Which way will it go?

[kster]

Byron York, starts this article on the secret vote counting side, then ends it on our side, a two sided article, is He afraid, that we may have this one in the bag, so he has to try and keep his job by running a two sided article? Thats what this article seems to be.



The Loser Who Won’t Concede
Democrat Christine Jennings’s losing crusade.


SNIP...That theory was supported by the fact that in other counties, the 13th District race was given its own screen — and there was not an unusually high number of undervotes. Also, in those other counties, when two other races were packed onto the same screen, there was an increased number of undervotes. “We conclude with what we believe is a simple and conservative implication of our main finding,” the authors wrote: “iVotronic touchscreen voting systems should not combine important races on the same voting page.”

It was as simple as that. There was no malfunction and no sabotage.

HERES WHERE THE CHANGE OVER TO OUR SIDE STARTS, HE STARTS USING "COMMON SENSE , IS HE AFRAID? YOU DECIDE

SNIP...That conclusion is gaining increasing support among nearly all experts outside the Democratic party. But there is still no proof of the results that you can hold in your hands. And because of that, the controversy has put candidates, activists, election officials, and lawmakers nationwide into a quandary: After the Help America Vote Act of 2002, the government spent millions of dollars to help states install new, paperless, electronic voting machines, and those new systems have earned perhaps even less public confidence than the old paper-ballot systems. Even though Jennings’s claims were unfounded (and they were positively scientific compared with the paranoid ravings in some quarters of the Left about Diebold machines), people in both parties are still uncomfortable about votes cast with no paper record.

SNIP...Of course, even if changes are made, voting systems will still have problems. Electronic machines are certainly easy to use, and they eliminate questions of voter intent: You either selected this name or that one. They’re also highly accessible to the disabled. But problems can arise when printers are attached to the machines; like any other printers, they can jam or run out of ink. And with optical-scan ballots, a voter might pencil in a space too lightly, or do so outside the required area, which means election officials will be back to studying ballots to determine intent.

ENDS WITH MR.YORK SWINGING HEAVY TO OUR SIDE......

SNIP...Still, for all the problems, experts are coming around to the idea that voting is one of those things — like the wooden baseball bat or the handwritten Post-it note — where the low-tech solution is the best. Yes, Democrats will still protest when they lose elections. But everyone will have more confidence when real, paper ballots determine the winner. Just ask Congressman Buchanan.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWNhMWVhMWUyOThmMjU1ZjFhMTc0NzdlMWZhMmMyN2M=

Seems to me, Mr. Byron is not so sure what side to be on right now.
What do you guys/gals think?

[Psephos]

1. This issue is more bipartisan than many of us realize

Classical conservatives mistrust these electro-vote systems in large numbers. Same with libertarian-style conservatives.

Do a Google Blog Search for copious evidence.

Peace.

[Stevepol]

2. C'mon, a 5th grader could understand it. If there's any issue that's non-partisan

THIS IS IT.

When the vote is counted in secret without any verification, how can that even be a democracy???

If they'd let me count the vote in secret without verification, there wouldn't be Repub anywhere in Congress.

[kster]

3. I agree, but a fifth grader that, already got dissed

by the crooks and their secret vote counting, would also have enough sense not to let them same crooks be in charge of the vote counting EVER again, with or without verification.