each party observes. Everyone has to certify under penalty of perjury that the counts matched the machines exactly.
If a machine has a mismatch in the counts, those ballots would be counted again and the totals taken from the hand count.
And at that point, all machines at that polling location would have to be hand counted.
I mostly agree Fred. But I believe the only way you can have full certainty is to hand count 100% of the ballots and every race on every ballot. Beside the fact that the outcomes are so damned important as they determine how our lives (freedom, liberty, pursuit of happiness, self determination) will be in our counties, state, and country, it would allow us to understand with complete certainty whether the machines are properly counting the vote. That they will not let us hand count to verify the machine count tells you everything.
Was just about to add: from time to time - happened with a race for Tulsa mayor just a couple months ago - a candidate will ask for a hand recount.
In which case the recount always is within one or maybe two votes, and usually the exact same. I remember thinking in this case that it was a waste of time & money. And it was.
I get the reason and recent history with a corrupt process in AZ though.
The problem is with programmable machines, and these machines are connected to the network, or which can bridge the air gap with thumb drives, can give you any outcome you want. So maybe for the Mayor of Tulsa, they ran the system with no algorithms, ran it straight and clean, in order to create a sense within the electorate the machines can be trusted for other more important elections like this one coming up. As long as they are programmable as all these are, you must never assume that because one election was clean, therefore all elections are. You just can't do that, that's why the machines must go, mail in ballots must go and everything returned to a certifiable and verifiable process.
The Tulsa mayoral race was just the most recent example. But I completely agree. If we’re gonna use electronic tabulator machines, there must be strict manual auditing built in to the process.
Anything else leaves the question in the voters’ minds, and destroys the trust that a one-man-one-vote system requires.
As I said elsewhere yesterday, we absolutely need a constitutional amendment coupled with federal legislation that spells out the minimum actions necessary for a state to effect these goals.
But what did the "feds" give us instead? The HAVA act and the Federal Post Card Voter Registration Application which does not require documentary proof of citizenship, you simply check the box to state you are a citizen.
And they gave us the J6 fauxsurrection and conducted a coup d'etat, not only against Trump but the American people.
The entire fed government must be dismantled, including not on the executive branch and deep state, but the Legislative branch which no longer represents the people and the Judiciary, which includes weaponized lawfare at every level.
I did early voting for the first time ever on Wednesday. Stood in line for almost 3 hours.
This morning I went with my wife to repeat the process.
In Oklahoma, we get a paper ballot with little boxes out beside each candidate / question. You fill the chosen box in with ink, then after your entire ballot is complete, feed it into an electronic machine that records the votes and stores the ballot.
If any marks are made outside the boxes, or you try to write in a candidate, or try to vote for more than one candidate per election, the ballot is automatically voided and spat back to you.
No receipt is given to you so you just have to trust that it was tabulated correctly.
Same for Hellinois.
So the part of your process where you vote on paper is legit, your problem is letting the machines count it. LIkely, you also have no opportunity to do a manual hand count to verify the machines? See, I would be okay with the machines doing a count as long as a 100% hand count was also accomplished. But here in AZ the courts (yes the courts not the legislature) has ruled that only 2% of 5 races can be hand counted!! It's unbelievable and it happened right here in Cochise when a judge was sent here from Pima, a corrupt son of a bitch by the name of Mcginley who totally misinterpreted what it says in the legislation, which is that a minimum of 2% must be checked. Which means you could check all the way up to 100%. But he "interpreted" it differently and was not challenged by the county supervisors. They just fell in line.
Yep. We should have a counting verification process for the machines. Maybe not even for each machine but a random selection.
A poll official counts while someone from each party observes. Everyone has to certify under penalty of perjury that the counts matched the machines exactly.
If a machine has a mismatch in the counts, those ballots would be counted again and the totals taken from the hand count.
And at that point, all machines at that polling location would have to be hand counted.
I mostly agree Fred. But I believe the only way you can have full certainty is to hand count 100% of the ballots and every race on every ballot. Beside the fact that the outcomes are so damned important as they determine how our lives (freedom, liberty, pursuit of happiness, self determination) will be in our counties, state, and country, it would allow us to understand with complete certainty whether the machines are properly counting the vote. That they will not let us hand count to verify the machine count tells you everything.
Was just about to add: from time to time - happened with a race for Tulsa mayor just a couple months ago - a candidate will ask for a hand recount.
In which case the recount always is within one or maybe two votes, and usually the exact same. I remember thinking in this case that it was a waste of time & money. And it was.
I get the reason and recent history with a corrupt process in AZ though.
The problem is with programmable machines, and these machines are connected to the network, or which can bridge the air gap with thumb drives, can give you any outcome you want. So maybe for the Mayor of Tulsa, they ran the system with no algorithms, ran it straight and clean, in order to create a sense within the electorate the machines can be trusted for other more important elections like this one coming up. As long as they are programmable as all these are, you must never assume that because one election was clean, therefore all elections are. You just can't do that, that's why the machines must go, mail in ballots must go and everything returned to a certifiable and verifiable process.
The Tulsa mayoral race was just the most recent example. But I completely agree. If we’re gonna use electronic tabulator machines, there must be strict manual auditing built in to the process.
Anything else leaves the question in the voters’ minds, and destroys the trust that a one-man-one-vote system requires.
As I said elsewhere yesterday, we absolutely need a constitutional amendment coupled with federal legislation that spells out the minimum actions necessary for a state to effect these goals.
Agreed.
But what did the "feds" give us instead? The HAVA act and the Federal Post Card Voter Registration Application which does not require documentary proof of citizenship, you simply check the box to state you are a citizen.
And they gave us the J6 fauxsurrection and conducted a coup d'etat, not only against Trump but the American people.
The entire fed government must be dismantled, including not on the executive branch and deep state, but the Legislative branch which no longer represents the people and the Judiciary, which includes weaponized lawfare at every level.