In Reply to: Re: Before the election, Trump was bragging how Denmocrats don't know posted by russsmith on July 13, 2025 at 10:25:10
Since they provide a large number of reliable electoral college votes, it would make sense to install the system in those machines too, just as guardrails in case things start going bad. They may also have had some internal polling that alerts them to the possibility. But then, who knows why bank robbers put a watch on this particular corner or that?
I feel like the solution to this problem is not to go even more high-tech, but go the opposite direction and strip all the technology out. Stop consolidating ballots and vote counts. Start with radically increasing the number of polling places. That means fewer voters per place, which means the count can be done more quickly. Separate the ballots: one for president, one for congress, one for whatever ... make the markings big so they can be seen from a distance, and let people drop their ballots in large transparent boxes. At the end of the day, count the votes locally, in public, by hand. Anyone can observe and keep their count. If it has to be recounted, no problem because they don't have thousands to go through. Everyone participates in every locale and the rest is simple addition where every number that comes in is publicly observed. End of the f*cking story.
You don't need machines. You don't need scanners. Old school, human hands and human eyeballs solves the problem that should have never existed in the first place.
there's literally no mechanism now to declare the election null and void,
Very good point. My kinda point, even. Yes, our election system has no built-in method for self correction. and that's one more way in which we're suffering the early adopter problem.