For depression, just follow the link

Nation’s voting machines tested in secret

Just in case anyone’s forgotten, MO thinks that electronic voting machines, particularly but not limited to those without paper records of votes cast, are a total crock.

For my reasoning, see my previous post on the subject. It includes additional links to additional claims of crockery. (Hat tip to the reader who, um, tipped me off to this article.)

For what it’s worth, I think these people have the right idea. And it’s Y3K-compliant, to boot. (Get it? “To boot”? You don’t have to boot them. Ha ha.) (Via Instapundit)

I don’t care if the results are in quickly. I only care if they’re correct. (In fact, we might all be better served if we don’t know any results until all polls everywhere are closed, but that’s a different subject.)

I’ve backed off a bit from my New Year’s Day doom-and-gloom prediction that electronic voting would be the disaster of the year. I still think there will be accusations and counter-accusations (and even more annoyingly counter-counter-accusations and counter-counter-counter-accusations) in the days and weeks following the election, but I now suspect that it won’t be the end of the world as we know it because the election isn’t going to be nearly as close I thought it would be.

(Get it? “Counter”-accusations? You have to count them. Ha ha.)


  1. The thing I like about electronic voting machines is that they can virtually eliminate stupid voter errors: overvotes, undervotes, smudges, smears, hanging chads, etc. Other than that, I agree with that Colorado town. Better an accurate tally than a quick tally.