BBV: Clark AND Dean choose not to protest internet voting

[Zhade]

Eight of the presidential candidates have written national Democratic officials to support a challenge of Michigan Democrats' plan to allow Internet voting in its caucuses Feb. 7.

Only Howard Dean, former Vermont governor, and Wesley Clark, the retired general who just joined the race, did not sign on to back the protest.

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/6919757.htm

This post will make me soooo popular here in GD... *cringes*

[cthrumatrix]

1. I have brought this up before...the question is WHY?

IF the Democrats are the ones being screwed by electronic vote scams then the question is why is there NOT A VOCAL PROTEST from the candidates like any other subject.

Clearly they can point to the John Hopkins study and the only desire for fair elections and EVERY VOTE COUNTING.

I hate to say this ...but I'm afraid the answer is they serve a "common master".


And yes I know the DNC has issued a desire for an "audit trail". I prefer paper ballots and count until you are done and recount if it's close.

[althecat]

2. Perhaps Dean and Clark have fallen in love with the blogosphere...

And think it will give them an edge...

And we all love you Zhade!!!! How can you say such a thing.....

[Zhade]

11. I love you guys too!

I just know how Dean/Clark threads get ;)

[shirlden]

3. Note, this is internet voting, not

electronic voting machines. This is NOT good. This may be far worse than voting machines. We need to convince all Democrats to stand behind a veto of this idea. Remember the war cry is Paper Ballots, Paper Ballots, Paper Ballots, Paper Ballots, Paper Ballots. Go write that on the blackboard 50 times and then repeat after me.....Paper Ballots, Paper Ballots, Paper Ballots.
Can you say..Paper Ballots?

:bounce:

[althecat]

4. Paper ballots....

Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....Paper ballots....

yip... I can say that... :)

[CoffeePlease1947]

5. Could it be because Clark and Dean have the largest following on the

internet?

I think so. The Clark and Dean folks are the ones that have the largest support on-line. It only makes sense that the others would protest.

I am fine with it :).

The worst Clark could do is second. Even Bush's support on the internet is less than that of Kucinich. So I think we have the upper edge on the game in this one. I would be surprised if the General Election doesn't take place on the internet by 2024. Your voter turnout would be much higher than it is now.

Mike

[Byronic]

6. "Democracy is about equal access..."

and internet voting is not equal access. That is the point that Al Sharpton has been making and I think he is totally right. If you can afford a computer and internet access then you have an advantage over those that do not.

Sharpton went so far as to call the idea a kind of a "high-tech poll tax" that discriminates unfairly.

It is not surprising that Howard Dean would support internet voting. After all he has made an extraordinary impact in that sphere and should be congratulated for doing so, nevertheless, I strongly agree with the other 7 Democratic candidates on this issue. The bottom line is, it simply isn't fair.

[w13rd0]

7. I agree...

...and I'm a Dean supporter. Dean supporters, for one, have shown a willingness to get out and take action, I think it's doing a disservice to them to think they're too lazy to actually make a trip to the polls. Despite their obvious strengths online, both Dean and Clark would do well in joining the other candidates in criticizing this...

[punpirate]

8. I agree about access....

The excuse made is that there are other points of access (public libraries, etc.), and that doesn't exactly wash, either. Steady access to a computer also develops the skills necessary to navigate the internet, which someone doesn't develop at a public library on the day of the caucus.

But, truly, it sounds as if these people need some education in the matter. How about what Bruce Schneier has to say about internet voting:

http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0102.html#10

Clark is supposed to be big on techie stuff, but that doesn't mean he understands security from a public internet standpoint (from what I know, there's no Micro$oft software on computer-guided weapons). }(

Cheers.

[Byronic]

9. Yes, you're right

the 'public library' argument doesn't really work does it? Sharpton made the comparison between a person who only has to get a cup of coffee, go into their living room at home, and vote by clicking a mouse to "A Grandmother in a housing development who is going to have to go downstairs and walk 5 blocks to vote. Who is going to have a larger share of the vote?"

[KittyWampus]

10. Article Written Oct. 2nd- Clark Entered Race Sept 17th

So two weeks later he's supposed to have ALL the issues worked out?

No wheres in the article here does it say that Clark supports Internet Voting (although he might well do so). It cannot be assumed that he chooses not to protest it... he just didn't sign the Michigan Protest 2 weeks after getting the race. That is NOT MAKING A STANCE ON THE ISSUES. If, after being the race for about a month, Clark were to refuse again and/or publicly come out against internet voting... then we can debate it.

I happen to think it's important to get people out together to polling places on the same day/days to vote. There's a ritualistic part to that which is important. Experiences like that help bind us together as a Nation.

However, I've heard PRO's and CON's regarding Internet Voting. I refuse to automatically say it's a bad thing without knowing all the facts. The article states Arizona has used Internet Voting. How did that go?

Clark has at least addressed Black Box Voting & I started a thread about that:

"i was particularly glad to hear his answer to the question "how will we know our votes are counted
correctly?"
he mentioned charlie rangel heading up the voter-verifiable paper trail issue on electronic voting machines.
this to me was a sign that he is sincere about his passion for politics, as many of the candidates out there
don't even have this very complicated issue on their radar screen, much less in tune with those who have the
answer for how to solve it."

[Zhade]

12. I wasn't trying to smear either of them.

Just mentioning what I learned.

By the way, is Rangel a co-sponsor of the Rush Holt legislation (the one we anti-BBVers support), or the non-Rush Holt one (which is clever in how it ALMOST addresses the issue, but is critically flawed)?

[RedEagle]

13. Internet Voting 10,000 Times Worse....

...than the touch screens.

That is what I was told by a computer scientist.

Why make vote fraud just that much easier?

It's not just a hacker or a cell phone connection, it's the world that can hack the vote.

If the Dems insist on internet for the primaries, and I think they contracted with Election.com (Accenture now), you can bet that the best candidate for "someone" will be picked, it just won't have anything to do with what the people really wanted.

The best thing the Dems could do at the primary is to go to paper ballots and HAND COUNT. Now THAT would make a statement.

[Zan_of_Texas]

14. Paper Ballots. Hand Counted. Right at the Precinct.

Post the results at the door. Send 'em to anyone who wants 'em.

Yes!

It works! Places do this already and it works. It's fast, it's cheap, and it's accurate. And transparent.

Internet voting? :puke:

Election.com? WTF is that entity all about anyway?!?! -- it was majority owned by Saudis until the spotlight hit, and it went to Accenture. http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzelec0227,0,2634964.story?coll=ny-business-headlines

Election.com Sold To Group Tied To Saudi Nationals

By Mark Harrington
Staff Writer NEWSDAY

February 27, 2003

Election.com, a struggling Garden City start-up scheduled to provide online absentee ballots for U.S. military personnel in the 2004 federal election, has quietly sold controlling power to an investment group with ties to unnamed Saudi nationals, according to company correspondence.

In a letter sent to a select group of well-heeled Election.com investors Jan. 21, the online voting and voter registration company disclosed that the investment group Osan Ltd. paid $1.2 million to acquire 20 million preferred shares to control 51.6 percent of the voting power.

In a Newsday interview in October, Charles Smith, a representative of Osan who sits on Election.com's board, declined to name the Saudi Arabian investors with a stake in the company, other than to say they were "passive” and part of a larger group that included Americans and Europeans. <more>

[Code_Name_D]

15. I dissagree

No wheres in the article here does it say that Clark supports Internet Voting (although he might well do so). It cannot be assumed that he chooses not to protest it... he just didn't sign the Michigan Protest 2 weeks after getting the race. That is NOT MAKING A STANCE ON THE ISSUES. If, after being the race for about a month, Clark were to refuse again and/or publicly come out against internet voting... then we can debate it.

Oh but it IS stating a position. That of ambivolence. And its a position that can be just as damaging as sidding with Bush.

[creativelcro]

16. it seems that...

If politician X believes that vulnerability Y in the voting system would lead to a bias in his/her favor, then there is no reason to complain... Sad, but true... -CV