NEWSHOUR WITH JIM LEHRER | Electronic Voting Controversy | PBS

[benbur69]

That last commentator has no clue about computers. It is much easier to manipulate a computer than paper.

[JeffreyRodriguez]

The final commentator is wrong, and a fool.

Manipulation of electronic records is far simpler a task than manipulation of physical records. I can change millions of votes in only a second electronically, millions of sheets of paper is a completely different matter.

[anmoose]

Absolutely correct. It's a simple task to print that record on watermarked or otherwise secure paper, in such a way that it's certifiable as an accurate document. Those Diebold machines are flawed, the operating systems are buggy and failure prone, and their security is so weak that they've been experimentally hacked on a voting site, under tight surveillance. Every vote one of those machines holds can be changed in seconds.

Moosie

[JeffreyRodriguez]

The bigger risk is less the machines than the central tabulation computer; though both are easily compromised.

Personally, I like what we have in Arizona: paper ballots are fed into electronic counting machines. I think it's a reasonable mix of technology (speed, ease, accuracy) with accountable paper trails.

[LeoHareMusic]

As the old saying goes, "If a man can make it, a man can break it."