"Paper Ballots Hand Counted" only way to secure elections

BBV "Paper Ballots Hand Counted" only way to secure elections

Other issues that are rather intractible, with open source, are the issues of truly keeping ordinary citizens in control of their own ballot counting. There are many ways to spin and maneuver a computerized system, even one with honest software. Also, all computer-based systems present a moving target, constantly changing -- no sooner do you spot one problem and mobilize the immense effort it takes to tackle it than a switcheroo is pulled and you have to start all over again.

Paper ballots, hand counted at the polling place (NOT centrally counted, for the paper ballot playground for fraud lies in the transportation and central counting methods) -- well, if you get precinct-based hand-counts of the paper ballots, with methodology encouraging as many eyes as possible on the counting, you end up with a fairly stationary target, and one that is difficult to tamper with except on a small localized scale.

Like "VVPAT" -- "Open Source" is not a solution. Very tricky, and absolutely a moving target that no one has put together correctly yet.

Bev Harris

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/72/6758.html?1...

its gotten way past that now.

THe DNC has fought kicking and screaming to avoid verified voting,
and now here we are - they are pushing internet voting again for the primary.

It was democrats who pushed paperless voting in Georgia and Maryland,
and democrats who obstructed the passage of VVPB in North Carolina.



We are so far away from HCPB it isn't funny.

Way far.

all we (the people) want to do is see the votes BEING COUNTED, they (the Dems and Repubs ) will only provide us with an explanation as to how the votes are being counted, I demand to see the votes BEING COUNTED. How about you?

:grr:

She has ZERO credibility here.

If she said the sun is shining I wouldn't believe her until I saw it with my own eyes.

Notice she still hasn't answered all the questions about her failure to properly account for the almost one million dollars she has raised from people.

Phoney tax forms are a hell of way to be "accountable".

how about you?

so she can scam more money from people. Some people want to help her.

or not.

...HCPB sounds great "on paper" but the reality is that with the opposition so desperately against even Voter-Verified paper records on DREs, we are unlikely to see HCPB pass in the foreseeable future.

To put it bluntly HCPB has a snowball's chance in hell of passing in most areas and states. If you want to work for HCPB, go for it but please don't belittle others who believe in a different, more realistic path.

Bev Harris was banned from DU for a reason. Let's not start another round of posting her most imflammatory stuff please.

Apparently quite a few people, otherwise this would be adopted overnight. What's the hold up? Efficiency? Training? Money? Handicapped access?

In that order:

It's more efficient to take a few hours and count the vote, keep it securely, and make it available for review thus generating confidence in elections and public officials than it is to have these ridiculous machines produced by inferior tech companies with a public that grows ever more skeptical. Forbes called paperless voting technology the worst technology of 2003 and there's no reason for them to have revised that assessment.

In the poll Paul Lehto sponsored (Michael Collins/www.electionfraudnews.com and Democracy For NH were contributing sponsors) 92% of Americans want to be able to watch vote counting. Fine, lets give them something to watch other than a plastic case or a memory pack.

Training for ballot counting is easy. It's low tech, actually no tech. And you can watch it. We've done that for over a century.

Money. The cost of DRE's is prohibitive, after all they've ruined the public trust in the vote. The specific costs when compared to paper are irrelevant. The real cost is all the money we lose because we have lousy elections. Think about $300 billion for a war that over 60% of Americans oppose, have opposed, and will oppose. Money is not relevant. Anyone who argues for a voting system based on cost is immediately suspect.

Handicapped access. By all means, in the best way possible. In a questionnaire done by a NY State Commissioner of Elections (County), 90% of handicapped voters said they'd like to vote absentee like they always had. For the 10% who want to go to the polls, lets get them the best adaptive device(s) available.

The overriding argument for paper ballots is that the alternative systems are suspect and getting worse by the election.

There are other issues as well, bigger than paper like:

--Election fraud is first and foremost a race crime, period...
--Election fraud victimizes the poor disproportionately...



Here are some principals to think about http://electionfraudnews.com/about.htm