No back-up systems for Utah. Instead, Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert will back-up every
Diebold machine with his personal reputation. For what that’s worth. With the ears of an elephant, you’ld think they’d hear some of the criticizm. This is Princeton University computer research group findings after all. But he wouldn’t listen to the local computer people, who were unimously against the very system He pitched for and now we are stuck with. Thanks Gary. NOT!
Wow that is shocking. It appears any unscrupulous Salt Lake County Clerk (such as Sherrie Swensen) could tamper with the machines and manipulate the ballots. So the only thing we can do prevent this is get a County Clerk in there that we can trust.
That reminds me of what Joe Hatch said recently about incumbents being in office too long, just like Sherrie Swensen’s (16 years in office):
“He got arrogant and sloppy,” said Democratic Councilman Joe Hatch, who is crafting the plan along with Republican colleague Cortlund Ashton. “What he did was the direct product of him being in office way too long.” - Joe Hatch
Fred, we all want officials we can trust. Why have them otherwise? Your assumption / presumption that M. Swensen is ‘unscrupulous’ is subjective and only your opinion, though I appreciate your inclusiveness. Whether or not you trust any particular official, it is impossible to trust the new Diebold voting machine. And to think they also manufacture ATM’s…
About longevity, see Orrin Hatch. When he first ran he campaigned on that very idea! Go Ashdown.
Btw, I’d be curious to khow who Joe Hatch was refering to in your quote above.
It was in regards to Doug Sorensen and the guzzle gate mess. Joe Hatch hit the nail hard on the head about lifetime politicians. They not only get sloppier the longer they are in office, but they get real out of touch with the people and whats going on. I mean seriously, here we are using internet to share ideas and opinions and they don’t even try to stay up with technology. Sweep out all the old-timers I say.
Did you listen to Nightside Project tonight? They talked about the Deibold machine quite a bit. They also made light of the fact the county clerk doesn’t want take advantage of the flexibility of an electronic voting machine and create a fair ballot. Just like all the other politician, just more games.
Thanks for the link, Fred. I don’t think that who comes first on the ballot is of as great a consequence as the whole auditability issue that has intentionally been built-out of these machines. That troubles me. I guess I’m sorta Luddite when it comes to the glitz and ‘wow’ of the new tech voting deal, especially given its hackability. I don’t need to know right now if my guy one. I can wait for a proper vote count. In fact, during the debate and supreme court hoopla in 2000, I was kinda thrilled to have no idea if the vote would be stalemated or not. It seemed liberating to speculate on the prospect of eliminating that layer of the beaurocracy. If only. Thanks
I agree too about auditing those ballots. I can’t believe we went through the 06 Primary without Sherrie Swensen preparing for something like that. What kind of Clerk doesn’t ask the question?
What is really scary is the way they treat a recount. If I recall correctly, there was a recount in district 42 because the vote tally was so close on both side’s. So they recounted the ballot machine memory cards, but they didn’t look into WHO actually voted. It turns out that one of the precincts allowed ANYBODY to vote regardless of affiliation. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like the closed primary thing. But not even check and see if they should be voting or not is breaking the rules. How Salt Lake County has gotten by with Sherrie Swensen as the county clerk I’ll never know.
These are not the machines used in Utah. Utah electronic voting machines produce a continuous paper trail as each voter casts their vote which the voter can view and verify for correctness. When the poll workers close out at the end of the day the summary and totals are also printed on the same paper tape. This complete paper record of every vote cast is maintained for something like 24 months.
This complete paper record of every vote cast is maintained for something like 24 months.
All records of an election are sealed immediately after the election and cannot even be seen by somebody who ran for that election. A judge is the only person who would be able to release the records, but why would that happen considering all Utah races are proclaimed to be honest by the government and the media.
These records should be public, but they are the complete domain of Diebold election systems who sold their business because it was bringing down the larger corporation of Diebold.
The machines used in Utah are hackable and even the Lt. Governor wouldn’t know if they had been. Does that make you feel good about our purchase?
Cliff Lyon
September 17th, 2006 at 10:42 am
No back-up systems for Utah. Instead, Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert will back-up every
Diebold machine with his personal reputation. For what that’s worth. With the ears of an elephant, you’ld think they’d hear some of the criticizm. This is Princeton University computer research group findings after all. But he wouldn’t listen to the local computer people, who were unimously against the very system He pitched for and now we are stuck with. Thanks Gary. NOT!
September 17th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
Cliff,
Wow that is shocking. It appears any unscrupulous Salt Lake County Clerk (such as Sherrie Swensen) could tamper with the machines and manipulate the ballots. So the only thing we can do prevent this is get a County Clerk in there that we can trust.
That reminds me of what Joe Hatch said recently about incumbents being in office too long, just like Sherrie Swensen’s (16 years in office):
“He got arrogant and sloppy,” said Democratic Councilman Joe Hatch, who is crafting the plan along with Republican colleague Cortlund Ashton. “What he did was the direct product of him being in office way too long.” - Joe Hatch
September 18th, 2006 at 7:07 am
Fred, we all want officials we can trust. Why have them otherwise? Your assumption / presumption that M. Swensen is ‘unscrupulous’ is subjective and only your opinion, though I appreciate your inclusiveness. Whether or not you trust any particular official, it is impossible to trust the new Diebold voting machine. And to think they also manufacture ATM’s…
About longevity, see Orrin Hatch. When he first ran he campaigned on that very idea! Go Ashdown.
Btw, I’d be curious to khow who Joe Hatch was refering to in your quote above.
September 18th, 2006 at 8:37 pm
Caveat,
It was in regards to Doug Sorensen and the guzzle gate mess. Joe Hatch hit the nail hard on the head about lifetime politicians. They not only get sloppier the longer they are in office, but they get real out of touch with the people and whats going on. I mean seriously, here we are using internet to share ideas and opinions and they don’t even try to stay up with technology. Sweep out all the old-timers I say.
Did you listen to Nightside Project tonight? They talked about the Deibold machine quite a bit. They also made light of the fact the county clerk doesn’t want take advantage of the flexibility of an electronic voting machine and create a fair ballot. Just like all the other politician, just more games.
Check out the one title “Sherrie Speaks Out”
http://nightside.ksl.com/
The show host goes off on her and its kind of funny.
September 19th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Thanks for the link, Fred. I don’t think that who comes first on the ballot is of as great a consequence as the whole auditability issue that has intentionally been built-out of these machines. That troubles me. I guess I’m sorta Luddite when it comes to the glitz and ‘wow’ of the new tech voting deal, especially given its hackability. I don’t need to know right now if my guy one. I can wait for a proper vote count. In fact, during the debate and supreme court hoopla in 2000, I was kinda thrilled to have no idea if the vote would be stalemated or not. It seemed liberating to speculate on the prospect of eliminating that layer of the beaurocracy. If only. Thanks
September 19th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
I agree too about auditing those ballots. I can’t believe we went through the 06 Primary without Sherrie Swensen preparing for something like that. What kind of Clerk doesn’t ask the question?
What is really scary is the way they treat a recount. If I recall correctly, there was a recount in district 42 because the vote tally was so close on both side’s. So they recounted the ballot machine memory cards, but they didn’t look into WHO actually voted. It turns out that one of the precincts allowed ANYBODY to vote regardless of affiliation. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like the closed primary thing. But not even check and see if they should be voting or not is breaking the rules. How Salt Lake County has gotten by with Sherrie Swensen as the county clerk I’ll never know.
September 19th, 2006 at 4:40 pm
She certainly did buckle to the Diebold scammers.
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:56 am
These are not the machines used in Utah. Utah electronic voting machines produce a continuous paper trail as each voter casts their vote which the voter can view and verify for correctness. When the poll workers close out at the end of the day the summary and totals are also printed on the same paper tape. This complete paper record of every vote cast is maintained for something like 24 months.
June 22nd, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Stan says:
All records of an election are sealed immediately after the election and cannot even be seen by somebody who ran for that election. A judge is the only person who would be able to release the records, but why would that happen considering all Utah races are proclaimed to be honest by the government and the media.
These records should be public, but they are the complete domain of Diebold election systems who sold their business because it was bringing down the larger corporation of Diebold.
The machines used in Utah are hackable and even the Lt. Governor wouldn’t know if they had been. Does that make you feel good about our purchase?