Who are you voting for?

[HeyYou]

Given the technology we have today, it would be possible to implement an on-line voting system.... The problem would be securing it.

[Harbringe]

Given the technology we have today, it would be possible to implement an on-line voting system.... The problem would be securing it.

 

And thats why it should never be done... too hackable , even electronic voting machines should be outlawed because they too are too easily hacked, magnets also work. The main reason is there should always be a paper trail of votes that if something goes wrong , they can always be recounted by people of said district or state . As Stalin said " I care not who votes , but only for those who count the votes". If a machine is doing the counting for you , then you the electorate can always be deceived. Which is why States that are passing restrictive Voter ID laws are lying to you. Voter fraud has never determined a national election , but electoral fraud (those who do the counting) has.

[Deleted54170User]

 

Given the technology we have today, it would be possible to implement an on-line voting system.... The problem would be securing it.

 

And thats why it should never be done... too hackable , even electronic voting machines should be outlawed because they too are too easily hacked, magnets also work. The main reason is there should always be a paper trail of votes that if something goes wrong , they can always be recounted by people of said district or state . As Stalin said " I care not who votes , but only for those who count the votes". If a machine is doing the counting for you , then you the electorate can always be deceived. Which is why States that are passing restrictive Voter ID laws are lying to you. Voter fraud has never determined a national election , but electoral fraud (those who do the counting) has.

 

 

Are you suggesting that we are all being fairly treated, given a secure assured voting method that is safe and will not be ignored by the electoral college and no one is deceiving us now?

[Harbringe]

 

 

Given the technology we have today, it would be possible to implement an on-line voting system.... The problem would be securing it.

 

And thats why it should never be done... too hackable , even electronic voting machines should be outlawed because they too are too easily hacked, magnets also work. The main reason is there should always be a paper trail of votes that if something goes wrong , they can always be recounted by people of said district or state . As Stalin said " I care not who votes , but only for those who count the votes". If a machine is doing the counting for you , then you the electorate can always be deceived. Which is why States that are passing restrictive Voter ID laws are lying to you. Voter fraud has never determined a national election , but electoral fraud (those who do the counting) has.

 

 

Are you suggesting that we are all being fairly treated, given a secure assured voting method that is safe and will not be ignored by the electoral college and no one is deceiving us now?

 

 

No , just that going digital will leave you no recourse to be able to confirm if it was a fair vote or not . No need to make it any easier than it already is.

[sunshinenbrick]

 

 

 

Given the technology we have today, it would be possible to implement an on-line voting system.... The problem would be securing it.

 

And thats why it should never be done... too hackable , even electronic voting machines should be outlawed because they too are too easily hacked, magnets also work. The main reason is there should always be a paper trail of votes that if something goes wrong , they can always be recounted by people of said district or state . As Stalin said " I care not who votes , but only for those who count the votes". If a machine is doing the counting for you , then you the electorate can always be deceived. Which is why States that are passing restrictive Voter ID laws are lying to you. Voter fraud has never determined a national election , but electoral fraud (those who do the counting) has.

 

 

Are you suggesting that we are all being fairly treated, given a secure assured voting method that is safe and will not be ignored by the electoral college and no one is deceiving us now?

 

 

No , just that going digital will leave you no recourse to be able to confirm if it was a fair vote or not . No need to make it any easier than it already is.

 

 

I kinda think it would be possible both ways and, if the people were willing, they could implement an infallible system between us and the ballots (digital or not), if 'they' really wanted to. But I question whether 'they' really WANT to do that because it would make the link between 'one person, one vote' too unavoidable to put an election off if it went really 'wrong'.

 

In other words democracy has become increasingly corrupt over many years, in my opinion.

 

But then 'they' are 'we' (or at least used to be - as in it was an old 'us' who put the systems in place). So one has to wonder if we actually did take the big plunge, and all those people who don't know 'common sense' when they see it cast their vote...

 

'Could ya' handle it?... Punk!?' :cool:

[HeyYou]

Our government, and voting system, have been corrupt for decades. That basically goes without saying. Citizens United just put the icing on the cake.

[Deleted54170User]

I'm still thinking a series of sorts like sports do every year would make more money than the present methods. Only once every three years for candidates for the President. In fact, why not for all government offices?

 

We have Billionaires and the Earthly people are on the verge of becoming Trillionaires.

 

Which makes what the candidates are doing these days look like they're selling popcorn and peanuts at the old ball game. Bring out "more" candidate that make the kind of money one of the top billionaires make and I wonder what would happen?

 

It might be like the time that one president of the U. S of A. wiped the National debt clean and the country began with a new slate. I wonder if that was true?

[sunshinenbrick]

I'm not sure wiping the slate clean is an issue for those who have lots of spare slates. Problem is the debt has to go somewhere... (and by debt I don't mean simply money but social debt and expectation).

 

While they may have 'moulded' the problem, the elite are not the whole problem. What is a real issue are the people in the middle who are aspiring to become part of the elite. So even if we ousted the established elite, we would still have this massive epidemic to try solve - in fact it could be made worse because of the anarchic vacuum created.

 

In fact could this even be the achilles heel of a 'western empire'? (although I am unsure how immune the 'east' is to the future either...).

 

Well, history repeats itself for sure.

[Deleted54170User]

I'm not sure wiping the slate clean is an issue for those who have lots of spare slates. Problem is the debt has to go somewhere... (and by debt I don't mean simply money but social debt and expectation).

 

While they may have 'moulded' the problem, the elite are not the whole problem. What is a real issue are the people in the middle who are aspiring to become part of the elite. So even if we ousted the established elite, we would still have this massive epidemic to try solve - in fact it could be made worse because of the anarchic vacuum created.

 

In fact could this even be the achilles heel of a 'western empire'?

I just got nipped by a page telling me I could not save changes and when I hit the back button it wasn't exactly what I had finished with prior to that. So I delete the comment and refuse to negotiate with a thought about saving the U. S. of A. from dull slow mental regression to cavemen.

[sunshinenbrick]

Perhaps it is the very diversity in the world that drives the competition in our fight to break free from our finite resources - if you never realise what you don't know then you will never be able to attain knowledge.

So does the ability to survive take precedent over a moral 'right' and 'wrong'? If so, then what if the species becomes so diverse in its needs that it becomes relatively ever more difficult to survive?