Later On

A blog written for those whose interests more or less match mine.

Voting machines admittedly drop votes

with 2 comments

It’s going to be an interesting election. Check out this post by Mike Mansick:

Consider me to be in a state of shock. For nearly half a decade Diebold has always responded in the identical way to every single report of a problem or security vulnerability with its e-voting machines: attacking those who pointed out the problem and claiming it really wasn’t a problem at all. This has happened time and time again that I’m not even sure how to react when the company (renamed Premier to get away from the Diebold name stigma) has finally admitted that its machines have a flaw that drops votes. Oops. It’s warning 34 states that use the machines of the problem which was highlighted in the lawsuit Ohio filed against Premiere/Diebold. Not only that, but it’s admitting the flaw in the software has been in the software for the past decade.

So, uh, why was the company blaming anti-virus software just a couple months ago?

It should also make us question Premier/Diebold’s longstanding claim that independent outsiders should not be allowed to inspect its machines for problems. Of course, Diebold execs are already downplaying all of this, claiming that they were “confident” that this hadn’t actually impacted any elections, though they offer no proof of that. The company’s president admits he’s “distressed” that they were wrong in their previous analysis, but he fails to explain why the company is so against letting outsides inspect the machines to avoid such flaws. In the meantime, the company insists that the problem will be patched in time for the November election, and I’m sure we’re all confident that there won’t be any other problems with their machines, right?

Written by Leisureguy

24 August 2008 at 12:44 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. In reply to your comment: I will check out your link to the court record, however I will express in advance my skepticism as to whether court records are more accurate than other accounts given more freely by both McCain and his first wife. When the McCains divorced, the idea of no fault was not the norm. In any case, I don’t see the relevance. Your reference to a flip flop exposed at Saddleback, I would think, bears more weight.

    The “right” like the “left” is a big place. When the choices boil down to “this” or “that” man certainly voters will have widely different reasons for marking the same ballot. In 2000 when Bush had beaten McCain for the GOP nomination, I who had supported McCain voted for Bush. My decision was a strong vote against Gore rather than a vote for Bush. So, let’s not forget these simple distinctions.

    I certainly did not wish to make light of sex scandals (I’m against them), but McCain’s divorce hardly seems to me to rank with the scandals. If it does then probably a good 50% of the American voting public is similarly guilty (of having gotten divorced).

    I do not expect either candidate to be “perfect” tho’ I think it’s not asking too much to expect any candidate to at least be “normal” (which definitely would have excluded Bill Clinton). And I count their political decisions as more important to scrutinize than their marital harmony. And flip flops should concern us, though sometimes we admire a man who changes his mind.

    Were Obama to renouce his previous opposition to the born alive legislation, he might begin to win back my respect. If he could honestly confront his association with Bill Ayers as a foolhardy rookie moment, I might begin to think him teachable. If he told us it was his wife that dragged him to hear Rev. Wright’s sermons because all the fashionable black middle class was congregating there, I might understand. Certainly he would not be the first man dragged unwillingly to a religious setting. And even if it were his own preening that took him there, men have a fine, long tradition of blaming their weakness on a female authority.

    But none of these things matter. The plain fact is that, as Biden once said, Obama shows (showed) promise, but to presume to the nation’s highest office with no experience and just some gift for speechifying strikes me as arrogant in the extreme.

    So, I’ll vote against Obama on the merits. One of my neighbors was an early Obama supporter, and it was the esteem of this admirable neighbor that first got me looking seriously at the Dem candidate. Obama could not have gotten a better endorsement, in my view, than from this idealistic, intelligent unknown citizen. But after looking more deeply into Obama’s past and into his present actions, for that matter, I cannot support him. I think him very bad for the country, and I write my blog to do my small part to support McCain — who though imperfect is a fine man.

    I really enjoyed your blog. Had such a grand time there. It lifted my spirits enormously. We’re having some family troubles here, my father is dying, and your blog was the bright refuge of fun and delight in an otherwise grim day.

    Thanks for your comment. Tell Meg the cat I say hello.

    From Political consistency and cat names, 2008/08/24 at 5:12 PM



    24 August 2008 at 4:04 pm

  2. The McCain scandal was not that he was divorced, but that he began his affair with Cindy, his second wife, while he was still with his first wife: infidelity, in other words. Certainly a serious thing if committed by a Democrat, so I imagine equally serious for a Republican.

    If you admire George Bush, you’ll certainly be happy with McCain, who’s promised to continue the policies and is arguably more belligerant internationally.

    I have a post with a link to 74 flip-flops McCain has done. If you’re interested, take a look.



    24 August 2008 at 9:09 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: