So, you start out by calling me a liar...although you haven't the foggiest idea what county I'm in, or even the state, or what the procedures here are.
Um, when did I call you a liar?
Then, again without knowing anything about my background, you assume I know nothing about the technology.
I don't "assume" anything. You've demonstrated as much in the above thread (for example, by comparing ATM technology to op-scan technology, even though they have absolutely nothing to do with each other.)
You also demonstrated you know nothing about how precinct-based hand-counting works.
So what have I inappropriately "assumed"??
If you were capable of embarrassment, you would hide for a while if you knew my background. Or if you saw what goes on at the polls here.
Why would I do that? Why don't you tell me your background and tell me what "goes on at the polls" there? So far, from what you
have told me, you've demonstrated a tremendous lack of knowledge of the voting system. Would you like to try again -- again? Feel free. I'm all ears. Not sure what you think I should be "embarrassed" about. But I'm sure you'll help me, as I've helped you.
And then you insult me be calling me a peon in the system.
Huh? Perhaps I missed the part where I called you "a peon in the system". Do you now have to simply make things up to try and support whatever argument you're trying to make??
I don't put anyone on ignore, but please just don't talk to me. I might, however, continue to attempt to correct any foolishness I may happen to come across so others will have a chance to not fall for such distortions. A hopeless cause, I know, but it's what I do.
Please do! If I have posted any "foolishness", I certainly hope that you, and/or others, will "correct" it. So far, it seems the only "foolishness" displayed here, however, has been your own. Given that you've not rebutted any of my assertions, I'm guessing you must agree as well.
BTW, I read your article about Columbia County, and if the major problem was overvotes, that's easily dealt with here on our systems, and the problem of not filling in the circle is also dealt with here.
Um, where did my story on Columbia County say that "the major problem was overvoters". In fact, where did it discuss that at all??? Did you actually read my story?
As to "them problem of not filling in the circle", I don't know that my story dealt with that much either, but, pray tell, how has that been "dealt with" in your so-far unnamed county? (You might wanna let me know which county that is, or at least which technology you use there, so we can have a specific discussion about it.)
Just because they are incapable of or unwilling to deal with the machines does not make the machines bad.
That's correct. What makes the machines bad is that study after study after study has found them to be bad, to drop votes, to report inaccurate results and, worst of all, provide secret vote counting that is not overseen by the public to assure accuracy.
(Did I miss the part where their statistical sample showed actual misreading of properly filled out ballots? Don't bother to answer-- I have my own sources.)
There have been many such examples of that. Would you like me to provide them to you? Or should we just rely on your super secret, unspecified "sources"?
Don't bother to answer, since I know you won't...just as you haven't bothered to answer any of my previous questions on this thread.
Are you embarrassed yet? If not, I'm guessing you're not capable of it. Replying pseudonymously, however, rather than putting your name on everything you post on the Internet, as I do, probably makes that much easier for ya.
= new reply since forum marked as read