Don Poitras wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:
So, now the "operator" (presumably a person) knows how you voted? (how
else to verify?). Or do you mean that the operator verified that a
piece of paper came out? (did you verify what was on that piece of paper?)

He "knows" how I voted the same way that the election officials "know"
how I voted with the paper ballots. Or did you think they can't look
at those, too?

Of course, they're "x's" on a piece of paper that must be lined up with
a template in order to interpret what they mean. All he did was
verify that it printed out. He didn't look at it in an attempt to see
how I voted.

Not that it matters -- he has no idea who I am, or how many times I've
voted.

Didn't they ask who you were when they handed you a ballot (or whatever
the equivalent computer thingy is)?

They can ask, but have no idea if the answer is correct. That's the problem.



Until mandatory IDs are required to vote, the system is an
utter sham.

Absolutely. Just think of the thousands of times that somebody's shown
up to vote only to be told, "Hey! You already voted!" The chorus of those
poor impersonated voters is what's driving the calls for internal
passports. Wait, there weren't thousands? No? Hundreds? Any? No?

In the last election (two years ago), a friend went to vote and noticed his mother
had already voted. He asked if the volunteer remembered when she voted, and was
told that she just left. He said, wow that is amazing because she has been dead
for a year!

There is a lot of hanky-panky going on with elections and voter registrations. The
group called ACORN is notorious for dumping phony registration forms by the pallet
at elections offices around the country. This year in St Louis, officials actually
mailed a letter to 5,000 of the registrants with a request for contact. How many
responded? Less than 40. In 2004, County election offices in Pennsylvania were
completely inundated with registrations from ACORN and almost all of those checked
were phony. Unfortunately most of them were not checked, because there are no
resources to do so.

The system desperately needs positive identification. Some states are already
doing this.

Gee,
you'd think even with a 40% turnout, this would have happened somewhere...
No? Gosh, if that's not happening, what other reason could there be
to mandate ids for voting? What could it be...

There was an interesting article in the New York Times or the NY Daily News (can't
remember which) after the election in 2004 about all of the people in New York who
vote there and also vote where they have winter homes, particularly Florida. In
this day and age, that should be easily prevented. But it is not.

Turnout percentages will always be underestimated for the simple reason that all
the ineligible voters (died, moved, etc) are never removed from the rolls in time
for the next election. (or the one after that....)