Quote Originally Posted by japangreg
Oh yeah - we should be less concerned with the guys making our paperless, untraceable voting machines giving money to one political party and promising them votes than we should about how the reporters on the evening news vote.

Great sense of priorities there.

Here's what's reasonable: there should be a nationalized system for elections. The machines used should produce a verifiable paper trail. The people responsible for developing and deploying this system should not be partisan operatives (as they were in OH).

What's not reasonable: using voting machines that don't produce verifiable print outs and have a demonstrated habit of flipping votes only toward one party. Using chairmen of (re)election campaigns as election officials.

And I think the fact that Diebold had to go the extra step of making it a rule that this can't happen anymore should tell you if it really is a bad idea.
hah! who said anything about level of concern or priorities? i dont think journalists being liberal is something to be "concerned" about. its just something a person should know if discussing the media. i also think that we should always look to improve our election system and there ought to be a reliable trail of some kind (not necessarily paper after 2006). However, problems with an election system does not qualify as evidence toward a scandal that should lead to a federal investigation, cost tax-payers and throw needless doubt onto the public at an unknown expense. As such, it's a frivolous charge.

good luck finding that non-partisan work-force. people that work at voting centers shouldnt be partisan either. but, they are.

Diebold making rules about contributions that were publicly scorned tells me that they have an active public relations department. As a company they have the right to and probably have been contributing to Republicans for years. that they even bothered to make this rule lends to point made earlier that if theres any avenue that could be taken to tarnish the election results, there are forces frothing at the mouth to do so. any business would be wise to avoid even the appearance of such a problem.

The information leaked tells me that they did some shoddy things in regard to delivering the product California bought. they are, in fact, being sued for that. I believe that is warranted based on the info I have. but, again, it doesnt follow that some voting scandal was occurring.