'scariest thing I've heard on this program in a long time

[catbyte]

[Warpy]

1. Paper ballots, counted by human beings

It worked in my town in New England. It can work nationwide, just reduce the size of some urban precincts so that people aren't counting ballots for weeks.

NM went to 100% paper Opti-Scan ballots in 2005, thanks to a particularly clumsy election hack in 2004.

Moving to a hand count would not be a bad thing, either, although it would be labor intensive.

Finding out Opti-Scan software had been part of the stolen data would just about make it worthwhile.

Oh, and these goons belong in prison, all of them.

[wnylib]

4. Hard to picture that in NYC, Chicago, LA, etc.

[Warpy]

5. That's where the smaller precincts come in

Each precinct drawn per number of registered voters, so the count could be accomplished by the next morning.

I have to say paper ballots counted by Opti Scan made a huge difference in NM. I'd hate to lose the system but if there software has been compromised by Powell and others, we might have to. Still, it's hard to know how they'd get hacked, the only connection is a power cord plugged into the wall, nothing online, and if there's a USB port, I couldn't find it.

[AmBlue]

2. Yes. PAPER can't be hacked.

The answer is simple. Until they can re-write SECURE election software, we need to take a big step back and go to hand-counted paper ballots. Results will take more time, but so what? We can protect our elections and know unequivocally that the results weren't tampered with.

[summer_in_TX]

3. A paper trail is essential.

But hand counting is not necessarily error-free. It's important to be able to do spot verification using it, and have it available to do a full recount as needed.