You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #32: there are very few NEW laws needed; litigation recognizes invalidity [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-21-06 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #20
32. there are very few NEW laws needed; litigation recognizes invalidity
of the present electronic voting system. Once it's gone, what are "paper trails" for? Asking for laws is putting the people on their knees when they are supposed to control the government and elections are the very process by which the government gets it's legitimacy. SO much begging is very bad for real democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -WARNING: INDELICATE WORDS AHEAD ABOUT OPPOSITION TO HR-550 Kelvin Mace  Jul-21-06 10:22 AM   #0 
  - Alien Autopsy wasnt real?  Howardx   Jul-21-06 10:29 AM   #1 
  - Dude, I realized it was fake  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 10:43 AM   #6 
     - take out wrenched ankle  Howardx   Jul-21-06 10:52 AM   #12 
  - It would allow a high degree of false confidence; not working when needed  Land Shark   Jul-21-06 10:34 AM   #2 
  - Holt is not a step toward getting rid of machines  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 10:45 AM   #7 
  - U say Machines here to STAY?: NOW I'm REALLY AGAINST HOLT  Land Shark   Jul-21-06 10:55 AM   #13 
     - If you believe that you will get a law passed that mandates  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 11:40 AM   #20 
        - there are very few NEW laws needed; litigation recognizes invalidity  Land Shark   Jul-21-06 12:59 PM   #32 
           - So you solution is???  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 01:03 PM   #34 
           - Here's a thread of interest...  fooj   Jul-21-06 03:05 PM   #50 
  - By what mechanism  Febble   Jul-21-06 01:39 PM   #38 
  - If LS doesn't mind  BeFree   Jul-21-06 03:32 PM   #54 
  - Will there be HCPB in Snohomish? What about the 3000 other counties?  Bill Bored   Jul-21-06 03:44 PM   #57 
     - Holt also removes Wireless - which many machines have  WillYourVoteBCounted   Jul-22-06 10:29 AM   #82 
        - Right. Bans wireless and Internet connectivity.  Bill Bored   Jul-22-06 10:13 PM   #95 
  - airplanes will never fly. the earth is flat. paper ballots = impossible  msongs   Jul-21-06 10:36 AM   #3 
  - Elections with hand counted paper ballots used to get stolen too  havocmom   Jul-21-06 10:48 AM   #8 
  - The more people handling the paper  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 10:51 AM   #11 
     - it's always the lack of checks and balances that allows fraud  Land Shark   Jul-21-06 10:59 AM   #14 
     - 550 requires the code to be disclosed  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 11:37 AM   #19 
        - as written, the vendors may well have a claim for a constitutional  Land Shark   Jul-21-06 06:31 PM   #60 
           - The bill EXPLICITLY states that  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 09:08 PM   #63 
     - Right you are  havocmom   Jul-21-06 11:01 AM   #15 
  - I have already done the math  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 10:50 AM   #9 
  - Could you please show me where I said  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 01:59 PM   #42 
  - Well said.  fooj   Jul-21-06 03:13 PM   #52 
  - Electronic voting  flobee1   Jul-21-06 10:38 AM   #4 
  - Uh, I don't know many people  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 10:42 AM   #5 
     - Hard to believe that you go from this premise to this conclusion:  Land Shark   Jul-21-06 11:03 AM   #17 
        - 'Electronic machines' does not always = programmable computer voting  havocmom   Jul-21-06 11:31 AM   #18 
        - OpScan is simple technology  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 11:54 AM   #24 
           - OpScan is so simple, reliable and OLD  havocmom   Jul-21-06 12:01 PM   #25 
              - Some time old tech, is the best.  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 12:03 PM   #27 
        - Now you are ignoring the context  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 11:50 AM   #23 
        - I'll tell you who is lacking vision...  fooj   Jul-21-06 03:07 PM   #51 
  - Good luck but I've known all along we had the power nt/  Fredda Weinberg   Jul-21-06 10:51 AM   #10 
  - I would like to know when it became acceptable to privatize the election  AndyA   Jul-21-06 11:03 AM   #16 
  - I didn't say I disagree with you about manipulation of elections  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 12:02 PM   #26 
  - The most amazing, fantastic, ideal system  IndyOp   Jul-21-06 11:43 AM   #21 
  - Or use the computer to actually  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 12:08 PM   #28 
     - Voter-marked is better than voter-verified, IMO  IndyOp   Jul-21-06 04:21 PM   #58 
        - You can lead a horse to water  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 09:03 PM   #62 
  - I got it: digital vote processing systems everywhere spells success  Kip Humphrey   Jul-21-06 11:49 AM   #22 
  - Sorry this pisses you off.  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 12:28 PM   #29 
     - First of all, thanks for this  Febble   Jul-21-06 01:30 PM   #37 
        - Thanks for the correction  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 01:47 PM   #39 
  - Having been involved in getting legislation passed in my state  truckin   Jul-21-06 12:44 PM   #30 
  - You make a good point about  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 01:01 PM   #33 
  - The lines are drawn  BeFree   Jul-21-06 02:04 PM   #43 
     - I think you are drawing incorrect lines. The open source code  truckin   Jul-21-06 02:07 PM   #44 
     - Correct me if I am wrong...  BeFree   Jul-21-06 02:37 PM   #47 
        - Computer experts, who cannot review the code now, would be  truckin   Jul-21-06 02:44 PM   #48 
           - Feeble assurances.....  BeFree   Jul-21-06 02:59 PM   #49 
              - So you think that we are better off without the ability to review the  truckin   Jul-21-06 03:20 PM   #53 
              - Of course not  BeFree   Jul-21-06 03:41 PM   #55 
                 - The code CAN be examined in EVERY machine  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 09:16 PM   #65 
              - Once code has been certified  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 09:15 PM   #64 
                 - Is  BeFree   Jul-21-06 11:23 PM   #69 
                    - It doesn't have to be, it is a standard  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 09:03 AM   #77 
                       - Standard?  BeFree   Jul-22-06 10:56 AM   #83 
                          - My credentials are established for those who bother to look for them  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 11:18 AM   #86 
                             - Mine  BeFree   Jul-22-06 11:29 AM   #88 
                                - I have already "staked my reputation"  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 11:33 AM   #90 
                                   - Which vendor? What make and model?  BeFree   Jul-22-06 11:38 AM   #91 
                                      - I don't know who your experts are  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 12:40 PM   #93 
     - So you are saying that 100 million ballots  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 02:13 PM   #45 
        - Show me...  BeFree   Jul-21-06 02:32 PM   #46 
           - And your are proposing that the ballots  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 04:54 PM   #59 
              - Properly advertised  BeFree   Jul-21-06 11:29 PM   #70 
                 - My we are naive  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 09:05 AM   #78 
                    - Naive?  BeFree   Jul-22-06 09:25 AM   #79 
                       - HOW DO YOU VETTE THESE PEOPLE?  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 10:57 AM   #84 
                          - But accurate and dependable vs. machines  BeFree   Jul-22-06 11:12 AM   #85 
                          - A machine that has had its software vetted  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 11:30 AM   #89 
                             - A machine?  BeFree   Jul-22-06 11:46 AM   #92 
                                - I am speaking in general  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 12:42 PM   #94 
                          - Kelvin, multiply your # of counters by 4  WillYourVoteBCounted   Jul-22-06 11:22 AM   #87 
  - Thank you. I appreciate your efforts.  MH1   Jul-21-06 12:45 PM   #31 
  - all well and good . . . let's support the bill, get it passed . . but . .  OneBlueSky   Jul-21-06 01:21 PM   #35 
  - You are right but I've never heard an election reform activist say  truckin   Jul-21-06 01:25 PM   #36 
  - Not me, that's for sure.  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 01:56 PM   #41 
  - I have seen many things that make me suspicious  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 01:53 PM   #40 
  - I completely agree... what's more,  troubleinwinter   Jul-21-06 03:44 PM   #56 
  - I just don't know how a hand count would work in my precinct,  MH1   Jul-21-06 06:57 PM   #61 
  - Again, even if your brought in a counting team  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 09:19 PM   #66 
     - I wonder  MH1   Jul-22-06 07:27 AM   #73 
        - Damn few if you ask me.  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 09:01 AM   #76 
  - She sounds reasonable. nt  Bill Bored   Jul-28-06 11:07 PM   #97 
  - Why do we need HR-550 ?  kster   Jul-21-06 10:46 PM   #67 
  - Becuase it raises the minium standards  Kelvin Mace   Jul-21-06 11:18 PM   #68 
     - The politicians have not admitted there is a problem  kster   Jul-21-06 11:31 PM   #71 
        - KICK nt  kster   Jul-22-06 02:26 AM   #72 
        - Kerry and Boxer have, I know  MH1   Jul-22-06 07:29 AM   #74 
        - Really?  Kelvin Mace   Jul-22-06 08:54 AM   #75 
        - I think the poster was referring to getting it out in the media  MH1   Jul-22-06 10:16 AM   #81 
        - 199 co-sponsors, Holt's page, and Verified Voting article  WillYourVoteBCounted   Jul-22-06 10:01 AM   #80 
           - Says 205 co-sponsors  troubleinwinter   Jul-28-06 11:36 PM   #98 
           - Great links. And now 206 co-sponsors.  troubleinwinter   Jul-29-06 03:44 PM   #99 
  - Maybe people are waiting for HR 551  WillYourVoteBCounted   Jul-28-06 11:02 PM   #96 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC