Election fraud

Bob, before your going away party in December, both you and I mentioned this problem to Bill. He said the exact same thing then as he does now which is "How come I haven't heard anything about it?"

When he asked this question back then, we dug up the articles that had been linked from 13D, showed them to him, described the problem inherent in using Windows, maintaining dual databases, how the Republicans were able to defeat the favored Democrat in a Georgia city for the first time in 125 years etc, etc, etc.

Since that day, we have had at least one voting fiasco. San Diego gave the wrong ballots to 7000 people during the primary, and they can't identify who those people are because there is no trail. The city declined to redo the election because it wouldn't change the outcome, although there is one change that they could have by redoing the election: it would change the integrity of the election. Also, if you cannot go back and show a 1:1 correlation of the votes (THIS person voted for THAT candidate), how can you possibly prove that election fraud occurred? The only reason this problem was caught in the first place is because more Republican ballots were cast than there were registered Republicans in the city. In a Presidential election where the only number that can be used as a parity check is the number of registered voters, it will be even MORE difficult to prove that fraud occurred.

Bill and Dad's attitude about e-voting and election fraud underline a more dangerous problem in relation to this issue: until there is proof that fraud occurred during an election, it will never stick out in anyone's mind that this is a problem. Because there is no trail, it will be almost impossible to prove that fraud took place.