Paper Ballots Make a Comeback

[DeclinetoState]

Updated June 23rd, 2008

Paper ballots are making a comeback this election season. More than half of voters will cast their vote for president on paper ballots read by optical scanners this November. That’s nearly twice as many as in 2000. Some states are using paper ballots but refuse to use machines that leave a verifiable paper trail.

More (http://loudobbs.tv.cnn.com/2008/06/23/paper-ballots-make-a-comeback/)

[Patriot Heart]

That is all I have ever used here in Hughes County Oklahoma

[PrezLeefun]

I dont know how I feel about that one............

[Wyatt_Junker]

Its better since its an immedite hardcopy backup.

But leave it to crats to *** even that up and want it both ways. At first, after 2000, they went all Diebold on our ass. Now, they're afraid of the evil Diebold robots. Either way, they have an in-built excuse whether its dimpled chads or that hacker kid in 1982's Wierd Science.

[DesertFox]

Liberals will screw something up ONLY if it can't be jimmied to yield the results they desire. Same with rules, laws, and everything else. They observe them punctiliously unless they don't produce the desired liberal result, in which case they do as the Clintons do and try to change the rules to suit themselves.

[DeclinetoState]

Use paper ballots; mark and count them by hand. Canadians picked a prime minister in 2000 in just a few hours, even as they were arguing about hanging, dimpled, and pregnant chads in Florida.

[DesertFox]

What DtS said. Have a GOPer and a RAT present at the hand counting, and a GOPer and a RAT present where the tallies go up. Videotape the entire proceedings -- the counting and the tallying.

[gnome]

As I understand it optical-scan paper ballots have the best accuracy record, have an automatic paper trail, and are a relatively cheap alternative to the electronic voting systems that cause such controversy.

I never saw much reason to use anything different.

[Maggie_T]

Liberals will screw something up ONLY if it can't be jimmied to yield the results they desire. Same with rules, laws, and everything else. They observe them punctiliously unless they don't produce the desired liberal result, in which case they do as the Clintons do and try to change the rules to suit themselves.

Exactly. As long as we have to contend with power-crazed demunists, it doesn't matter what kind of ballots are used. If the result is not what demunists want, then it's all just "circumstantial evidence."

Oh, and "unfair," "illegal," and "disenfranchisement" (or however you say it), of course.

[DeclinetoState]

As I understand it optical-scan paper ballots have the best accuracy record, have an automatic paper trail, and are a relatively cheap alternative to the electronic voting systems that cause such controversy.

I never saw much reason to use anything different.Those might make more sense than hand-counted ballots in elections with a lot of different races and/or issues to be voted on (as is often the case).

Some people might have trouble coloring in the circle or completing the arrow, but someone is going to have trouble with any ballot used, no matter what it is.

[jayson]

If you are so worried about election fraud, you are more than welcome to go spend your day watching the polls like a hawk... then follow the van that takes the ballots from your precinct to the county elections office and watch the votes being counted.

In my county we use optical-scan paper ballots. On February 5th, I watched the count... the whole operation seemed legit to me.

(Needless to say, this post isn't directed towards those with completely electronic ballot systems... I'm very much against those.)

[Neil Peart]

(Needless to say, this post isn't directed towards those with completely electronic ballot systems... I'm very much against those.)That's what we have in my county.

Do people realize how easy it is to tamper with those things relative to paper?

And the worst thing about those kinds of ballots is that you can't vote for a write-in candidate. I would have voted for Fred as a write-in in the primaries, but I ended up voting for Huckabee because I couldn't write anyone in.

[DeclinetoState]

Neil, is write-in voting legal in Indiana? If it is, but you weren't allowed to write in a name on the electronic ballot, then the voting system would have to be illegal, no?

[Neil Peart]

Neil, is write-in voting legal in Indiana? If it is, but you weren't allowed to write in a name on the electronic ballot, then the voting system would have to be illegal, no?I don't know. I'll have to find out about that.

[DesertFox]

Do people realize how easy it is to tamper with those things relative to paper? What does this mean? :question:

[Rhino]

As I understand it optical-scan paper ballots have the best accuracy record, have an automatic paper trail, and are a relatively cheap alternative to the electronic voting systems that cause such controversy.

I never saw much reason to use anything different.:yeahthat:

They've always worked fine here.

[Rhino]

What does this mean? :question:I think he means electronic systems are easier to tamper with without leaving a trail.

[Neil Peart]

I think he means electronic systems are easier to tamper with without leaving a trail.Yeah, that's what I meant.