I took a new Diebold machine for a test drive today...

[rucky]

the registrar was set up at a booth at the county fair. (Miami county, OH may ring a bell for some folks who read Robert Kennedy's Rolling Stone article). They had a model Diebold touchscreen up, and I asked for a demo.

This is where I need some edumacation from you savvy DU-ers.

She took a card that had a little circuit sticker thingie, and stuck it in a slot (like a credit card reader). That activiated the touchscreen ballot. I got to vote for Ulysees Grant for president, Maya Lin for Grand poobah, etc. When I told the computer that I've cast all my votes, there was a verification screen, and a little window, where I saw a printout of the votes I cast. To the best of my knowledge, all my votes were accurately recorded on the piece of paper. When I pressed the OK button once more, it said my vote was registered, then my printed vote rolled upwards for a paper voting record.

Should I be alarmed? What am I missing, here, because this is not like the machines that I've heard described to me in past discussions of Diebold?

Also, If I'll be voting on these machines in November, what should I be watching out for?

This is Ken Blackwell AND John Boehner country. I don't trust these people one bit, but the machines seem legit. :shrug:

I also saw a demolition derby with farm equipment, and a hog bigger than a linebacker. :)

[msongs]

1. did the paper stay in the machine or come out for seperate storage?

did you get a copy?

is this the same thing that will actually be used in a real election?

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[rucky]

5. The paper rolled up into the machine.

they told me that's what they'd use in a hand count.

this is supposed to be the machines we're using in Miami County

[iconoclastic cat]

2. Perhaps they're trying to save their company? nt

[proud patriot]

3. That one had the voter verified paper trail

the ones we fought against didn't have
the little paper tabulating the votes ..

I still think diebold is up to no good ,
but that little piece of paper that you
could see was a very important step to
insuring the integrity of the vote .

[rucky]

7. good news, then, I suppose!

of course, Miami County became famous for a dubious absentee ballot count in '04. Maybe I should be scoping out the dumpsters behind the building?

[purduejake]

4. I don't think the "real" machines...

Print anything on paper. The Diebold machine I used didn't. I just turned my card into somebody and walked out.

[magellan]

6. The fear is what happens to the votes afterwards

The little card was a memory card. When it's full it's read into a tabulator, which uses a program to count the votes. You and I don't have access to the tabulator. It could be programmed properly. It could also be programmed to flip votes after a certain threshold is reached (for example).

That paper printout you saw is of no use if the miscounting is being done in the tabulator, because things can be set up to confirm the tabulator's results, even if they're wrong. Same goes for audits.
There's never an in depth look at the paper trail if there's no evidence to warrant it.

Trust the machines? I don't.

[hobbit709]

8. The real question is

How will it be programmed on election day?

[GregD]

9. Here's the simple answer

Just because the paper and the screen display says you voted for X and Y does not mean that the votes actually stored in the system memory reflect those choices.

Extend the problem by recent discoveries that back doors are built into the machine to allow (for example) post-election changes to the totals, everything is up for grabs.

And until there is legislation that requires a statistically accurate sample of each county to be compared to the paper trail, nobody will know.

For a programmer, it is very simple to mess with the votes since nobody is thoroughly auditing the results.

Make sense?

[rucky]

11. makes sense. thanks!

this'll all be done in a backroom, so there's really nothing I can watch for on election day, other than that little piece of paper.

[sandnsea]

10. "to the best of my knowledge"

??? You don't KNOW if your votes were recorded accurately?? That would be problem number one.

The real problem is the programming during an election where you cast your vote and the opposing candidate pops up instead. And, of course, that you never know whether the vote on the memory card and the paper are the same; and you don't even know whether your vote and the paper is the same in the event of a recount anyway. These are the kinds of problems that need to be fixed with these machines in order to ensure the cleanest elections possible.

[rucky]

12. I think I'll remember who I voted for in a real election. n/t

[sandnsea]

13. I don't think that's the point

Either you could see that the paper matched who you voted for or it didn't. I don't get what your memory has to do with it. :shrug:

[DemInDistress]

14. did you actually see your printed vote before it rose up and

out of your sight.
In 2004 a guy named I believe Alton Gibbs developed True Voting Systems. After you electronically vote behind a glass was the printed copy of your computer vote. If your selections matched the printed copy then that paper copy fell into a box where if needed could be used in a hand count. I later learned Wally (Deibold) O'Dell bought that company and more coincidental Alton Gibbs would soon die in a horrific car crash.

[rucky]

22. Yes, I was able to see the printed votes & match them with the screen.

What happened after the paper got sucked back up is a mystery. I suppose it's kept like register tape.

I never heard the Gibbs story. Yikes! It's actually reassuring to know they're using technology that some folks don't want them to use.

[skids]

15. About all you can do with those...

...is encourage others to check the printout like you did, and of course to watch out on election day for software "glitches" that might cause the unattentive voter to record a vote other than what they intended to and report them to as many agencies and watchdog groups as you can, or for malfunctioning machines making lines long at comvenient times and places in order to drive away a certain demographic. Odds are very good the machines won't be working quite as flawlessly on election day when the votes really matter.

The biggest vulnerability that E-Voting with VVPAT has is procedural and beyond control of the individual voter: offcials don't count the paper record unless they have reason to (they believe the results tabulated electronically unless someone raises a fuss.) That can lead to premature "calling" of the race by the media and candidates. Morover in many places BoE officials will fight tooth and nail to prevent having to count the paper ballots, even if there is good reason to be suspicious. Add to that that the official "ballot" is what the machine says, and the paper is just an "audit trail" and not legally binding, so even if there are problems there's no legal obligation to correct the problem before certifying the results. Not that these days it seems that legal obligations mean anything anymore.

The only way to really fight that mess is to get into the BoE system as an official of some sort.

Another vulnerability is the ease with which votes can be fabricated, especially if the polling place logbooks are maintained in an integrated computer system. But there's not much you can do about that either, other than to be a poll watcher and keep a running record of the number of voters that have logged in and the number of votes recorded.

(As an aside I wonder who's going to end up supporting all these systems when Diebold goes belly up due to stock market fraud. The states that bought these systems will be left holding the rather expensive bag, I guess.)

[JohnnyRingo]

16. We got those last year in Trumbull and Mahoning Co

It's at least somewhat reassuring to see the receipt. I guess they save it for 1 or 2 years in case of a problem.

Those are also the one RFK said would be destroyed this Nov if the election isn't challenged. he's supposed to be working in court to preserve them.

I think the GOP is just going to return to the tried and true voter disqualification

[rumpel]

17. 2 things

To your question "should I be concerned about". Please read the following:

THE STAIN OF CONG DUKE CUNNINGHAM IS THE STAIN OF SECRECY, NOW IN OUR ELECTIONS
by Paul Lehto
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x444967

and

Since you said Diebold -

Fraud Vitiates Everything It Touches: Why Diebold DREs May Have Invalid #s
posted by helderheid
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1882620

the actual report can be found
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1648&Itemid=51

and another related article
posted by kpete
Diebold defrauded the Federal certification process.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=445438&mesg_id=445438

[Selatius]

18. I'm sorry, but my faith in e-voting is utterly smashed

I'm upset over what could happen behind my back. In the past, I had full-faith, but now I'm either just paranoid or cynical. Maybe I didn't have full-faith and was simply blithely ignorant of what happens. Whenever I use an e-voting machine, I will inevitably ask myself until the day I die whether my vote really counted or was utterly wasted.

"The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."

-- Joseph Stalin

[sproutster]

19. Too bad they have a reputation for tearing and running out of paper

[rucky]

23. Another thing to watch for at the polls.

You'd know right away if it's out of paper, because there's a little window that should have paper behind it. When I go vote, I'll try to take a look at all the machines & inform someone if any are out of paper.

[orleans]

20. All you need is a screwdriver & a flip of a switch inside the machine

this is on rawstory july 31 2006:

"The Open Voting Foundation, a California-based nonprofit organization that works to promote the adoption of "open source" technology to the nation's voting machines, has announced it has found what it calls the "worst ever security flow found in Diebold RS voting machines."

The Foundation claims to have discovered a switch inside of the machine which, when flipped, can have the machine operate in "a completely different manner compared to the tested and certified version."

"Diebold has made the testing and certification process practically irrelevant," said the Foundation's President Alan Descert, in a statement obtained by RAW STORY. "If you have access to these machines and you want to rig an election, anything is possible with the Diebold TS -- and it could be done without leaving a trace. All you need is a screwdriver," he continued."

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Voring_machine_grup_identifies_new_flaws_0731.html

ALSO
from what i understand--unless the election is really close there will not be a recount...so fliping the votes to ensure the difference of at least several percentage points (or whatever percentage) and votes don't get looked at and recounted.

[marions ghost]

21. for all the excellent reasons given by posters above

these machines are worthless pieces of junk.

You should be alarmed.

:thumbsdown: :argh: :thumbsdown: