ChasingBlueSky 0 #1 November 5, 2004 This is much better than having dead people vote in Chicago! ____________________________ Machine Error Gives Bush Extra Ohio Votes COLUMBUS, Ohio - An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said. Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Bush actually received 365 votes in the precinct, Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, told The Columbus Dispatch. State and county election officials did not immediately respond to requests by The Associated Press for more details about the voting system and its vendor, and whether the error, if repeated elsewhere in Ohio, could have affected the outcome. Bush won the state by more than 136,000 votes, according to unofficial results, and Kerry conceded the election on Wednesday after acknowledging that 155,000 provisional ballots yet to be counted in Ohio would not change the result. The Secretary of State's Office said Friday it could not revise Bush's total until the county reported the error. The Ohio glitch is among a handful of computer troubles that have emerged since Tuesday's elections. In one North Carolina county, more than 4,500 votes were lost because officials mistakenly believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did. And in San Francisco, a malfunction with custom voting software could delay efforts to declare the winners of four races for county supervisor. In the Ohio precinct in question, the votes are recorded onto a cartridge. On one of the three machines at that precinct, a malfunction occurred in the recording process, Damschroder said. He could not explain how the malfunction occurred. Damschroder said people who had seen poll results on the election board's Web site called to point out the discrepancy. The error would have been discovered when the official count for the election is performed later this month, he said. The reader also recorded zero votes in a county commissioner race on the machine. Workers checked the cartridge against memory banks in the voting machine and each showed that 115 people voted for Bush on that machine. With the other machines, the total for Bush in the precinct added up to 365 votes. Meanwhile, in San Francisco, a glitch occurred with software designed for the city's new "ranked-choice voting," in which voters list their top three choices for municipal offices. If no candidate gets a majority of first-place votes outright, voters' second and third-place preferences are then distributed among candidates who weren't eliminated in the first round. When the San Francisco Department of Elections tried a test run on Wednesday of the program that does the redistribution, some of the votes didn't get counted and skewed the results, director John Arntz said. "All the information is there," Arntz said. "It's just not arriving the way it was supposed to." A technician from the Omaha, Neb. company that designed the software, Election Systems & Software Inc., was working to diagnose and fix the problem._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #2 November 5, 2004 Geez dude, GIVE IT A REST!!!!! I'm sure there were mistakes on all sides. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #3 November 5, 2004 I read somewhere during the 2000 election shenanigans that an estimated 2-4% of all votes cast are tallied incorrectly. I've always wondered how they came up with the estimate. Anybody got any info? Just curious as to what sort of model they were using to come up with the #. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #4 November 5, 2004 Quote I read somewhere during the 2000 election shenanigans that an estimated 2-4% of all votes cast are tallied incorrectly. I'm okay with Bush's victory the other night (economically I side with conservatives, I just don't like GWB). But I wonder why the USA is unable or uncapable of conducting an election where national standards are not adhered to all across the land. Believe it or not, Boulder county here in CO is still counting the votes from Tuesday (they've only got about 70% of the votes counted) and they don't expect to be finished until early next week. So if this county is still counting votes, how many other places have the votes not been properly counted? Why isn't there a national standard for voting and tabulating the results in tune with the 21st Century world we live in. Other countries are able to do this. Why is the most powerful country in the world unable to conduct an election where you know your vote was counted and counted properly? I'm sure mistakes exist for both Bush and Kerry votes, so I'm not crying foul. But I just don't understand why the USA is unable to have national voting standards. PS: I do like that US citizens are able to vote for local by-laws during their election processes. Case in point, the people here in CO were given the opportunity to vote on whether or not they wanted to improve their light-rail transit system (which they approved). North of the border we vote in our members of parlament and then those clowns decide what gets approved and what doesn't. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #5 November 5, 2004 QuoteGeez dude, GIVE IT A REST!!!!! I'm sure there were mistakes on all sides. It has nothing to do with trying to get Bush kciked out. It has everything to do with making sure no election is rigged, no fraud is taking place, and getting the voting system as effeicient and fair as possible. I'm comfortable accepting that Bush lost. I don't think, however, that these electronic voting systems are good enough yet to be used nationally, and I do believe we need to consistently audit them to make sure someone can't modify the tally.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #6 November 5, 2004 Moot point now,though........Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jessefs 0 #7 November 6, 2004 This is not about Bush... This is about about acknowledging that something is not working quite right and figuring out how to make it better. Nothing is perfect, there is always room for improvement. The first step in that is acknowledging that something is wrong in the first place. Wait a second....maybe this is about Bush <* Spread the Love! *> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #8 November 6, 2004 QuoteBut I wonder why the USA is unable or uncapable of conducting an election where national standards are not adhered to all across the land. Because we're a collection of indenendent states? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #9 November 6, 2004 Quote QuoteBut I wonder why the USA is unable or uncapable of conducting an election where national standards are not adhered to all across the land. Because we're a collection of indenendent states? - Jim Bah, cosmetically, maybe. That really hasn't been true when it comes to anything important for a long time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #10 November 6, 2004 QuoteI don't think, however, that these electronic voting systems are good enough yet to be used nationally, and I do believe we need to consistently audit them to make sure someone can't modify the tally. -- We might remember that it was FL who rebelled and bellyached so much after the paper ballot chads et al and called for computers to be the answer to their (our) problem. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #11 November 6, 2004 QuoteMoot point now,though........ Apathy is a wonderful thing._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #12 November 6, 2004 QuoteWe might remember that it was FL who rebelled and bellyached so much after the paper ballot chads et al and called for computers to be the answer to their (our) problem. LOL, good point. The ultra left is going to whine and cry until a Democrat wins. Then, and only then, will they consider the system fixed. I browsed the Democratic Underground site today and they are hilarious and downright delusional. They have convinced themselves that the exit polls by the liberal media, which showed Kerry winning, are more accurate than the actual vote. They are trying to use the exit polls to prove that some type of voter fraud occurred. Those guys need to move out of their parents house and get a job.I feel a little sorry for the more centrist dems. The party is understandably starting to have some self confidence issues. They haven't won over fifty percent of the vote in a presidential election since 1976 and that guy was a miserable failure, and still is. Even Clinton's victories were tainted by the Republicans gains in Congress. I think they call it "having short coattails". "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ScottishJohn 25 #13 November 7, 2004 I really can't understand why there is a need for machines for voting. All the confusion that was caused by the paper punches in the last election and there is always room for error or abuse with electronic or programable machines. I can't understand why putting a X on a ballot paper is not good enough any more. After all it's been used for many years in many countries and it is accountable. John---------------------------------------------------------------------- If you think my attitude stinks you should smell my fingers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #14 November 7, 2004 i liked AZ's ballots.. a simple, slightly modified (bigger type and answer block) scantron type sheet... keeps a permanent record of your vote, is easily electronically counted, and anyone who cant figure out how to "connect the brackets" with a simple line shouldnt be voting in the first place.. i dislike systems that would allow someone with NO SENSE of what they are doing (aka touch screens) to be able to vote... in addition, versions of paper forms could easily be printed in braile for the blind...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarkM 0 #15 November 7, 2004 Quote Bah, cosmetically, maybe. That really hasn't been true when it comes to anything important for a long time. I don't pay income taxes to my state. I'm allowed to own a gun where I live and even carry it around with me. That isn't true everywhere in the US and I wouldn't call those changes cosmetic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
