I should not be surprised, it’s what democrats do. Democrat election fraud for 2010 has already started, so says the Drudge Report.
As is my habit, I hit the Drudge Report first thing in the morning. Today, I see two headlines in red reporting democrat election fraud in North Carolina and and Nevada. In both cases, the fraud was attempted using computerized voting machines.
Such systems make it easy to alter data remotely. In my past life, I designed databases, data systems, data monitoring systems, installed and operated them. Even across international borders.
I don’t trust such systems for such a critical political purpose. They can be hacked or preprogrammed for desired results. Once the data has been changed, you have no audit trail to determine the original desired result. (Yes, I know that databases can backup each transaction. The flaw in that concept is that data can be altered before it reaches that database. Once in, you cannot tell what that original vote was. And, system administrators can also alter data without leaving traces. I’ve seen it done.) It’s either accept everything at face value or dump it all.
I’m glad my county uses paper ballots. You mark your choices with a #2 pencil and run the ballot through a scanner. Old technology to be sure, but that paper ballot still exists and can be used again for recounts. And—there are audit trails and accounting procedures that have been time-tested to insure fraud is at a minimum IF the election judges and poll watchers do their jobs.
Paper ballots can be numbered and tracked. Theoretically, a computerized voting transaction can too. But that computerized transaction can also be spoofed and/or altered and by-pass audit procedures remotely and no one at the polls with know the difference.
I love paper ballots. Long may they be used.