January 8th, 2008

toothybear

Voting and Technology

There is a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/magazine/06Vote-t.html?pagewanted=all">good article</a> in the New York Times Magazine about touch screen voting machines.  In passing it mentions how long it takes to count 'millions of paper ballots."

Um... Even if there were NO machines, how difficult would this really be?  At each precinct, poll workers tabulate votes, under the eyes of poll watchers.  They send the ballots to a central location for safekeeping under lock and key, call the main office to report totals, and go home.

It would take one person a long time to count a million ballots. Or 100 million.  But it wouldn't take that long for a group of people -- poll workers and poll watchers -- to count a thousand ballots, and very little time to total their totals. 

And we'd have a election process we could trust.

Am I missing something here?
toothybear

Stop it with the canonizing already KTHXBAI

Now this is just getting silly. This is the art for a Salon article titled Obama's double magic.


As Barack would say 'Look!' I support Obama for a number of reasons, none of which are so original that they bear repeating here. But he really is just a guy, and a politician at that. He may be elected President of the United States, and in that position he'll do his level best to run the government and motivate Congress to Do The Right Thing on all the problems the country faces. But he is NOT Jebus, or Tinkerbell, or Clarence the Angel from "It's a Wonderful Life."

All I'm saying is that people in the chattering classes have been OD'ing on the Koolaid and need to chill the fuck out.