Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Gore Vidal Savages Electronic Voting

CmdrTaco posted more than 10 years ago | from the something-to-think-about dept.

United States 1029

gribbly writes "aging author and social critic Gore Vidal savaged electronic voting in an interview with the LA Weekly. The interview deals mainly with (what's wrong with) the Bush Administration, but halfway down he says: 'We don't want an election without a paper trail...all three owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush administration. Is this not corruption?'."

cancel ×

1029 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

did you know (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467150)

that gore vidal is a homosexual?

now you know.

it's not offtopic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467354)

Gore Vidal really is a homosexual!

It's true!

Come on Gore.. (-1, Offtopic)

grub (11606) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467167)

.. tell us what you really think.

How much press will it get, though? (5, Insightful)

Denyer (717613) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467168)

Given that much of the media is similarly controlled?

Re:How much press will it get, though? (-1)

shaka999 (335100) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467197)

Sorry, the media is on the otherside of the street. Just remember

Media = liberal
Voting machine companies = conservative

Re:How much press will it get, though? (1, Troll)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467236)

Yes, the media* is liberal.

* we do not include Rush, talk radio, or Fox News (Number 1 in cable news) in our def of the media.

Re:How much press will it get, though? (3, Insightful)

javiercero (518708) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467292)

Yeah, right now I can go through my AM dial and hear all those "liberal" media outlets. Or pick up all those "liberal" newspapers, or listen to the "liberal" clearchannel owned stations, and of course FOX news is as "liberal" as it gets....

Jeez if the media is "liberal" in American I just do not wanna think about how much those poor conservatives must struggle to get their point of view accross the news....

Re:How much press will it get, though? (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467294)

Talk radio is a forum for opinions and you'd be hard pressed to mistake it otherwise. The term "media" refers to what is presented as supposedly unbiased news.

Re:How much press will it get, though? (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467411)

The term "media" refers to what is presented as supposedly unbiased news.


So what you're saying is, the "media" doesn't exist!

Re:How much press will it get, though? (1)

fenix down (206580) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467422)

Well, if it's unbiased news, then obviously conservatives are going to think it's liberal and liberals are going to think it's conservative. What's the problem?

Re:How much press will it get, though? (3, Interesting)

GMontag (42283) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467315)

Correct, which leaves a whole lot more on the Left, like major newspapers, magazines and all the rest of the networks plus the rest of 24 hour cable news..

Re:How much press will it get, though? (3, Funny)

Rick.C (626083) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467218)

Given that much of the media is similarly controlled?

But at least the press leaves a paper trail.

Re:How much press will it get, though? (3, Interesting)

HungWeiLo (250320) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467391)

Not quite. Time magazine recently yanked an archived article quoting Bush Sr. as basically saying that invading Iraq would not be a wise thing to do.

Re:How much press will it get, though? (1)

Usquebaugh (230216) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467429)

Not online they don't. Who reads old papers anyway?

Re:How much press will it get, though? (0, Insightful)

letxa2000 (215841) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467257)

Hopefully none. He's already gotten too much by being posted on Slashdot. He's obviously an old, bitter man with an agenda.

What I'd really like to know is whether the owners of those companies also contributed to the Democrats. It's standard operating procedure to donate to both parties so you're in business whoever is elected. And with something as delicate as voting equipment I can't imagine they'd donate to one and not the other.

This article has once again confirmed by belief that Slashdot is as much political as it is technological. Dozens of paragraphs of Bush-bashing and it gets on Slashdot for a passing (politically biased) comment about electronic voting? Can we be any more liberal, please???

Re:How much press will it get, though? (1)

Denyer (717613) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467398)

It would be preferable, IMO, to prevent those involved in such sensitive projects from contributing to [i]any[/i] political party.

Oh look (0, Troll)

JPelorat (5320) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467170)

Yet another thinly-veiled hatefest. Weeha.

So? (-1, Flamebait)

nakhla (68363) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467172)

So if these vendors contributed to democratic candidates would that make it any better?

Re:So? (1)

metallicagoaltender (187235) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467196)

Of course not...now if Jello Biafra mysteriously is elected president next year, that'll be a different story.

Would be better if they didn't contribute at all. (1)

Denyer (717613) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467285)

In addition to this, the mechanism needs to be transparent, easy to audit and beyond tampering if it's to become a credible solution.

One possibility is something similar to DVD-ROM hardware region locks, in which chips are 'burnt out' every time a signal is transmitted.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467297)

perfect example of biased moderation and politics on slashdot. how is the parent post any more or less flamebait than the fucking slashdot story that is being discussed?

wtg moderators (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467316)

if only the story could be labled -1 flamebait

Who cares about paper trails? (2, Insightful)

eurleif (613257) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467182)

They just let us know there was cheating, but no one in power will look at them. Look at the presidential election in Florida 2000!

You mean ... (1)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467446)

the presidential selection in Florida 2000.

Since the SC made him the Selected President*, that's the official descriptor now.

Why oh why (0, Troll)

Nazmun (590998) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467186)

Are our electronic voting systems so f'd up? Is it really that hard to implement a decent system without retarted bugs like in the last article (110,000 votes recorded versus the real 5k number).

Also why don't most normal American's a have a problem with Bush yet?

Re:Why oh why (5, Insightful)

eurleif (613257) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467203)

Also why don't most normal American's a have a problem with Bush yet?
Normal americans wouldn't have a problem with a reincarnated Hitler. As long as they have TV, plenty of food, etc. most of them will be happy.

Re:Why oh why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467390)

Yeah, that's a lovely 'enlightened' attitude you've got there. Makes you look sooooo cosmopolitan and elite, a true educated thinker for our time.

Any other grossly outrageous blanket stereotypes you've got rolling around in that highbrow forehead of yours that you'd like to toss out? All Israeli males are babyfuckers, something like that perhaps?

Re:Why oh why (1, Insightful)

proj_2501 (78149) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467214)

because he has somehow convinced the press that they are to be his lapdogs. large-scale terrorist activity didn't hurt his powers of persuasion. clinton didn't get so lucky.

Re:Why oh why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467254)

Maybe, just maybe, because there's nothing for them to have a problem with.

It never occurs to people like you that you might simply be wrong. No matter what the facts, no matter how thin or tenuous the 'pattern of evidence', no matter how ridiculous the conspiracy, you're just right and anyone who has a differing opinion is either stupid or 'in on it'.

That attitude starts to border on religious fanaticism, you know.

Re:Why oh why (1)

JBark (170224) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467262)

Also why don't most normal American's a have a problem with Bush yet?

Because we shudder to think what would have happened had Gore become president. :)

Re:Why oh why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467310)

Pretty much the same old shit I imagine.

Re:Why oh why (1)

Dav3K (618318) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467361)

In a word, apathy.

Re:Why oh why (1)

liquidpele (663430) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467433)

Seriously.

If I had my way, you would need at least a high school education to be able to vote.

Re:Why oh why (1)

Ichijo (607641) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467441)

Also why don't most normal American's a have a problem with Bush yet?
Because they have no compelling reason to [telegraph.co.uk] .

Have a Diebold Christmas! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467192)

'Twas the day of the Christmas Party, when all through Global
Not a phone was ringing, not even a mobile;
The wreaths were hung on the front door with care,
Not knowing a Wind Storm soon would be there;
The employees were seated, all quiet in their spots,
Things were too calm...Our stomachs were in knots;
and Moe with his spreadsheets with Deby in tow,
Had just settled down to discuss the cash flow,
When out in the parking lot there arose such a clatter,
I sprang from my desk to see what was the matter.
Away to the window like a quick puff of smoke,
I ripped up my hose and knocked over my coke.
The sun on the lawn showed a lack of any snow
Which gave the luster of Summer to objects below,
When, what to my wondering eyes should arrive,
But a 300M. Now that's a drive,
In the blink of an eye, he snapped back the seatbelt,
And I knew in a moment it must be Van Pelt.
More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;
"Now, Robert! now, Barry! now, Sherry and John!
On Diekman! on Kaplan! on Mickey and Don!
To the top of the heap to the top of it all
Outsell them, Outsell them, Outsell them all!"
And then, in a twinkling, he came up the steps
Swearing and screaming about each of the reps.
As I drew in my head, and was turning around,
In the front door Van Pelt came with a bound.
He was dressed like a prez', from his head to his foot,
And his clothes were all pressed, no ashes or soot;
A bundle of contracts he had flung on his back,
And he looked like a peddler just opening his pack.
His eyes - how they twinkled! his dimples how merry!
He said I've got RFP's...where the heck is Larry!
Orders for AccuVotes, Orders for Touch Screens,
Let's get moving and build some machines.
We've got AccuPoke, AccuFake...Voting's the theme,
And the visions encircle his head like a dream;
He had a smile on his face and whistled a tune,
As he thought about shipping 10,000 units by the end of June.
He was happy and cheerful, a right jolly ole Pelt
And I smiled when I saw him, in spite of myself;
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon everyone was smiling, the joy was widespread;
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
Picked up the phone and call the Cobb County Clerk,
He gave everyone a raise, like a good CEO,
And giving a nod, out the door he did go;
He sprang to his car, to his Team gave a whistle,
And away he did fly like the down of a thistle.
But I heard him exclaim, as he drove out of sight,
Happy Christmas to all and to all...Keep Smiling!

sure, but... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467211)

Right. And I'm sure they were donors to the Clinton Administration as well.

Liberals are the ones who pushed for Motor-Voter legislation and now want to give driver's licenses to illegals. Who's up to their eyeballs in corruption?

Re:sure, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467365)

Who's up to their eyeballs in corruption? The guy who gave $245M to Taliban controlled Afghanistan, thats who.

Ugggg.... (2, Troll)

TedTschopp (244839) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467212)

Why do people need to believe this is some conspriracy. Bad Code /= a vast conspiracy to steal the election. Bad Code = Bad Code. Lets get upset at that. Bad code on a voting machine = potential to steal the election, but until you have proof please keep your fingerpointing to yourself. Both sides of the political debate here in the States and abroad would love to steal an election.

Re:Ugggg.... (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467288)

It's not just bad code. It's suspicious code.

Besides that, why else would they so fight opening the source? Trade secrets? How many companies out there are making voting machines? Why is it a problem if they all open their source? If there is code "sharing" going on, they'd know about it almost immediately due to the nature of the process.

So why are they so opposed to it?

Re:Ugggg.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467319)

It isn't just bad code when uncertified code gets installed on machines just prior or durring an actual election.

Many of the people involved, all of the way to the top, seem to have the attitude to where they are more concerned about selling machines to the public sector than creating a mechanism to where the process of voting can be improved.

I don't immediately worry about big business money going to the republican party that supports them interfearing with the votes. I worry about terrorist that can intefere with the election and elect Bush for a second term.

Isn't potential election stealing worrying? (4, Insightful)

Kinniken (624803) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467325)

Bad code on a voting machine = potential to steal the election, but until you have proof please keep your fingerpointing to yourself.

Proof? No, but what looks like frightening bugs in one of the most critical tasks of a democracy, from companies whose owners are heavily involved in politic. Now, that does not necessarily mean that election-rigging is under way, but IMHO it is cause enough for public scrutiny.

Both sides of the political debate here in the States and abroad would love to steal an election.

So what? Should we let them do it, trusting that some sort of balance will be kept by the rigging on both side?

Re:Ugggg.... (3, Insightful)

mapmaker (140036) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467415)

The problem isn't bad code. The problem is hidden, unverifyable code.

Hiding the process used to count votes, and making that process unverifyable (is that a word?) once the votes have been counted, is an execellent way to steal an election.

Since all the electronic voting equipment manufacturers are insisting on hidden, unverifyable code, and all of them are "rooting for" the same political party, it isn't exactly a wacko idea to think there might be something fishy going on here.

Yes, both parties would love to steal an election. But one party appears to actually be implementing the means to do so.

Re:Ugggg.... (1)

edwdig (47888) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467452)

It's not just bad code. The whole procedure is bad. In fact, it's designed to make it impossible to prove if there's some kind of conspiracy going on.

By your logic, we shouldn't be complaining until we notice a candidate receiving 100 million votes from the state of Alaska.

The problem with electronic voting (-1, Troll)

PhysicsGenius (565228) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467216)

is safety, pure and simple. How do you transmit the results and have them be verifiable but also keep anonymity? Research has shown that a simple substitution cipher would likely be inadequate. What else is there? Some might suggest the innovated "One Time Pad", but we need to hold elections at least every four years--we need a solution that will work more than one time.

I think we'll be seeing paper voting for a long time to come.

Re:The problem with electronic voting (1, Informative)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467334)

Some might suggest the innovated "One Time Pad", but we need to hold elections at least every four years--we need a solution that will work more than one time.

A one-time pad isn't what you seem to think of. For example, I could have a cd-rw with a 100,000 1,024kbyte keys, all different. You have the same cd-rw. I send you a message encrypted with one of the keys - then I overwrite that key w. the burner. You decrypt w. the same key, and overwrite the key w. the burner. So long as we are the only 2 people w. the physical CD-RW, the "one-time" pad is good for 100,000 messages.

Gore Vidal is an idiot (-1, Troll)

ellem (147712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467217)

Slashdot posted this on the front page so they could all remind us they hate Bush.

Yes you may mod me a Troll now.

Re:Gore Vidal is an idiot (2)

sulli (195030) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467341)

So you think Vidal is an idiot (debatable). What is your position then on Bush's assault on the Constitution? Do you support the wholesale destruction of our freedoms that Bush is presiding over? Stand up and be counted if you really think this is better for the republic.

Re:Gore Vidal is an idiot (0)

Lando Griffin (698606) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467353)

Yep. Typical Slashdot uber-liberal Chicken Little-ism.

better than... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467423)

...uber-corruption neo-conservative chickenhawk-ism

Since I don't give a rats ass... (1)

MisanthropicProggram (597526) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467424)

about my karma. I also dislike Bush, BUT you do raise an interesting editorial question. And, I, myself have seen a trend lately in content. And... you should have been modded as "OFFTOPIC" not "Flaimbait"

Demand a paper trail! (5, Informative)

Eraserhd (21298) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467221)

Sign the HR 2239 petition [thepetitionsite.com] . It requires electronic machines to produce a receipt which is deposited in a lock box in case of a recount and mandates .5% of districts at random do a recount to verify accuracy of the machines.

Civil Disobedience (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467223)

On the idea of rebelling against a clearly problematic system, is there a way for voters to 'inadvertantly' do something along the lines of, say, mistaking an evote machine for an unhammered nail, metaphorically speaking...

No Paper Trail = No Trust (4, Insightful)

visionsofmcskill (556169) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467230)

For the first ten years (minimum) every one of these voting systems should print out a physical copy of voters selections for them to doule check and for submision in the ballot box (just like now)....

From that point the ballots should be counted in the traditional manner and used to audit the eletronic reports. If there is any significiant discrepency the paper ballots should take precedence. This procedure should continue until the eletronic voting process is as reliably accurate as the ballot method for a period of years.

After that point we can take the electronic method as the primary method, witht he printed results being automaticly placed into a ballot box connected to these machines.

If there is ever a time the printed ballot form should cease to exist i cannot for-see it right now. If there isnt physical evidence of the voting process somewhere, i feel highly dubious as to the integrity of the entire system.

--vision

Re:No Paper Trail = No Trust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467290)

10 years is 2.5 presidential terms...

Corruption? (2, Funny)

jemfinch (94833) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467231)

The only corruption here is the horrible corruption of the English language that somehow lead to CmdrTaco thinking "to savage" meant "to ravage."

Jeremy

this (1)

Hubert_Shrump (256081) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467233)

from the author of 'caligula', the motion picture.

take it or leave it.

I hardly believe (2, Insightful)

bigjnsa500 (575392) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467235)

I will hardly ever believe anything coming from a California paper or magazine. All this bigotry and hatred for anything Bush is totally ruining this country. You want change? Fine, then vote them out of office. But to constantly blast anybody in the media who doesn't think like you do, or believe in what you believe is like a child throwing a tantrum.

Stop bitching and moaning and get out there and DO something about it. Jeez...

That's the last political statement I will make on /.

Re:I hardly believe (0, Flamebait)

dacarr (562277) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467327)

Well, I guess I better get off my sorry ass and vote him out of office RIGHT NOW.

Oh, wait, the primaries, let alone the generals, don't actually happen until 2004. Guess I gotta wait and spend the time bitching about Dubya, don't I?

Re:I hardly believe (2, Informative)

bigjnsa500 (575392) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467371)

Nobody said he was the perfect president. That's why there are term limitations. You don't like somebody in office, next term vote them out. Its so easy even a child could do it.

Re:I hardly believe (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467389)

Voting against Bush only works if the votes get counted.

Re:I hardly believe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467410)

We never voted him into office in the first place.

You can call him what you want, but he's not *my* President.

As noted author, Gore Vidal, was ... (5, Funny)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467239)

led away to his Guantanamo relocation center, he was quoted as saying ...oh, wait. The Official Information Minister has informed me that reporting Vidal's final statement would make me an enemy combatant, and would mean that the terrorists had won. And that would be doubleplusungood.

No Whining Zone (1, Insightful)

syntap (242090) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467249)

Another example of bitter young men growing up to be bitter old men.

Oh, and no solutions are provided in the article either, other than to replace the current swag of corrupt politicians with a new swag of corrupt politicians.

With all things politic (1)

UrgleHoth (50415) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467255)

Even if activity is legal, it is the image or sense of impropriety which gets people's ire up. That seems to be the case with electronic voting, like the case with Haliburton.

Gore Vidal is a FAGGOT (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467261)

Peter puffing faggot.

Gore Vidal, Homosexualist (1)

handy_vandal (606174) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467386)

Peter puffing faggot.

Vidal prefers the term "homosexualist" [fawny.org] .

-kgj

Its not a bug, its a feature! (1)

ChesireKat (601712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467265)

"..all three owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush administration. Is this not corruption?'."
---------
I can see it now
---------
"Sir, the votes came in. You have a unanimous vote."

"hrm. couldnt this be a bug?"

Nono sir, its not a bug, its a feature!

Fine hair products (4, Funny)

GoofyBoy (44399) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467270)

Why do I care what a popular salon owner says about this issue?

Just another leftist whiner (0, Troll)

clustersnarf (236) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467272)

Whenever someone from an opposing party wins its all whines and cheese. If electoral races and political parties were IRC it would be something like this:

OMFG TEH VOET WAS RIGGIED!!!11 I WANT OPZ SO I CAN KICK THEM!

All I've heard since GWB was elected was people who wanted some socialst in power saying things bad about the current president as if it really matters. These people take their toys and go home when they don't get their way. Not to mention cry about it forever.

I didnt hear the "vast right wing conspirators" whining this much when Bill "pants around my ankles" Clinton was in office for 8 years. Lying his ass off and basicly fucking us all in the ass.

And even now, with this "memo" from the Democrats about slandering Bush next year to win the election, using the powers of the Independent Council to lock up the current administration so they can sneak some socialist in and tax us all to death. WAY TO GO, keep whining about people who care about this country and stop using this "conspiracy" blip to explain all your cry baby rants.

OMG TEH CLUSTERSNARF MAEKS ID10T JOKES!!!!! WTF!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467421)

yeah whatever.

using the powers of the Independent Council

Dude. The Independent Counsel Act expired and will not be renewed after the Kenneth Starr debacle. If you don't even know that, why the fucking fuck fuck do you think anyone should pay attention to you?

Re:Just another leftist whiner (1)

citizenkeith (720680) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467437)

"I didnt hear the "vast right wing conspirators" whining this much when Bill "pants around my ankles" Clinton was in office for 8 years. Lying his ass off and basicly fucking us all in the ass." Let's see.... a balanced budget, huge surplus, a military that's kicked ass for Bush (deployment in Afghanistan happened long before the Bush administration presented a military budget), lower unemployment, lower crime rate... Yeah, that's fucked in the ass. http://www.prospect.org/print/V14/10/tomasky-m.htm l Enjoy.

Re:Just another leftist whiner (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467453)

"Higher tax bad, lower tax good".

Keep up the chanting, there's a good sheep.

He's a luddite, but a sharp luddite (2, Interesting)

Ars-Fartsica (166957) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467273)

Vidal may be a notorious blue-blood, and clearly a luddite, but nonetheless he is the source of an incredible amount of scathing invective tracing back to The Decline and Fall of the American Empire, which somewhat dated now, is still biting.

Vidal is one of America's sharpest social critics, although he only operates as a critic. He ran for office once but I suspect he would be a failure as a career politician despite his family ties.

Corruption (2)

MisanthropicProggram (597526) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467279)

...all three owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush administration. Is this not corruption?'."

No, I'm sad to say, it's the American way.

enough (1, Troll)

Boromir son of Faram (645464) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467282)

I am so sick of hearing Gore bitch about Bush and about how elections don't work or whatever. Newsflash, you lost, now shut up.

Re:enough (2, Funny)

bark (582535) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467367)

it's not al gore we're talking about ... it's gore vidal, some wierd person

Re:enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467375)

Um...

You do realize that Gore Vidal and Al Gore are different people, right?

Re:enough (1)

nearlygod (641860) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467409)

I think your missing something here: Gore Vidal != Al Gore.

Re:enough (1)

jratcliffe (208809) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467419)

Um, the guy quoted in this article is Gore Vidal, the author, not Al Gore, the failed presidential candidate.

Re:enough (2, Informative)

saddino (183491) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467420)

Newsflash, you're confusing Gore Vidal [commondreams.org] with Al Gore [algoreisourpresident.com] .

Re:enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467432)

Yeah, the guy with the MOST votes did lose.

yeah, we did lose, after all Bush WAS elected.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467456)

...by a majority of the Supreme Court.

Have you OD'd on Fox News or were you just asleep for the last half of 2000?

News for... Policy Wonks? Bias that matters. (1)

Tailhook (98486) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467293)

Slashdot hasn't been producing enough subtle leftist spin while michael has been out. Guess CT is trying to make up for it...

A vote for Hanging Chads (1)

j0keralpha (713423) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467299)

One thing i will say about even traditional paper based voting is that
A. we know how it works,
and B. it doesnt have to be rebooted and have its hardware and software swapped out and replaced with unverified components (see Diebold). How the hell are we supposed to trust an electoral system thats going to allow this?

Bush will win... (1)

56ksucks (516942) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467301)

I'll probably get modded down for this but.. If you put a voting machine in front of the same people who couldn't figure out the Florida ballot and said it was confusing, what makes you think they can figure out a voting machine? If these are the same people who are going to be voting against Bush, then yeah he'll win if they have to use a machine.


----

Time for Open Source Voting Machines (2, Interesting)

!Squalus (258239) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467305)

We need these things to be built upon Open and Inspectable Source and on machines that the public can trust as giving valid results. Otherwise - it is all BS. I have been calling for a Corporation for Public Software to do just this. I continue to do so.

This simply is too important to allow hacked machines to spit out as answer that somebody pre-determined in a back-room deal.

We can do something about it now, or we can pay the consequences of an untrusted election system come next year. The choices are few, the ooportunities many. Write me off as stupid if you just don't give a rat's, but you will sooner or later.

Paper trail (1)

apoplectic (711437) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467326)

How Luddite. We've just got to have a paper trail, eh? Let me see, does "hanging chad" mean anything to you? Sheesh....

Paper trail for what?? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7467332)


Hah! Did it matter in the 2000 election in Florida?
The trail is still there -- is someone doing anything about it?
Bah crap! The precedent is already there. It could be the Dem party which does that the next time...
Its all the same in the end.

Must be Bush's fault (2, Informative)

obsid1an (665888) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467333)

We don't want an election without a paper trail...all three owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush administration. Is this not corruption?

And if Clinton was president odds are they would be donating to Clinton. It may be corruption, but at least it's universal.

A Republican agrees (1, Flamebait)

mcg1969 (237263) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467352)

OK, Gore Vidal is an idiot, and I'd pay no more attention to him than I would a Frenchman trying to "educate" me about how the U.S. ought to work.

But despite my Republican affiliation and support for Bush, I agree that current electronic voting systems are shamefully flawed. The lack of a paper, human-readable ballot receipt prevents any sort of independent audit of the results to confirm their accuracy. And the various statements attributed to Diebold's C.E.O. about "delivering" the electoral vote to Bush is just ludicrious and rightfully cast serious doubts on his company's credibility in this arena.

Electronic voting can be done right. But currently it is not...

Obligatory Simpsons' Reference (3, Funny)

SplendidIsolatn (468434) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467355)

Marge: So, did you call any of your friends?0
Lisa: Friend? [scoffs] These are my only friends.
[holds up a book]
Grownup nerds like Gore Vidal, and even he's kissed more boys
than I ever will.
Marge: Girls, Lisa. Boys kiss girls.

Donors to the "administration"??? (2, Insightful)

magarity (164372) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467360)

all three owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush administration

Everyone who pays taxes in the US is a "donor" to the executive branch. Perhaps you mean the Bush campaign? In that case, you may be suprised that most companies actually donate pretty equally to both sides just to cover the bases. What were these companies' total donations to political campaigns compared to just to just Bush's? Without that info, this is a meaninglessly paranoid "article".

electronic voting/paper trail (3, Funny)

jdruyjdruy (723939) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467377)

If we're talking about paper voting, don't paper mill companies give big bucks to the Republican party?

I understand where he is coming from, but... (1)

Inebrius (715009) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467396)

Mr. Vidal seems to concentrate his focus on one administration. The reality is that this power grab is not owned by one particular party. Democrats want their share of control, just like Republicans. Both parties have entitlement systems and power systems which are designed to further the goals of the elite, the politicians, and their financial backers.

The rights of corporations often trump the rights of individuals. Just look at the recent laws on the books...if they were reversed so corporations could also be fined not per song per use per day, but per person ripped off, colluded against, lied to, and per person they commit fraud against - at the exact same rate individuals pay per song, per offense, per unauthorized use...you would see laws get changed and fines more representative of real damages...or maybe they would just change their practices as would the public (if both were liable for $150000xYxZ.

The point is, while the Bush administration scares me, so does the other side of the isle. The only ones I am not so fearful of are the ones with (I) or (L) or something else next to their names, other than (R) or (D).

Re:I understand where he is coming from, but... (1)

veddermatic (143964) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467440)

You must have missed his writings during the 8 years previous to Bush, or even the Clinton bashing quote in the interview.

He can't stand the Democrats. He just hates the Conservatives even more.

aging author (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467397)

Everyone is aging at exactly the same rate. Isn't this rather agist, anyway? What information does that description impart, exactly?

Huh? (5, Funny)

schon (31600) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467404)

The USA PATRIOT Act is as despotic as anything Hitler came up with -- even using much of the same language.

Really? The PATRIOT act was written in German? :o)

makes sense.. (0)

deego (587575) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467418)

Well, I can see Gore being so concerned about election issues... specially after his 2000 bid..

Why I have stopped reading Slashdot (0)

Pres. Ronald Reagan (659566) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467425)

Stories like this.

Over the years, the Socialist bias of the Slashdot garbagemen has begun to come through. Rather than run an unbiased site and let the readers decide for themselves (a la Fox News), they have taken an anti-Bush, pro-Socialism standpoint.

Also, the utterly confusing and occasionally frightening of self proclaimed Communist Richard M. Stallman is nothing short of disgusting. Check out his website for proof of his Communist beliefs.

I thought this was a libertarian-oriented site, but more and more the readers and janitors have demanded protection and increased spending for minorities, themselves, the poor, and other social outcasts at the expense of our economy and at the expense of hard working, capitalist Americans. It's really disgusting.

Gore Vidal is an expert on this stuff... (1)

Rahga (13479) | more than 10 years ago | (#7467436)

Guys, this is the man who wrote "Caligula". He is more intimately linked to many bad and savagable works of humanatiy than most of us will ever be. If he says that e-voting is bad, who am I to doubt it?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?