Yahoo/USATODAY.com: Fewer voting errors likely this November

[GregD]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/20041025/ts_usatoday/fewervotingerrorslikelythisnovember


The vote count in this year's presidential election should be far more accurate and comprehensive than the controversial election of 2000, a USA TODAY analysis found.

snip

Key changes since 2000:

New machines. About 26% of Americans will vote on equipment that guards against voting mistakes.

==================================

Well hell, now they tell me! If I knew these new machines were so danged good, I would not have wasted the past 18 months worrying about them!

These people must live on the same planet as Rove/Bush and the rest of the pukes. What utter crap!

[Voltaire99]

1. An important propaganda step prior to the theft

Since the latest poll shows something like half the nation worried about unfairness, count on USA Today and other establishment organs to try to stop this deadly plague of critical thinking.

[mom cat]

4. I am the tooth fairy and I approve of this USA Today opinion!

:puke:

[are_we_united_yet]

14. How

True!

[sofa king]

2. So McInternet and McPaper say there should be fewer irregularities.

You want fries with that prognosis?

[Chicago Democrat]

3. This may actually be true...

I have a hard time believing DieBolt would actually steal an election. I certainly hope these machines are not tampered with and if they are, I hope those that do are caught! I pray this is true.

[Amigust]

13. Then why do they have a back door built in AT ALL that allows

the vote tallies to be changed in a few seconds?

[ava27]

5. Kerry will win

easily. No need for worrying.

[ogradda]

6. it must be so if you tell me so

right??:eyes: :smoke:

[VegasWolf]

7. and Santa Claus will definately be here Christmas!!

New Information Shows Bush Indecisive, Paranoid, Delusional

[0007]

8. Since when has the media gotten it right?

Now USA News Today wants to do our thinking for us??

[lakeguy]

9. somebody's pants are on fire!

[scavok]

10. This may be true

However, it won't be for the reasons that US Today thinks.

IMHO, the difference is going to be the efforts by ElectionProtection and other groups that provide independent monitoring of the polling places.

It's a lot harder to pull stuff when you are being watched.

[cubsfan forever]

12. Indeed. I have said all along

that it's much more difficult to steal the election if we get out the vote AND have people watching for rethugs at the polling places.

Professor 2

[Zorra]

11. Boy is that article a load of crap or what? Guards against voting

mistakes?

Yeah, in their perception, voting for Kerry is a mistake. The electronic voting machine automatically corrects your mistake and registers your vote for Bu$h. Since there is no way for you to actually verify who you voted for, it is foolproof.

Now I get it.