[EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines

[rob brown]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Kathy Dopp <kathy.dopp at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:01:45 -0400
> > From: Dave Ketchum <davek at clarityconnect.com>
> > Subject: Re: [EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines
>
> >> Well here is where you and I differ.  I think if electoral fraud in the
> >> US were eliminated, it would be a good thing, but not dramatically
> >> change things, any more than eliminating shoplifting would dramatically
> >> change our economy.  I do not believe that such fraud changes the
> >> outcome of a large percentage of elections, and in those it does, it was
> >> pretty close anyway.
>
> And how do you know this since elections are not subjected to
> independent audits except in one state (beginning in 2006 - NM)?  Do
> you believe that you are psychic and *know* which elections are being
> subjected to fraud in the last couple of decades since ballots have
> been primarily secretly counted by private companies with easily
> hackable, unaccountable voting equipment.
>

I did not say I *know*, I said I *think*.

Your argument could be made to support any crazy conspiracy theory out
there.  How do you know aliens aren't controlling our thoughts?  You don't.
Or for that matter, how do you know your spouse isn't cheating on you
without proof?  You take a reasonable, balanced perspective on things.
Which you seem unable to do on this issue.

I'm sure a degree of electoral fraud happens in the US (but much moreso in
other places).  But murderers get away with murder, police are being bought
off by criminals, government employees steal office supplies.  No one knows
exactly how much any of things happen.  We try to limit them (balancing the
degree of the problem and the cost of addressing it), and we go on with our
lives.

I do not object to the fact that you consider it an issue of more importance
than various other issues (street crime/violence, cancer, plurality voting,
bacterial resistance to antibiotics, middle east conflict, poverty,
whatever...).  I do object to your expectation that others on this list
consider it so, since that is not the core issue of the list.

What I care about, and my understanding of what this list is about, is the
problems due to plurality voting and how to fix them.  Basically the math of
voting and reforming that side of it.  And since you are distracting from
that, I take issue.


> >> So my priorities are different.
>
> Yes. Apparently.
>

Due to the nature of the list, isn't that expected?

This isn't an election security list.  See
http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Election-methods_mailing_list and
http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Main_Index if you are confused as to what is
meant by "methods".  Security and fraud prevention is at best a peripheral
topic.

I'm not saying you can't discuss this stuff here, but if you come in
expecting us to care about your pet issue as much as you do, you are being
unrealistic.

>> Giving up on fixing a huge problem because it makes it more difficult to
> >> fix a much smaller problem is not something I can support.
>
> Ah. So you consider it a "small" problem that the public has virtually
> no reason to believe that election results are accurate in 49 out of
> 50 states and that even the one state that subjects their election
> results to independent scrutiny, does so in a wholly unscientific
> manner that is insufficient to detect vote fraud in close election
> contests?
>

Well, first off, I did not say small.  I said "smaller".  Big difference.  I
consider the problem with plurality huge, strongly affecting the shape of
our government (i.e. it has become polarized into two main parties that
spend most of their time battling each other rather than solving real
problems).

Your issue is with crime.....a fundamentally different thing.

And just why, pray tell, do you believe that the fact that elections
> is the only major industry (I am aware of) that is not subjected to
> any independent auditing, yet election winners decide who controls
> budgets in the millions to trillions of dollars and make decisions on
> awarding contracts worth millions to billions of dollars, is such a
> "small" problem?


Why do you not consider the issues with plurality a larger problem than you
do?  Maybe because that is your pet issue, this is mine.

I won't address the rest of your email because it is basically just more of
the same...you typing in all caps and labeling things insane and calling
this list a "rabbit hole" because others aren't as convinced as you there is
a massive conspiracy going on.

-rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20080816/c1e68fd2/attachment.htm>