It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do you think you should get a receipt when you vote?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
It seems strange to me that you don't get a receipt when you vote. You get receipts when you buy stuff, but not when you vote. If you go to court, they want you to have receipts and stuff in writing to back up your case. So, why shouldn't we get receipts when we vote?

My opinion is that receipts would help prevent election fraud. It's no coincidence that while they are trying to make electronic voting the norm, they refuse to issue people voting receipts. Isn't this lack of voting receipts somewhat of a slap in the face of such landmark events as the CRM which led to the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Then again, if our own president doesn't know what it is, I can't expect you to...


[edit on 5-4-2005 by truthseeka]




posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
I would be for receipts, but only if they enforced having a picture ID and having your voter registration card with you when you voted. No exemptions.

The only fraud in the last election was "The Provisional Ballot".

Example: Yeah, I think I'm registered to vote, not really sure, just let me vote anyway.

Example: What do you mean I got to register before I vote?

Example: I had an appointment on the other side of town, I'll just vote at the closest poll, doesn't matter that I'm not at the right one.

All of these examples and more where given "Provisional Ballots"

That was the fraud.

[edit on 6-4-2005 by Carseller4]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4

The only fraud in the last election was "The Provisional Ballot"...

That was the fraud.



It seems you have much to learn about the election process and the systematic corruption in it.

* Denying registered voters the right to vote through providing inadequate facilities is fraud.

* Changing the record away from what the voter intends to vote is fraud.

* Miscounting, and adjusting tallies electronically, is fraud.

* Excluding public observers and scrutineers from counting is fraud.

and finally

* Lying about key aspects of yourself as a candidate and the performance and intentions of your party is fraud.


Those and many others made up just some of the fraud in the 2004 election.


On the subject, there is no need for a written receipt. But the ballot should be on paper, never by inauditable machine. Democracy in the US became terminally ill some time ago with this.



posted on Apr, 7 2005 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
But the ballot should be on paper, never by inauditable machine.


- IMO it is beyond belief that this has supposedly been tolerated by the US people.


Democracy in the US became terminally ill some time ago with this.


- I don't think it is quite terminal but I do think the gov in the US needs to concern itself persueing the interests of more than just mostly it's big business community.

Until that happens I think you're stuck with the similar candidates etc etc.

(that particular part of it is something afflicting the UK too IMO)



posted on Apr, 8 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
I would be for receipts, but only if they enforced having a picture ID and having your voter registration card with you when you voted. No exemptions.


Are you acknowledging that "no paper trail" is wrong?

Not only do I think that there should be a receipt, but I believe there should be three receipts. One for you, one for the state archives, and one for national archives. That way, they can be examined and audited. I thought that many of you were "trust but verify"...wouldn't this be a perfect chance for that?

I trust these machines about as far as I can throw them. The only way that I could trust them is if I programmed them myself. Since I didn't, I don't believe the honesty of them.

Further more, I do know they are very hard to hack. The program itself is difficult to be broken into...but the spreadsheet...ahhh the spreadsheet can be accessed by a lucky two year old, a knowledgable eight year old, or any plain person over the age of thirteen. That right there is reason enough to have a paper ballot printed out and audited after the election to verify the actual results. Sure, it may cost extra money...but isn't it worth spending it to make sure the person who leads us into war, brings up judicial nominees, and is the spokeperson of the country is the one who won.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join