Re: [tlug] Somewhat OT- open source software for US voting machines

["SL Baur" <steve@example.com>]

On 10/7/08, Edward Middleton <emiddleton@example.com> wrote:
> SL Baur wrote:
>  > On 10/6/08, Edmund Edgar <lists@example.com> wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  >> You can't put 100% trust in the paper system. (See the rest of your latest
>  >> post for details.)
>  >>
>  >
>  > Oh, but it's so much closer.  See Dr. Breen's posting and many
>  > others for details.
>
>
> Dr. Breen, was talking about the Australia system, which as it happens
>  is were a trial was held for an e-voting system because the count of the
>  paper ballot were found to be inaccurate enough to effect the election
>  outcome.

And then?

> "Two candidates were separated by only three or four
> votes, said Phillip Green, electoral commissioner for the
> territory. After recounting, officials discovered that out of
> 80,000 ballots, they had made about 100 mistakes. They
> decided to investigate other voting methods."

There are many possible responses I have to that, I'll settle
with "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

It is close elections that require the highest scrutiny.  The US
2008 election is going to be very close[1] and no matter what
happens, there will be valid arguments for claiming McCain
or Obama "stole" the election.

[1] The only way for it not to be to be close is for McCain
to win in a blowout with an energized Republican base voting
for him, which isn't likely to happen at this point, but still
could if they set Mrs. Palin free to be herself.  "Flyover"
americans like myself like her very much.  I guarantee you
that Obama, even in a winning campaign will have less then
50% of the vote, same as impeached ex-president Clinton.