Majority of electronic voting machines rigged, well... better than that?

[sportage]

Just thought I'd toss this out there for fun.

Remember when everyone was so concerned and convinced electronic voting machines were rigged? That is, when states switched to electronic touch screen voting machines?
Remember the news clips showing a vote cast for one candidate on an electronic touch screen machine then mysteriously switching to the another candidate?
And the rumors of programmers rigging machines to favor once party over the other?

Well, the rigging of touch screen voting didn't really work.
Nor was there mass voting fraud because of the new touch screens.
Even though no paper trail existed, there was little if any actual evidence of electronic voter fraud ever discovered.
No, performing that electronic trickery wasn't necessary to rig an election.

But what did work to the very same advantage of one party over another, was... redistricting.
Better yet than rigging a voting machine, better to rig the districts.
And so they did, and so that worked quite well.

While more democrat voters were cast in election after election in the past years, the end result was republican wins. And not only wins, but ensured safe haven districts.
Where the looniest of the loonies could be guaranteed reelection after reelection.

So, that idea of tinkering with an electronic touch screen ballot box turned out to be too messy. Too complicated.
Instead...?
Rig a district.
Much more effective, and you only need do that tinkering once.
Yes, only once to ensure voter fraud come election after election.

I thought that was interesting....

 

[ivwshane]

It is interesting but democrats do it as well, though they may not be equivalent. Part of the democratic strategy for the next decade is to win at the local level and have control of the districts so that when the census comes again, they will be the one redrawing the districts. My hope is that if they are given the chance to redraw that they will do it honestly but I'm not holding my breath.

What should happen is that the citizens of each state should get upset with the politicizing of districts that they vote for something like they did in California wher districts are now drawn by a bi partisan committee consisting of dems, repubs, and independents. I'm also not holding my breath for that as it seems Americans are too lazy to go and vote.

 

[unixwizzard]

welcome to gerrymandering.. something that political parties in the US have been doing since the early 1800's..

it's not a Republican only thing, nor is it a Democrat only thing.. it's just something any party will do or try to do when they have control of a state's legislature..

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/231865/gerrymandering

 

[HomerJS]

It is interesting but democrats do it as well, though they may not be equivalent. Part of the democratic strategy for the next decade is to win at the local level and have control of the districts so that when the census comes again, they will be the one redrawing the districts. My hope is that if they are given the chance to redraw that they will do it honestly but I'm not holding my breath.

What should happen is that the citizens of each state should get upset with the politicizing of districts that they vote for something like they did in California wher districts are now drawn by a bi partisan committee consisting of dems, repubs, and independents. I'm also not holding my breath for that as it seems Americans are too lazy to go and vote.

As much as I'm against gerrymandering no matter who does it. Districts should be strictly geographical lines/population.

When was the last time Democrats passed laws that make it more difficult for white people to vote? Not the same thing.

 

[waggy]

As much as I'm against gerrymandering no matter who does it. Districts should be strictly geographical lines/population.

When was the last time Democrats passed laws that make it more difficult for white people to vote? Not the same thing.

oh shit! what laws have republicans passed to make it more difficult for blacks to vote?

 

[PokerGuy]

It's amazing someone as dumb as the OP can actually even figure out how to get out of bed in the morning.

The concerns about electronic voting with no paper trail are legitimate, and I don't think they've gone away either. With ever major system or company getting hacked at one point or another, who feels completely comfortable that there will never be any kind of hacking of electronic voting machines/processes?

Gerrymandering has been going on for at least two hundred years, and it's certainly not limited to one party or another.

 

[glenn1]

Understood there can be fraud problems with touch screen voting machines, but so could there be with any other voting method you can think of. Anything from pull lever machines to OCR ("fill in the bubble") ballots can be rigged if you're the one in charge of the system and its controls. Concentrating on the problems with only one potential voting solution is pointless IMHO.

Not to mention the bigger point that we've allowed government and voting to be involved in far too much of our lives already. There's no logical or moral reason why some middle class soccer mom from Nashville should get to vote on whether/how a pregnant immigrant from Ghana should be able to get an abortion in Boston. And no reason why some Wall Street banker should get to vote on behalf of an Alaska resident how many rounds of ammunition should be allowed in the rifle magazine he uses to defend himself from bears.

 

[Jhhnn]

welcome to gerrymandering.. something that political parties in the US have been doing since the early 1800's..

it's not a Republican only thing, nor is it a Democrat only thing.. it's just something any party will do or try to do when they have control of a state's legislature..

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/231865/gerrymandering

It's also important to recognize that Repubs took it to a higher level after the 2010 census, using improved data collection & computer models. Witness Texas.

I think it's expected for the majority party to push their advantage somewhat, but going beyond a certain point defies common decency & respect- not just wrt the opposition, but also wrt the will of the people. It's a perversion of the democratic process in pursuit of an authoritarian agenda.

Resorting to it indicates a lack of confidence in the ability to sell one's ideology to the general public.

 

[TheSlamma]

Funny how the cheating and the redistrict stuff is always in favor of the repub party.

Between their guns and their bibles and now this they really are in the backed in a corner syndrome.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

This is one of my favorites....many call it 'rabbit on a skateboard'.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Funny how the cheating and the redistrict stuff is always in favor of the repub party.

I think it's hilarious! They're too stupid to know how pathetically stupid they are!

 

[dank69]

oh shit! what laws have republicans passed to make it more difficult for blacks to vote?

Oh I don't know, maybe like restricting voting hours in urban districts while expanding the hours in rural districts?

 

[cubby1223]

It is interesting but democrats do it as well, though they may not be equivalent. Part of the democratic strategy for the next decade is to win at the local level and have control of the districts so that when the census comes again, they will be the one redrawing the districts. My hope is that if they are given the chance to redraw that they will do it honestly but I'm not holding my breath.

What should happen is that the citizens of each state should get upset with the politicizing of districts that they vote for something like they did in California wher districts are now drawn by a bi partisan committee consisting of dems, repubs, and independents. I'm also not holding my breath for that as it seems Americans are too lazy to go and vote.

This is what Democrats do to Illinois to maintain political dominance:

Yea, don't hold your breath for honest Democrats

 

[dank69]

This is one of my favorites....many call it 'rabbit on a skateboard'.

Yup, put all the major cities into one district. That way, those millions of people get one representative and the other hundreds of thousands get 5 representatives.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Yup, put all the major cities into one district. That way, those millions of people get one representative and the other hundreds of thousands get 5 representatives.

I don't approve of the ridiculous extremes Democrats used in this particular case either.

 

[a777pilot]

If you don't vote on a paper ballot, then you have not voted.

 

[dank69]

I don't approve of the ridiculous extremes Democrats used in this particular case either.

Pretty sure that was the old border reached in a bipartisan deal to benefit the surrounding Republican incumbents as well...

The current district lines drawn by Democrats don't look quite so ridiculous. However, the less ridiculous lines benefit Democrats much more. Imagine that.

 

[blastingcap]

Misleading thread title.

 

[trenchfoot]

The will of the minority party over the majority party. It's what happening right now as the last election cycle shows.

And guess what party this logical violation of majority rule overwhelmingly favored time and again? As far as I know, that's the difference between the Dems and the Repubs redistricting the areas they control.

And so it seems that the Repubs will be forced to hang on to this ploy to keep their legislators in office. Once they lose control over this, their numbers in Congress will change dramatically for the worse as the national demographic keeps shifting in favor of the Dems.

 

[cubby1223]

Yup, put all the major cities into one district. That way, those millions of people get one representative and the other hundreds of thousands get 5 representatives.

Or! The map was only labeling cities within the one district. Hint, try placing Peoria Illinois, or Bloomington Illinois on that map.

The districts get all squiggly like that to combine the residences of multiple incumbent Republicans into one new district, with the other districts are now open seats for elections, i.e. much much easier for Democrats to win.

Pretty sure that was the old border reached in a bipartisan deal to benefit the surrounding Republican incumbents as well...

The current district lines drawn by Democrats don't look quite so ridiculous. However, the less ridiculous lines benefit Democrats much more. Imagine that.

Yea, no, there is no bipartisanship in Illinois. Are you stuck in stupid partisan mode today? Because that's what it looks like "OMG, My DEMS Would NEVER Stoop So Low as to Engage in REPULICRAP SHIT TACTICS! Not MY DEMOCRATS!!!!!"

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Pretty sure that was the old border reached in a bipartisan deal to benefit the surrounding Republican incumbents as well...

The current district lines drawn by Democrats don't look quite so ridiculous. However, the less ridiculous lines benefit Democrats much more. Imagine that.

Bi-partisan deal my ass. IL-17 is a gerrymandered district created by Democrats to ensure themselves a seat in western Illinois. Unfortunately, they lost that seat in 2010 when a Tea Party candidate (Bobby Schilling) won....but the gerrymander was strong and they where able to get it back in 2012 (Cheri Bustos). Hooray!

 

[dank69]

IL-17 is a gerrymandered district created by Democrats to ensure themselves a seat in western Illinois. Unfortunately, they lost that seat in 2010 when a Tea Party candidate (Bobby Schilling) won....but the gerrymander was strong and they where able to get it back in 2012 (Cheri Bustos).

If it was so beneficial to them, why did they change it in 2013? The current district map:

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

If it was so beneficial to them, why did they change it in 2013? The current district map:

I don't know. Perhaps they couldn't look at themselves in the mirror any more.

 

[dank69]

I don't know. Perhaps they couldn't look at themselves in the mirror any more.

LOL, you are ridiculous. BTW from wiki:

From 2003 to 2013 the district was known as "the rabbit on a skateboard" for its unusual shape devised as the outcome of gerrymandering.[5][6] The boundaries were drawn in a bipartisan deal to protect both the Democratic incumbent and neighboring Republican incumbents. The lines of the district were drawn to move Republican voters into neighboring districts and to include Democratic neighborhoods in Springfield and Decatur.

 

[Jhhnn]

I think it's important for voting systems to be secure & honest. It's equally important that they be perceived as such, something that purely electronic voting will never provide.

If all the recent revelations about the NSA tell us anything at all, it should be that all digital information is fundamentally insecure. That level of confidence is insufficient wrt voting.

We need processes that are above reasonable suspicion & controversy. Having a paper trail creates a higher level of security that people can understand, advancing that goal.