talk.politics.misc

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:48:32 -0400, "Sid9" wrote:

>* US * wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:00:41 GMT, "Scout" wrote:
>>> Compared to the costs ...
>>
>> The electronics are exhorbitantly more expensive,
>> and a total waste of taxpayer resources.
>>
>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:17:51 -0400, "Sid9" wrote:
>>
>>> Electronic voting offers some great advantages...all it needs is a
>>> voter verified independent audit trail.
>>
>> It's too expensive, too slow, too unreliable, and your 'audit trail'
>> won't do you any good because you won't get the audits.
>
>Wrong...

Prove it.

>there are laws today for such audits and they have been done
>frequently.

No one is saying that they'd not be legal or possible.

As for rigged elections, they'll be rigged such that
audits aren't triggered, and even if they're done
anyway, they'll be done on only a tiny fraction
of the 'votes' on carefully selected equipment.

>You speak from ignorance

You're mistaken, and that's fallacious anyway.

The fact remains that it's easy to hide rigging
elections with the electronics.

They're also unreliable (very low MTBF) and
exhorbitantly costly.