Alternative To The Electoral College

[Independent thinker]

Counting it out in $1 bills at 1 second per bill 24/7 with no breaks, it would take 31+ years to count 1 trillion. So multiply 31 years by 32 you get more than 992 years.

However when it comes to elections, the average number of registered voters among the roughly 177,000 precincts in the USA is 800. Especially if ballots were separated into federal and local elections, it should be a snap for 8 or 10 counters to count the ballot by hand in most precincts, give the tally to poll watchers and call in or transmit the results of the federal vote within a couple or so hours and the rest should be completed in another few hours.

How long to count to 1 trillion? - Search Videos

www.bing.com

It totally amazes me that in today's computer/tech age, we sometimes have to wait days, weeks, or even more than a month to figure out who won an election. We're going backwards, not forwards.

 

[braalian]

If you want to go to a popular vote, voting should be restricted to people who actually pay direct taxes. In other words, only property owners, employed people or those drawing pensions earned from working. You know, people who actually have skin in the game.

I rent, but I’ve been working since I was 14 and been paying taxes the whole time. I don’t deserve a vote in your stupid scenario?

 

[rightwinger]

"Certified election officials" are put into their positions by political parties.
Those holding those positions are pretty much 100% members of a political party.
Who determines how 'independent' the verification, reliability, accuracy is?

Okay you can't do math. But are you really so naive to believe that just because somebody tells you it is honest and reliable, you can depend on that?

Think of the process you are verifying

A machine that just counts dots that are put before it.
It does not care what names or parties are associated with those dots…it just counts them.


The machine is certified as accurately counting known dots.
1,523 dots were put before it and it reported 1,523 dots
In multiple passes, it always reports 1,523

The tabulating machine is then locked to ensure nobody has tampered with it.

 

[Foxfyre]

It totally amazes me that in today's computer/tech age, we sometimes have to wait days, weeks, or even more than a month to figure out who won an election. We're going backwards, not forwards.

Well hey cheating takes planning, time and work. Coming up with 'believable' phony ballots takes time when and where they are needed. And when they have to rig a court to nullify a challenge to the count, that also takes some time to arrange. Plus they have to be sure those machines are scrubbed and unreadable before the checkers get to them. They have to make sure there is no 'evidence' or 'insufficient evidence' of any voter hanky panky no matter how much there actually was. Sort of like planning the perfect murder that even Columbo can't solve. Appreciate how difficult all that is. It takes a lot of time.

 

[Foxfyre]

Think of the process you are verifying

A machine that just counts dots that are put before it.
It does not care what names or parties are associated with those dots…it just counts them.


The machine is certified as accurately counting known dots.
1,523 dots were put before it and it reported 1,523 dots
In multiple passes, it always reports 1,523

The tabulating machine is then locked to ensure nobody has tampered with it.

Guarantee me that the person or persons who calibrates and programs our voting machines do it honestly and accurately?

 

[WorldWatcher]

We fill out paper ballots here. And then those ballots are fed into a machine that presumably tabulates them. When I feed my ballot into that machine I have no way of knowing if it was counted in the way I filled out the ballot or whether it was counted at all. There is no hand count.

Hate to break it to you, but when you fill out a ballot and hand it to a person it goes into a box and you have no way of knowing if it was counted in the way you filled out the ballot or whether it was counted at all if done with a hand count.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

But if we have responsible voters watching the paper ballot count and receiving a tally before the ballots are fed into a machine, we have far more confidence that there is no cheating than when machines that can be programmed in myriad ways count those ballots.

Now you want a hand count * * AND * * a machine count.

I don't know who "we" is but I have a high degree of confidence in those working elections. They are observed by members of BOTH parties where every state in the union allows them as observers. Machines are faster and much more accurate at mundane tasks human hands.

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

Hate to break it to you, but when you fill out a ballot and hand it to a person it goes into a box and you have no way of knowing if it was counted in the way you filled out the ballot or whether it was counted at all if done with a hand count.

WW

That's why the law specifies or should specify that there be bipartisan poll watchers observing the count. And those should receive a tally of the vote when finished so that dishonest officials cannot change it later. The goal should be near universal confidence in the vote and the policies I want, that all honest people want, would come much much closer to that than the vague, uncertain, unverifiable, easily manipulated system now utilized in many states.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That's why the law specifies or should specify that there be bipartisan poll watchers observing the count.

There are already, every state has provision for the parties to supply poll watchers both in the voting area and of the counting area. Hell as we saw in the last few elections most do centralized counting now where it's also done under surveillance and recorded.

That video was a major factor in disproving the claims of the Georgia workers had "pulled out suitcases" from under a table, and re-ran stacks of ballots

And those should receive a tally of the vote when finished so that dishonest officials cannot change it later.

They do, they are released to the media at the same time. But, and I know you aren't going to get this, they are unofficial BECAUSE THEY CAN CHANGE. Mail in ballots are counted, provisional ballots are cleared (either rejected or counted), Military ballots can arrive after election day, recounts correct initial "unofficial results".

Totals change and it's not "dishonest officials".

The goal should be near universal confidence in the vote and the policies I want, that all honest people want, would come much much closer to that than the vague, uncertain, unverifiable, easily manipulated system now utilized in many states.

The current system is neither vague, uncertain, unverifiable, or easily manipulated. You don't seem to be aware of what really goes on when ballots are counted and are listening to the "elections are rigged" whiners who whine because they are lost. There is a huge amount of quality assurance that goes into an election from testing and validation of the tabulation machines before the election, statistical recounts of real ballots after the election to entire the machines counted correctly, random sampling of ballots for hand review, and of course if the election is close mandatory recounts of all the ballots. If the margin is outside of set limits set by the legislature which require a mandatory recount, pretty sure most states have an option for the losing party to request a recount at the parties expense.

Then of course we have data analysis that goes toward how many people voted, by what method, and how many ballots were received and processed by what method along with security measures incorporated into the printed ballots making them difficult to forge. This idea that DEMs or GOP members are pulling stacks of ballots out of vans in the middle of the night is poppycock.

WW

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

There are already, every state has provision for the parties to supply poll watchers both in the voting area and of the counting area. Hell as we saw in the last few elections most do centralized counting now where it's also done under surveillance and recorded.

That video was a major factor in disproving the claims of the Georgia workers had "pulled out suitcases" from under a table, and re-ran stacks of ballots



They do, they are released to the media at the same time. But, and I know you aren't going to get this, they are unofficial BECAUSE THEY CAN CHANGE. Mail in ballots are counted, provisional ballots are cleared (either rejected or counted), Military ballots can arrive after election day, recounts correct initial "unofficial results".

Totals change and it's not "dishonest officials".



The current system is neither vague, uncertain, unverifiable, or easily manipulated. You don't seem to be aware of what really goes on when ballots are counted and are listening to the "elections are rigged" whiners who whine because they are lost. There is a huge amount of quality assurance that goes into an election from testing and validation of the tabulation machines before the election, statistical recounts of real ballots after the election to entire the machines counted correctly, random sampling of ballots for hand review, and of course if the election is close mandatory recounts of all the ballots. If the margin is outside of set limits set by the legislature which require a mandatory recount, pretty sure most states have an option for the losing party to request a recount at the parties expense.

Then of course we have data analysis that goes toward how many people voted, by what method, and how many ballots were received and processed by what method along with security measures incorporated into the printed ballots making them difficult to forge. This idea that DEMs or GOP members are pulling stacks of ballots out of vans in the middle of the night is poppycock.

WW

WW

You are happy with the corrupt systems now in place. I'm not. Let's let it go at that.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You are happy with the corrupt systems now in place. I'm not. Let's let it go at that.

The system isn't corrupt. You listed to the radicals that whine because they lost an election. (Well actually multiple elections.)d

Actually take some time and find out what goes into a voting "system" beyond what right wing pundits and media are spewing.

The problems we have today all track back to, not a problem with the "voting system", those are pretty tight. The problems we have stem from the registration system which is much more lossy goosey and underfunded and under centralized and a lack of communications between various election jurisdictions.

PREMISE:

The current model of “voter” registration is a carryover from the British system established during the birth of our country was based on a time when:

• The main mode of transportation was shanks mare (feet)
• Cargo was moved by horse drawn wagons
• It could take days and multiple riders for information to travel from the State Capital to any point in the state and weeks if information needed to move from one end of the country to another (say Maine to Florida). As the country expanded that time could be measured in months (east coast to west coast).

During those times the idea of “Voter Registration” being localized made sense as the vast majority of the population was born, lived, and died in the same 100 mile circle.

That time is passed, we now live in the age of a highly mobile society with instant communications. Hell sitting here on the east coast I can pick up a phone, punch in a few numbers and be talking with my daughter stationed in Japan.

RECOMMENDATION:

Therefore I think it’s time to fundamentally change the core concept of “Voter Registration” from the current model of registering to vote and having to prove you are eligible to being automatically an eligible voter unless the franchised is removed for a reason (felony, death, mental incapacity, etc.).

This fundamental shift from “having to register to vote” to “eligible voter” would be based on the integration of various sources of information into a central clearing house that all states would be required to participate in for election for federal offices. If they decided to maintain a separate parallel system for state/local elections, they would be free to do so.

All eligible citizens are fundamentally considered “registered to vote” as long as they are of the correct age and have not had their franchise removed. So it becomes less a question of “who” is eligible to vote, the only remaining question is “where” they are eligible to vote.

This “Voter Electronic Eligibility Center” system would include:

• Real time access to voter eligibility information via an encrypted secure network to state and local boards of election.
• State and local boards would be able to download voters whose address falls within their jurisdiction.
• State and local officials would have access to querying and updating individual statuses.
• Information would be integrated from various sources which provide input into the system.
• State Department responsible for vital records - births, deaths, etc.
• State Department of Taxation – current address, change of Address
• State Department of Motor Vehicles – current address, change of address
• State Departments of State – Court actions and restoration of franchise after removed by court action
• United States Postal Service – National valid addresses, change of address
• Social Security Administration – births deaths, etc.
• Federal Department of State – naturalization of new citizens
• The various Felony level courts at both the State and Federal level – removal of the franchise via felony conviction

Because of the data integration between the various agencies, the idea “voter eligibility” is shifted. There are no “purging the roles” based on inactivity. All citizens are considered active voters.

Where you vote then becomes a function of your primary legal address (of which you will only have one). If you move, that address change will automatically be fed into the system and your information would be downloaded to the local elections office.

When you are born, you are automatically registered into the system and become “eligible to vote” at your 18th birthday. You just have to wait to get there of course.

If you die, when that death is registered it is automatically communicated to the VEEC making you ineligible to vote.

Now in my humble opinion, it would take 10-15 years for such a system. First you need funding. Then the IT experts and Database geeks are going to have to map out the secure communication systems and data interface software that will function between agencies. Then you are going to need a few years each of “Alpha” and “Beta” testing before it can really go live. But once all the players are in place it could really streamline what we view as “voter registration” making it so much easier for (a) us as individuals and (b) for the voting process in general.

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

The system isn't corrupt. You listed to the radicals that whine because they lost an election. (Well actually multiple elections.)d

Actually take some time and find out what goes into a voting "system" beyond what right wing pundits and media are spewing.

The problems we have today all track back to, not a problem with the "voting system", those are pretty tight. The problems we have stem from the registration system which is much more lossy goosey and underfunded and under centralized.

PREMISE:

The current model of “voter” registration is a carryover from the British system established during the birth of our country was based on a time when:

• The main mode of transportation was shanks mare (feet)
• Cargo was moved by horse drawn wagons
• It could take days and multiple riders for information to travel from the State Capital to any point in the state and weeks if information needed to move from one end of the country to another (say Maine to Florida). As the country expanded that time could be measured in months (east coast to west coast).

During those times the idea of “Voter Registration” being localized made sense as the vast majority of the population was born, lived, and died in the same 100 mile circle.

That time is passed, we now live in the age of a highly mobile society with instant communications. Hell sitting here on the east coast I can pick up a phone, punch in a few numbers and be talking with my daughter stationed in Japan.

RECOMMENDATION:

Therefore I think it’s time to fundamentally change the core concept of “Voter Registration” from the current model of registering to vote and having to prove you are eligible to being automatically an eligible voter unless the franchised is removed for a reason (felony, death, mental incapacity, etc.).

This fundamental shift from “having to register to vote” to “eligible voter” would be based on the integration of various sources of information into a central clearing house that all states would be required to participate in for election for federal offices. If they decided to maintain a separate parallel system for state/local elections, they would be free to do so.

All eligible citizens are fundamentally considered “registered to vote” as long as they are of the correct age and have not had their franchise removed. So it becomes less a question of “who” is eligible to vote, the only remaining question is “where” they are eligible to vote.

This “Voter Electronic Eligibility Center” system would include:

• Real time access to voter eligibility information via an encrypted secure network to state and local boards of election.
• State and local boards would be able to download voters whose address falls within their jurisdiction.
• State and local officials would have access to querying and updating individual statuses.
• Information would be integrated from various sources which provide input into the system.
• State Department responsible for vital records - births, deaths, etc.
• State Department of Taxation – current address, change of Address
• State Department of Motor Vehicles – current address, change of address
• State Departments of State – Court actions and restoration of franchise after removed by court action
• United States Postal Service – National valid addresses, change of address
• Social Security Administration – births deaths, etc.
• Federal Department of State – naturalization of new citizens
• The various Felony level courts at both the State and Federal level – removal of the franchise via felony conviction

Because of the data integration between the various agencies, the idea “voter eligibility” is shifted. There are no “purging the roles” based on inactivity. All citizens are considered active voters.

Where you vote then becomes a function of your primary legal address (of which you will only have one). If you move, that address change will automatically be fed into the system and your information would be downloaded to the local elections office.

When you are born, you are automatically registered into the system and become “eligible to vote” at your 18th birthday. You just have to wait to get there of course.

If you die, when that death is registered it is automatically communicated to the VEEC making you ineligible to vote.

Now in my humble opinion, it would take 10-15 years for such a system. First you need funding. Then the IT experts and Database geeks are going to have to map out the secure communication systems and data interface software that will function between agencies. Then you are going to need a few years each of “Alpha” and “Beta” testing before it can really go live. But once all the players are in place it could really streamline what we view as “voter registration” making it so much easier for (a) us as individuals and (b) for the voting process in general.

WW

I have worked on political campaigns. I have been a poll watcher. I have been a poll worker. I have no confidence the system is not corrupt.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And was a dumb decision as it was never the intent of the founders

Neither was black people or women voting.

Get a better argument.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I have worked on political campaigns. I have been a poll watcher. I have been a poll worker. I have no confidence the system is not corrupt.

So what? Those statements are not relevant to each other, because you as usual present zero evidence or argument.

"I buy cars. I drive cars. I even LOOK at cars sometimes. I have no confidence the CEO of Toyota is not corrupt."

See how stupid that sounds? That's how you sound.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I have worked on political campaigns. I have been a poll watcher. I have been a poll worker. I have no confidence the system is not corrupt.

That's a problem you have.

That does not mean the system is corrupt.

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

Think of the process you are verifying

A machine that just counts dots that are put before it.
It does not care what names or parties are associated with those dots…it just counts them.


The machine is certified as accurately counting known dots.
1,523 dots were put before it and it reported 1,523 dots
In multiple passes, it always reports 1,523

The tabulating machine is then locked to ensure nobody has tampered with it.

The machine has to be programmed by somebody to count the dots. I do not trust many of the people in charge of having those machines programmed. And however 'honest' they are when they leave the supplier does not mean they cannot be reprogrammed by somebody else.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Rightwinger has the best of it

 

[Foxfyre]

That's a problem you have.

That does not mean the system is corrupt.

WW

My 'problem' is shared by millions upon millions of Americans. The goal should be for ALL Americans to have confidence in the integrity of the system.

https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2020-02-13/majority-of-americans-dont-trust-elections-poll

Election Integrity: Voters Support Absentee Ballot Reforms

Two measures aimed at protecting the integrity of elections have majority support from American voters.

www.rasmussenreports.com

Election Integrity: 54% Say Not Enough Done to Prevent Cheating

A majority of voters still believe cheating is likely to affect this year’s election, and don’t think government officials have done enough to protect election integrity

www.rasmussenreports.com

And this one is really interesting:

Most Democrats Donât Want Congress to Certify Election if Trump Wins

After the Supreme Court rejected attempts to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the ballot, a majority of Democratic voters now support another way to block Trump’s possible return to the White House.

www.rasmussenreports.com

 

[rightwinger]

Guarantee me that the person or persons who calibrates and programs our voting machines do it honestly and accurately?

Easy Peasy

Because it is more than one person.
It is a team of people who validate that machine.

Again, that machine counts the dots that are put before it
It does not care about party or candidate

Neither do those V&Ving the machine
They just verify that it accurately counts the dots

 

[Foxfyre]

Easy Peasy

Because it is more than one person.
It is a team of people who validate that machine.

Again, that machine counts the dots that are put before it
It does not care about party or candidate

Neither do those V&Ving the machine
They just verify that it accurately counts the dots

So Jim Jordan, Donald Trump, Mike Johnson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Dan Bongino make up the team to ensure honest elections. You're entirely comfortable with that because it is a group. Yay for you.

I don't believe for a minute you mean a word of it. All I'm seeing is the same justification for dishonest elections that we get from leftwingers/Democrats all the time.

Again have a lovely day.