Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KonKilo who wrote (2046)	8/17/2003 6:33:38 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

<<<I have but five words on voting: Paper Ballots, Counted In Public.>>> Another possibility is to abandon the concept of secret ballots. If the voting is to be done electronically, there should be a way for voters to double check their choices after the fact. Over the years I've never met anyone who had a problem with talking about who or what they voted for. I suppose opinions vary on the topic of a secret ballot, but personally I've never been able to think of a good reason why it would make any difference in a free country. For all practical purposes, voting is nothing more than an extension of freedom of speech, so what difference does it make whether a person expresses an opinion about a referendum or a candidate over the water cooler at the office or at a voting booth? I imagine there are a lot of folks in Florida who have been wishing they could double check their ballots for the past several years. Unfortunately, the only way for voters to absolutely guarantee no one changed their choices either electronically or on paper, is for voters to go public in such a way as to completely eliminate any opportunity for sleight of hand.