Network America News

"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." Communist Tyrant Josef Stalin

Internet Voting

March 13, 2000 NA (Network America) e-wire

Internet Voting

Thanks to Nick Landholt of CIA (Christian Information Alliance) we have three articles to run on internet voting. One today; one March 14th, and one March 15th.

Internet voting is the ultimate absurdity in voting, as it leaves us relying completely on the government (Board of Elections) to tell us what all the bleeps of energy added up to.

With internet voting, how is anonymity preserved for the secret ballot? I mean, if you e-mail your results after logging in, doesn't the email say who it came from? Or, if there is anonymity, how could anyone every double check the final count - added up from all those bleeps of energy?

Actually, internet voting is no more absurd in principle than today's computer vote-counting system which exclude citizen checks and balances - internet voting is just taking that absurdity to the absolute limit.

With internet voting, there would be no checks and balances, and none even possible. The same problem exists with absentee voting, which is why absentee voting must be outlawed. Today's article is from CNET.com - with NA comments interspersed.

Beginning of article:

Arizona Net primary draws record turnout, gets bugged by Y2K

By Patricia Jacobus

Staff Writer, CNET News.com

March 8, 2000, 9:50 a.m. PT

Arizona's momentous first day of online voting drew tens of thousands of new voters but also frustrated an untold number of others who encountered computer glitches.

People who had problems voting were using older versions of Netscape Navigator infested with Y2K-related bugs, causing the browsers to crash, election officials said. Others couldn't execute their votes because the lines were tied up. . . .

(NA comment: So there can be computer glitches!)

"We had to work around the clock to circumvent these problems," said Joe Mohen, chief executive of Election.com, the company that made the online election possible for Arizona's primary. "We tried to think of every conceivable problem, but we didn't expect that so many people would have very old versions of Netscape."

The event should go more smoothly for the remainder of early voting this week, officials said. The regular primary election is March 11.

Despite the problems, about 14,000 Arizona Democrats voted yesterday. That's more than in the entire 1996 primary.

"This is the first time Internet voting has been done in history, and we certainly expected some glitches," Mohen said. "Overall it was a very good day."

The results could be a major score for the Internet-voting movement. Many industry experts claim the Web will revolutionize democracy as more people are attracted to the ease of registering and voting online.

(NA comment: Notice that all these establishment types are only worried that everyone participate, and as many as possible participate. The wider the participation, the better cover for the absurd, dishonorable and anti-American systems in use - internet voting being the most absurd of all.)

But Arizona's experiment has not gone without controversy.

Justice officials and several private organizations worried that the push for Net voting would disenfranchise poor and minority groups that frequently don't have access to computers. Equally troublesome were potential security issues.

To allay those fears, party officials have promised to put up 29 more polling booths in low-income neighborhoods on election day.

And to address security concerns, a team of experts has been on hand at the Democratic Party's computer center, ready to fend off attacks.

(NA: Notice, these charlatans always pretend that there is NO DANGER at all from officials running the election, they are always "on guard" against the kid from Hackensack, New Jersey who's beefing up his "hacking" skills.)

Election.com, based in Garden City, N.Y., also offers online voter registration software. . . .

(End of article)