BBV alert in Florida! A Trojan Horse...

[Jeebo]

Hey, y'all, am I reading this right? Read this article:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-precount13jan13,0,4337263.story

Now, here's the part I'm wondering about:

<< County Elections Supervisor Theresa LePore said the machines already are equipped to provide printed records of ballots cast in case of a manual recount.

The records show a candidate's ballot position and what candidate's number was selected by each voter who used each machine, she said. But there's no way to determine the intent of those who don't choose a candidate in one or more races, LePore added. >>

Do y'all see what I see in this? If a manual recount requires the electronic touchscreen machines "to provide printed records of ballots cast", aren't they just going to print out THE SAME BOGUS ELECTRONIC RECORDS THAT ARE IN THE MACHINES? And LePore thinks that should satisfy those of us who want a verifiable paper trail? What kind of imbeciles does this woman think we are?

Ron

[Eric J in MN]

1. Theresa LaPore should have resigned after the butterfly ballot

Theresa LaPore should have resigned after the butterfly ballot, but instead she's become a vocal opponent of machines with voter-verifiable paper ballots.

Printing results which the voters never got a chance to verify is meaningless.

It's like, I can type 1+1=3, and then later I can print 1+1=3, but the truth is that 1+1=2.

[ochazuke]

2. Criteria for a verifiable system

Unless a paper printout with a record number is given to the voter so that he can confirm that his vote was recorded correctly, it's no good.

Unless the voter can verify that his record number is in the ledger or whatever they call it so that he can confirm his vote was counted, and counted correctly, it's no good.