Trump Needs To Give It Back

That’s why we fill in bubbles
Which are then read by an electronic scanner…

Yeah, I remember elections where election officials were required to infer intent, because multiple selections were bubbled, or one was filled in and one was partially erased, or the fill exceeded the boundaries, etc.

“Scantron” is not substantially different than the booth I was in last week. I got a blank “ballot” which was electronically filled out by the booth. That ballot was scanned by a separate machine.

Adding a doofus (voter) with a number 2 pencil and eraser to the equation increases the error potential.
 
Am I the only one that remembers the “hanging chad” saga?
Nobody knew what those little pieces of paper were called until 2000. Then EVERYBODY knew what they were called because the news used that word only about 40 million times an hour.
 
No, it doesn’t. We were fine doing it the old way 30 years ago.
While you may be incapable of making errors, history has shown that the electorate as a whole is fallible as fuck.

Claims of shenanigans notwithstanding, the mere existence of “voter intent laws” (developed to guide election officials in determining voter choice on ballots with unclear marks) in 48 of 50 states proves the point that things were not fine using “the old way.” The electorate just wasn’t exposed to the fuckery in the time before the internet and the 24hr news cycle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jr81452
While you may be incapable of making errors, history has shown that the electorate as a whole is fallible as fuck.

Claims of shenanigans notwithstanding, the mere existence of “voter intent laws” (developed to guide election officials in determining voter choice on ballots with unclear marks) in 48 of 50 states proves the point that things were not fine using “the old way.” The electorate just wasn’t exposed to the fuckery in the time before the internet and the 24hr news cycle.

If we change the law to go back to paper, then we can also change the law regarding voter intent. Make the bubbles bigger and more widely spaced. If some retard marks it incorrectly then the ballot is spoiled. Also, serial number each ballot.
 
Screenshot 2024-11-12 150107.jpg
 
Nobody knew what those little pieces of paper were called until 2000. Then EVERYBODY knew what they were called because the news used that word only about 40 million times an hour.
I most respectfully call BS. In the old days BEFORE floppy disks, we had 'Paper Tape'. We would take the chad and funnel it down into your car's AC vents and then set the fan to High. When you jumped in the car and hit the ignition... viola, a snow storm of chad went everywhere. For the next 6 months every time you turned on the AC it would spit out a few and you could never get your interior clean. I like to think of it as the original revenge of the nerds.

:LOL:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: clcustom1911
I most respectfully call BS. In the old days BEFORE floppy disks, we had 'Paper Tape'. We would take the chad and funnel it down into your car's AC vents and then set the fan to High. When you jumped in the car and hit the ignition... viola, a snow storm of chad went everywhere. For the next 6 months every time you turned on the AC it would spit out a few and you could never get your interior clean. I like to think of it as the original revenge of the nerds.

:LOL:
I'm kinda upset that I didn't know this was a thing.....because I totally would have done it to a few friends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P-Squared
If we change the law to go back to paper, then we can also change the law regarding voter intent. Make the bubbles bigger and more widely spaced. If some retard marks it incorrectly then the ballot is spoiled. Also, serial number each ballot.
You know what they say about making something foolproof. They just come out with a bigger fool.

The “scantrons” are still read by an electronic machine. The only real difference is that the “scantron” is reading bubbled circles and the current machines are reading barcodes. Hell, the punched paper ballots were read electronically, except that the ballots were- apparently- easy to fuck up. And, I’m pretty sure voter intent laws were in response to the “scantron” ballots.

And “we had to toss all these ballots because they were “unreadable”” sounds like a civil rights lawsuit in the making.

We’re not going back to 14.4 modems, landlines, CRT monitors, or paper ballots.

Now, voter ID laws… I’ve needed an ID to vote for as long as I’ve been voting.
 
You know what they say about making something foolproof. They just come out with a bigger fool.

The “scantrons” are still read by an electronic machine. The only real difference is that the “scantron” is reading bubbled circles and the current machines are reading barcodes. Hell, the punched paper ballots were read electronically, except that the ballots were- apparently- easy to fuck up. And, I’m pretty sure voter intent laws were in response to the “scantron” ballots.

And “we had to toss all these ballots because they were “unreadable”” sounds like a civil rights lawsuit in the making.

We’re not going back to 14.4 modems, landlines, CRT monitors, or paper ballots.

Now, voter ID laws… I’ve needed an ID to vote for as long as I’ve been voting.

Scantrons aren’t connected to the internet. Half the civilized countries use paper ballots. We can go back. There is no reason for taxpayers to pay billions to democrat tech companies for vote processing only to get screwed in the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gigamortis
I’ll be 63 years old in a couple weeks, and I have never voted with a paper ballot. I started out with the lever type voting machine, and now, of course, the electronic, or digital, machine. And every time I have voted, since 1979, the year I turned 18, I had to show my ID, it was recorded twice, and I had to give a signature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironman1959
It was.

Are you trying to make the point that fraud will still occur if we use paper? If so, then my response is not on the same scale.
If you take your paper ballot and put it into a electronic device as we do in Florida, the friggin ballot totals can be altered electronically at any stage following you putting it into the devise.

So, if you don't hand count hard ballots with supervision, the vote is always is jeopardy.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
 
If you take your paper ballot and put it into a electronic device as we do in Florida, the friggin ballot totals can be altered electronically at any stage following you putting it into the devise.

So, if you don't hand count hard ballots with supervision, the vote is always is jeopardy.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Because simple electronics are certified before the election and aren’t connected to the net with multiple back doors. The current system enables fraud.
 
Scantrons aren’t connected to the internet. Half the civilized countries use paper ballots. We can go back. There is no reason for taxpayers to pay billions to democrat tech companies for vote processing only to get screwed in the end.
I’ve seen refrigerators and coffee makers that were wifi enabled. Your contention is that “scantron” electronic ballot readers can’t be connected to the internet?

IMG_6560.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: devildog93
No, it doesn’t. We were fine doing it the old way 30 years ago.
30 years ago(1994) we had the technology to scan ballot bubbles, it’s just a larger scantron. They’ve used that technology since the 60s it competed against the punch card system. Optical scanning machines were used to send telegraphs if that tells you how old the tech is(over 100years).
 
Last edited:
I’ve seen refrigerators and coffee makers that were wifi enabled. Your contention is that “scantron” electronic ballot readers can’t be connected to the internet?

Is it your contention that scantrons cannot be made without internet capability? Does everything have to be internet capable in your world? Can’t the state spec out voting systems that only count votes? Are there no people who can certify a machine? WTF is wrong with you?
 
Is it your contention that scantrons cannot be made without internet capability? Does everything have to be internet capable in your world? Can’t the state spec out voting systems that only count votes? Are there no people who can certify a machine? WTF is wrong with you?
The whole point of going to scantrons is to use the optical scanning component you dolt. They didn’t have internet in the early 1900s when the system was invented. Hell they didn’t have it when the system was rolled out for use in voting. Seems you’re the one who thinks everything revolves around the internet. From the 1800s to the 80s mechanical voting machines were also used…tell me more about the mythical internet of the 1800s…

There’s nothing wrong with me, but obviously there is with you. Tell me more about things you don’t really know anything about.
 
Last edited:
The whole point of going to scantrons is to use the optical scanning component you dolt. They didn’t have internet in the early 1900s when the system was invented. Hell they didn’t have it when the system was rolled out for use in voting. Seems you’re the one who thinks everything revolves around the internet. From the 1800s to the 80s mechanical voting machines were also used…tell me more about the mythical internet of the 1800s…

There’s nothing wrong with me, but obviously there is with you. Tell me more about things you don’t really know anything about.

I guess you can’t read either
 
Seems you can’t, I’m pointing out it was used for decades with no internet. The internet isn’t needed for the system, and all it did was count votes…or whatever data the scantron was printed with.

You’re the confused one here. Only a retard would hand count scantrons that can be counted optically with out an internet connection.

You’re the retard you commie weapon loving douche. You’re reading things into my responses that aren’t there.