Breaking on Cleveland News - Optical Scanners test fail

[liberal N proud]

Source: News Channel 5 - Cleveland


Test Of New Ballot Scanners Fails

POSTED: 5:06 pm EST February 29, 2008
UPDATED: 5:22 pm EST February 29, 2008
CLEVELAND -- The first public tests of the new optical scanners at the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections have failed.

Chief Investigator Duane Pohlman reported that the board ran two tests of the scanners on Friday, and during both tests, the computer repeatedly showed an error message.

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/news/15453424/detail.html

---

No link yet but they were saying on television that the first test of the optical scanners failed.

[stellanoir]

1. Shocked I'm thoroughly shocked.

We've just been screaming about the optical scanners since HAVA was passed in '02.

Nice for them to notice now. Four days before the primary.

Great.

[stellanoir]

2. self delete

another dumb and inadvertent duplicate post

[liberal N proud]

3. IMO: they didn't try too hard to make them work

This is proven technology, why is it so hard to make them work?

[stellanoir]

4. It is not in their self interests to make them so.

It ain't rocket science really.

[asthmaticeog]

6. Cleveland is in a heavily dem county.

This isn't conspiratorial malice. This is mundane incompetence.

[stellanoir]

7. Akcht

I think it's probably a bit of both.

It's weird.

[asthmaticeog]

10. It's not unexpected.

This will fill you in better than I can: http://www.freetimes.com/stories/15/43/will-your-vote-count

[Kolesar]

16. Cleveland Free Times is the best man!

[EFerrari]

9. Yes, a heavily Dem county that is subjected to vote suppression

by any means necessary every time out.

If their election officials are too incompetent to work these machines, which I don't believe, they need to go to something more reliable.

[asthmaticeog]

12. This isn't analagous to what happened to us in 2004 at all.

Totally different people are running the show, and Dems are firmly in power. This is stupidity, not suppression.

[EFerrari]

23. You miss the point. If there is predictably vote suppression

in this area, there is no reason to make it easier by using these machines.

[Stevepol]

5. The easiest thing you can do with a computer program is add a column of numbers.

The next easiest thing is to make a program that switches numbers from one column to another.

[peacetalksforall]

20. Two sentences. You must win an Oscar type Award for being succinct.

Thanks. Even I can teach that to someone else. Go forth!

[EFerrari]

8. It's proven all right. It's a proven flawed technology.

[Pastiche423]

11. This is Dennis Kucinich's district!

:scared:

[Kolesar]

15. Dennis is up 55/29

I posted about the poll in the Kucinich forum.

[Pastiche423]

17. Thank you!

Heading there now.

[EFerrari]

24. That's great!

Go, Dennis!

[stillcool]

13. The Secretary of State...

Jennifer Brunner did the EVEREST study.
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/info/everest.aspx
Here's a list of legislation presented, but it doesn't seem like any of it has passed. Maybe someone could check it out...
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/Info/LegislativeUpdate.pdf

[Kolesar]

14. Dem SOS Brunner made an earnest effort to dump the electronic voting machines &get paper ballots

edit: By "paper ballots" , I mean that Brunner wanted optical scan machines because the ballot is actually a hard copy you can handle and read. It is not a few bits on a memory cartridge.

I am disappointed, but Brunner has been on our side on this.

Cuyahoga County had horrible direct recording electronic voting machines. There were not enough, there were long lines in 2004, some broke down, the paper tapes got jammed. Those machines were decertified in California. She did the right thing.

In 2006, candidate Brunner took questions at our voting-outreach forum in Cleveland.

I hope this works out for her and the RWers and the Plain Dealer don't twist this into something that it is NOT.

[stillcool]

22. It seems to me there has been...

an awful lot of legislation presented...per the bottom link I provided. But nothing seems to have been voted on yet. Maybe this election will spur some action?

[EFerrari]

26. They will try. They tried to do the same here to Debra Bowen

and we had to organize people to dogwatch the media outlets that were trying to smear her. And, it worked out fine. :hi:

[Dr.Phool]

18. I've watchrf these stupid machines fail in EVERY election since 2002

In Florida. All over the state in different elections.

Yes. Optical scan, not DRE's.

They miscount. They jam. They can be rigged 12 ways from Sunday without a trace.

Why do people keep buying this crap?

[Kolesar]

19. How about just thick card stock, make an X and then count the ballots

No instant relief and you won't see Wolf Blitzer's wisdom at 11pm as the last state is called. Would you miss that?

[suston96]

21. Not the scanners but the scanees.......

They don't know how to work them. I have been using opticaL scanners for decades (yes, before voting machines) and once the newness glitches are resolved they work fine.

In addition, they use paper ballots which can manually back them up.

[EFerrari]

25. It doesn't matter if they use paper ballots if there is no significant audit.

All that leaves you is a stack of paper ballots.

[suston96]

27. Doing a manual recount with the paper ballots IS precisely an audit......! nt

[EFerrari]

29. That's right. n/t

[pnwmom]

28. Well, at least they issued an error message. In an election, this would

alert authorities to the fact that the ballots needed to be counted by hand.