kranky
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 21,019
- 156
- 106
Having worked in the polls during elections, I'm all in favor of voter ID requirements. It's senseless that we allow people to walk in, claim to be anyone who happens to be a registered voter, then go vote.
At one election I worked, a guy walked in and gave me his name. I look at his registration and asked his address (that doesn't count as having to show ID). He gave me the matching address. I gave him the voter card to sign, and the signature reasonably matched the scribble in the registration book. I directed him to the voting booth.
The worker next to me stopped him and challenged his identity. That worker happened to know the person the guy claimed to be, and requested ID (which is allowed in case a poll worker suspects a problem). The person said he didn't have ID on him and would come back with it later. That was dumb luck he got caught.
Now we have birthdates in the registration book, so we can estimate if the person wanting to vote seems to be the right age. So I try to match signatures, look at the birthdate in the registration book, and look at the voter to see if that seems to match.
Thinking internet voting would be secure is a fantasy. You must accept how incredibly motivated certain interests would be to hack the system and manipulate the results.
It's too easy to have voter fraud now, voting in person without having to show ID. But in-person voting keeps the fraud to a smaller scale because you need a person to show up, be seen by multiple poll workers, and risk getting busted. You can't try to vote more than once without having collusion with all poll workers at that location. And with the huge numbers of polling places, it's simply too hard to pull off widespread fraud - today, they can only cheat a little.
With internet voting, here's how I expect fraud to work: if I was working for Party A, I would equip a van or bus with multiple computers and decorate it with signs and labels for Party B. I'd drive to places where I could likely find a lot of Party B voters and let them vote using our handy mobile voting station, because people are lazy and don't even bother to vote in person now.
Of course, my computers are programmed to display screens that look just like the real online voting site, but do nothing. All I would try to do is get people to think they already voted.
People STILL fall for the Nigerian prince scheme every day - and they are going to be able to know if they're on a legit voting site or a look-alike?
It should not be difficult for people to vote, but anyone who wants to keep fraud to a minimum should be against online voting and in favor of voter ID. When I hear arguments against requiring ID to vote, it sounds like "I'm in favor of more voter fraud" to me.
At one election I worked, a guy walked in and gave me his name. I look at his registration and asked his address (that doesn't count as having to show ID). He gave me the matching address. I gave him the voter card to sign, and the signature reasonably matched the scribble in the registration book. I directed him to the voting booth.
The worker next to me stopped him and challenged his identity. That worker happened to know the person the guy claimed to be, and requested ID (which is allowed in case a poll worker suspects a problem). The person said he didn't have ID on him and would come back with it later. That was dumb luck he got caught.
Now we have birthdates in the registration book, so we can estimate if the person wanting to vote seems to be the right age. So I try to match signatures, look at the birthdate in the registration book, and look at the voter to see if that seems to match.
Thinking internet voting would be secure is a fantasy. You must accept how incredibly motivated certain interests would be to hack the system and manipulate the results.
It's too easy to have voter fraud now, voting in person without having to show ID. But in-person voting keeps the fraud to a smaller scale because you need a person to show up, be seen by multiple poll workers, and risk getting busted. You can't try to vote more than once without having collusion with all poll workers at that location. And with the huge numbers of polling places, it's simply too hard to pull off widespread fraud - today, they can only cheat a little.
With internet voting, here's how I expect fraud to work: if I was working for Party A, I would equip a van or bus with multiple computers and decorate it with signs and labels for Party B. I'd drive to places where I could likely find a lot of Party B voters and let them vote using our handy mobile voting station, because people are lazy and don't even bother to vote in person now.
Of course, my computers are programmed to display screens that look just like the real online voting site, but do nothing. All I would try to do is get people to think they already voted.
People STILL fall for the Nigerian prince scheme every day - and they are going to be able to know if they're on a legit voting site or a look-alike?
It should not be difficult for people to vote, but anyone who wants to keep fraud to a minimum should be against online voting and in favor of voter ID. When I hear arguments against requiring ID to vote, it sounds like "I'm in favor of more voter fraud" to me.
Facebook
Twitter