General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Kaptur Defeats Kucinich 94% to 4% on 100% Unverifiable E-Vote Systems in Toledo, OH? [View all]joshcryer
(62,265 posts)1) Machine does a revote, that would be found by tallying the paper ballots, ballot stuffing would be apparent. The vote on those machines or polling places would be invalidated.
2) Machine cancels your vote and then votes a different way, that would be easily seen by looking over the paper ballots and noticing that there are a lot of cancellations (a 94% win would require a massive number of canceled out votes, far more than the norm). The vote on those machines or polling places would be invalidated.
3) Machine overwrites your vote, that would easily, trivially be noticed because the paper ballots would look all messed up. The vote on those machines or polling places would be invalidated.
Now, assuming that the machine did any of those things, it would require 23k people on that day not noticing any strange behavior at all. That is preposterous. Machines printing another ballot after a person walks away, machines canceling ballots and people not noticing even though the pollsters instruct voters to verify their ballot.
This is certainly not a 100% unverifiable voting method, it's not ideal, of course, I can think of far better ways to do it, but you can get an audit done, which is a far sight better than not being able to have an audit at all!