I never remember hearing about that.

And I’m in agreement with eldano that optical scan machines are not the ideal. But they’re far better than the proprietary black boxes we have now because it is possible to verify voter intent after the ballot is cast.

I’m not typically one to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and what we have now is far from good. And it wasn’t good when Democrats oversaw it. You’ll notice that Mary’s commentary on this issue was critical of the status quo long before Tre Hargett ever appeared on the scene.

And the fact that we disagree on parts but can agree on parts is one of my favorite parts about Liberadio. I think that you guys are great at explaining WHY you think the things you do, and many times it enlightens me (and for the record, I agree with a majority of your opinions voiced on air or in the blog). I’m just drawing on my experience to point out that your heart is in the right place, but by focusing on recounts you are sub-optimizing the process.

One point that you have brought up in the past that does concern me is the rate at which people can use the electronic voting machines and the possible effect of vote suppression that can have. Keep up the good work.

Ryan clearly hasn’t spent a lot of time in the computer industry. It’d be hard to make a more ignorant statement about computer technology and software. An operating system with no users can, just by having bugs, crash.

The worst part about our equipment and the rules governing it is that there is no ability for independent security auditing organizations to review the software. Literally no one other than the manufacturer knows what’s happening in the black boxes.

It also boggles my mind that Stackiii and Ryan haven’t addressed the fact that we cannot have a meaningful recount in the case of a close election. I would think that would be a universal positive for all political parties.