Comments on: Vote for, er, Jim?

Vote for, er, Jim?

clevershark — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:38:51 -0800

Vote for James H. "Jim"? Voters in certain Virginia precincts will see electronic ballots featuring only part of some candidates' names. For some reason this is said to be "unfixable", even though this has been discovered two weeks ahead of election time. This problem only affects voting machines made by... not the one you'd expect, but Austin, TX-based Hart InterCivic, whose motto is "Always Accessible". Senatorial Candidate James H. "Jim" Webb (D) is, one may assume, not amused.

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:50:21 -0800

Allen gets truncated also, the "(R)" at the end of his name will not appear. Of course that "(R)" has become almost a scarlett letter these days. To be fair, this appears only on the summary screen, not while making the initial selections.

By: ericb

ericb — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:50:29 -0800

In related news:

Potential voting problems loom in U.S. New voting systems, rules may spell trouble at polls. Is Press Taking Possible Voting Problems Seriously? Chicago investigating elections web site security.

Vote early, vote often!

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:52:41 -0800

or even scarlet

By: weapons-grade pandemonium

weapons-grade pandemonium — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:58:31 -0800

George Wash and Abraham Linco are rolling over in their graves.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:58:37 -0800

Do they even test these things? What the fuck?

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:05:48 -0800

For a country that so prides itself on democracy and elections, you gotta admit that the US electoral process seems awfully Keystone Kops-ish.

By: birdherder

birdherder — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:06:17 -0800

I've used these machines in Austin elections but hadn't noticed people with long names getting truncated. Early voting is this week, and I'll check.

By: cotterpin

cotterpin — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:12:40 -0800

Do I read this correctly, that Virginia's ballot for senator has the choices: George F Allen James T "Jim" Naaaah... They're really going to try to have ballots without the candidates names or parties on them?

By: gurple

gurple — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:14:36 -0800

And Bo Li (R) wins by a landslide!

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:16:13 -0800

Do I read this correctly, that Virginia's ballot for senator has the choices... Yes, but only parts of Virginia -- Alexandria, Falls Church and Charlottesville. Still despicable that these things are being used, but it's a tiny bit better than it could otherwise be.

By: brain_drain

brain_drain — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:17:43 -0800

Pretty pathetic, but it seems unlikely to distort the results, especially if notices are posted or handed out describing the problem. On preview, cotterpin, the names apparently aren't truncated on the voting screen, it's only on the summary page.

By: quin

quin — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:18:41 -0800

U.S. Senate candidate James Webb's last name has been cut off on part of the electronic ballot... also affects other candidates with long names, city officials said yesterday. WTF? 'James Webb' is a long name? I'm of the mind that if your entire name is only two syllables, it can't be considered "long".

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:21:55 -0800

Interesting: From the company website: Charlottesville General Registrar Sheri L. Iachetta said the system has worked flawlessly."We haven't had any problems in the past, and we have spare machines in case there is a problem," Iachetta said. "We are very confident in our machines since they have run well in the past elections." From the article: "Sheri Iachetta, general registrar for Charlottesville, said the city purchased 72 machines in 2002. Election officials have had trouble displaying long names ever since. "We do have people complain and say they don't get it," Iachetta said. "I completely understand what they're saying, but it's not something I can control...." Bit of a disconnect between the two quotes, considering the issue's been around since 2002, no?

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:23:41 -0800

quin, it's the "Jim" that pushes his last name off. Apparently, the problem surfaced when the font on the voting page was enlarged. Why would that happen?

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:26:13 -0800

I guess that means the voting machines won't be able to fit in the full "George F. 'Macaca' Allen" on the intro screen. How disappointing.

By: pracowity

pracowity — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:26:38 -0800

> WTF? 'James Webb' is a long name? Maybe the quotes fucked it up. Are there no penalties for screwing up an election? These guys should be going to jail for their negligence.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:31:03 -0800

who do you want to vote for for senate 1) Macacawitz 2) Thunderthighs

By: Slarty Bartfast

Slarty Bartfast — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:33:44 -0800

I would like to see as much media attention as possible on any irregularities this election. No, this doesn't seem like a big deal by itself, why is it so fucking hard to fix shit like this? Election reform needs to be a way bigger issue than it is. No way an incumbent congress is going to challenge the system that sends them back every time. We've been getting absentee ballots at our house for people who moved away and voted in other states for the last two elections. It's everything I could do not to fill them out myself, especially for the right wing fuck tard who used to live with us.

By: diastematic

diastematic — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:34:59 -0800

I have an idea. Let's have a recount if and when the Democrats win.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:35:13 -0800

Apparently John Fitzgerald "Jack" Kennedy would have a hard time getting elected in Virginia! Why does "Jim" need to be specified though? Isn't the James-Jim connection a bit obvious?

By: hermitosis

hermitosis — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:37:21 -0800

When you think about it, we're lucky it says anything more than "[D] or [R]?"

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:38:54 -0800

I would vote for a guy named James H. Jim.

By: weapons-grade pandemonium

weapons-grade pandemonium — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:56:40 -0800

Calvin Cool over Richard Nix any day.

By: 2sheets

2sheets — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:58:13 -0800

Putting nicknames on a ballot is dumb enough, but "jim" takes the cake.

By: namespan

namespan — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:02:13 -0800

For a country that so prides itself on democracy and elections, you gotta admit that the US electoral process seems awfully Keystone Kops-ish. From my perch on the precipice, it looks to me like most Americans prefer their dream of democracy to paying attention to reality. Probably the only way to fix it is to have the government actually run over a couple of elementary schools. Short of those in power actually doing something blatant like that, I don't think most people will care enough to even find out how they're being shafted.

By: Eddie Mars

Eddie Mars — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:02:28 -0800

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos "Alien" Kod

By: Tacos Are Pretty Great

Tacos Are Pretty Great — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:03:36 -0800

Meh. This is a dumb and pointless error. That said, it'd be nice if a bunch of local governments could put together a grassroots effort to make a secure, reliable, verifiable electronic voting machine, if only so all these dumb bugs could be ironed out.

By: BillyElmore

BillyElmore — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:21:29 -0800

Quick fix: Throw the Macaca machines in the Potomac River, and vote on paper. Suppose they can figure that in two weeks?

By: dfan

dfan — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:21:50 -0800

From the comments, it seems like a lot of people aren't reading the article, so I just want to make sure that people realize that this doesn't affect the screens on which people are making their choices; it affects the confirmation screen at the end of the process that summarizes what choices the voter has already made.

By: JWright

JWright — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:24:41 -0800

It's also eyebrow raising that Falls Church, Alexandria, and Charlottesville are high-population, left-leaning areas of Virginia. The court ought to demand these machines be corrected at any cost, even if it means delaying the Virginia election. It's unfathomable that the summary screen only shows 14 characters of a name. Especially when those 14 happen to be the precise amount to cut the baggage (R) off of George Allen's name and remove Webb's entire last name. Even on the summary screen. It's unacceptable.

By: R343L

R343L — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:25:19 -0800

2sheets: "Jim" is probably how he goes day to day, so he would introduce himself as "Jim Webb". However, in most states the requirement for ballots is the candidate's legal name. Some allow a "nickname" to be included. Hence the "Jim". Other candidates of course have more interesting nicknames. However, in Webb's case, if "Jim" wasn't on the ballot, some voters might not realize that this Webb was the Webb they wanted. No, seriously. :)

By: Flashman

Flashman — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:35:36 -0800

He's Webb, Jim.

By: exogenous

exogenous — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:46:29 -0800

He's Dem, Jim.

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:47:06 -0800

I have an idea. Let's have a recount if and when the Democrats win. Oh, you can pretty much bet the farm that the Republicans will go recount-crazy if the Dems pull-off big wins. As I noted in another thread, I've been seeing a lot of pieces on FoxNews about the sketchiness and insecurity of electronic voting. I'm pretty sure they're greasing the wheels for an all-out, wall-to-wall "Election Fraud" campaign if the Dems pull-off the upset.

By: quin

quin — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:51:21 -0800

I came up with the same thing as JWright, 14 characters. Which raises the question, why can't they just drop the nick-name and have it show 'James Webb-D' and 'George Allen-R'? I realize it's just the summary screen, but come on, 14 characters? Are we back to using Windows 3.1 naming conventions?

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:56:06 -0800

I'm pretty sure they're greasing the wheels for an all-out, wall-to-wall "Election Fraud" campaign if the Dems pull-off the upset. No doubt. If Democrats win, the nazis will cry about vote fraud. If Republicans win, they won't. This will be explained away by asserting that the reaction would be symmetric for the Democrats, ignoring the fact that the last election WAS stolen (unless you convince yourself to ignore solid stats) and no significant hue and cry was raised, and also ignoring the fact that it is Republicans who are in bed with the vote counters.

By: nicwolff

nicwolff — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:03:17 -0800

Charlottesville, if you don't know, is where the University of Virginia is, and where VA's most vibrant arts and theater scenes are, and where a lot of the state's artists and musicians live and (try to) vote.

By: theducks

theducks — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:04:42 -0800

One wonders what would happen to these incredibly secure and well tested systems if a candidate named James COM1 tried to get elected.

By: I Am Not a Lobster

I Am Not a Lobster — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:06:12 -0800

Good thing Zbigniew Brzezinski isn't running in Virginia. Nobody would know who to vote for if all they saw was Zbigniew Brzez.

By: edgeways

edgeways — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:15:19 -0800

More fuel for the fire, Maryland - Diebold software may have been stolen Ohio - Blackwell and others sued over voter id issues

By: AaRdVarK

AaRdVarK — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:21:40 -0800

I'm an election official in Charlottesville (and a Democrat, for full disclosure). I don't think this is going to be too big of a deal. On the page where you vote, his full name will appear, so when you choose who you are voting for, you will be voting for James H. "Jim" Webb. Only on the summary screen before you cast your final ballot will the name be truncated. Personally, I'd like to see the machines be eliminated or a voter verified paper trail implemented. Why any sane person would be against this is beyond me.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:30:12 -0800

One wonders what would happen to these incredibly secure and well tested systems if a candidate named James COM1 tried to get elected. Before I run for office, I'm going to change my legal name to $_ .

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:53:51 -0800

Are we back to using Windows 3.1 naming conventions? more like MS-DOS 1.0

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:34:21 -0800

Are we back to using Windows 3.1 naming conventions? more like MS-DOS 1.0 The naming conventions in DOS 1.0 and Windows 3.1 are exactly the same, eight letters and a three letter extension.

By: swell

swell — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:53:00 -0800

AaRdVarK - IMHO, it's not that big a deal for a normal voter. However, you've got a close race, and the loser's gonna cry foul. This gives 'em something to hang a recount off of, no matter who wins.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:59:54 -0800

I Am Not a Lobster writes "Nobody would know who to vote for if all they saw was Zbigniew Brzez." "er, 'scuse me? I think there's something wrong with this machine! I want to see the guy's name but I only see jibberish!" Although with a name like Zbigniew Brzezinsky one could argue it'd be hard to get elected outside of Poland, or certain parts of Chicago.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:02:04 -0800

Apparently, the problem surfaced when the font on the voting page was enlarged. Why would that happen? Probably cause the elderly complained about not being able to read it. Damn those old people, always ruining elections.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:00:32 -0800

AaRdVarK writes "On the page where you vote, his full name will appear, so when you choose who you are voting for, you will be voting for James H. 'Jim' Webb. Only on the summary screen before you cast your final ballot will the name be truncated." Our last presidential election was plagued by voter issues around butterfly ballots. They didn't change while you looked at them -- they were a piece of paper. You look at the piece of paper, you punch a hole. If that caused such massive issues, then this surely will have an impact and given how close many races have been in recent years, any impact whatsoever can throw an election to a different candidate. Voting is not a low-anxiety experience. It requires travel to a location which may not be compeltely familiar, with officials searching through a list to hopefully find your name. Electronic voting carries its own level of anxiety -- one would assume especially for those who are on the disadvantaged side of the technology gap. This one screen is your final look at a ballot you have not marked by hand and of which you have no other lasting record and it is thus very critical in the electronic voting process -- without it, you literally have one opportunity to make and observe your choice accurately. We as a technology-oriented society have so many complaints that result from a lack of review and quality assurance -- you wouldn't want a car that hasn't been tested or ride in an elevator that hasn't been inspected -- why would you want to vote in a way that gives no opportunity for accurate review? Like it or not, my right to vote carries with it no obligation to know the names of the candidates. If I want to vote down the line for a Republican and I make a mistake with this new technology, the party affiliation would be the only way to tell. Heck, where's the last campaign sign you saw that included the candidate's first and last names? Assuming that someone didn't ignore the confirmation screen (where they might catch an errant D out of the corner of their eye) or shrug their shoulders and submit their final vote despite the lack of detail, the process for a doubtful voter to accurately review or change their choice then requires several additional steps, thus increasing the abandon rate and given the anxiety levels above, compounding the overall risk for error. Absolutely ridiculous.

By: malthas

malthas — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:29:23 -0800

I live in Falls Church (technically, though I'm away at college), and it really pissed me off when I first saw that they were advertising the new voting system. They had flyers talking about how they were offering little info/demo sessions where I'm sure they were going to talk about how awesome they were. Now I can say that I was right in being pissed off. Glad I get to vote by absentee ballot, but sorry for the people that have to use the stupid machines.

By: flug

flug — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:00:10 -0800

That said, it'd be nice if a bunch of local governments could put together a grassroots effort to make a secure, reliable, verifiable electronic voting machine secure, reliable, verifiable ~~electronic~~ voting ~~machine~~ system There, I just made it a lot easier on you.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:10:57 -0800

On the page where you vote, his full name will appear, so when you choose who you are voting for, you will be voting for James H. 'Jim' Webb. Only on the summary screen before you cast your final ballot will the name be truncated. We're talking about an electorate that needs James to have the nickname "Jim" come after it because election officials are worried enough people would get confused otherwise. "I don't think anyone will have a problem" is as lame now as it was with the butterfly ballot.

By: dhartung

dhartung — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:11:52 -0800

We're talking about an electorate that needs James to have the nickname "Jim" come after it because election officials are worried enough people would get confused otherwise. Oh, come off it. The candidate must request the use of a nickname.

By: jaymzjulian

jaymzjulian — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 22:03:06 -0800

I don't think the problem is so much that the code can't be fixed (it almost certantly can), but that there is a certain lag time on this type of software for auditing any changes - the fix may take a programmer ten minutes, but then six months worth of beurocrats have to sign off on it before it goes in to production systems. But then, you don't want your systems running un-audited code, right? I mean, it's fucked that the issue made it in there in the first place, but it just seems to me to be not big enough to be worth the amount of pain that a new audit and approval process would entail, this close to an election. But then, it's entirely possible that I'm smoking crack.

By: dglynn

dglynn — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 06:31:23 -0800

So, if I understand this correctly, there were complaints that the summary page was correct, but not readable by some portion X of the voting populace. So, the fix that was selected has the summary page displaying incomplete information for 100% of the voting populace? The summary page is apparently important enough to change the font size to accomodate some portion of the voters, and now they can read the summary page, but the information is incomplete? The summary page is important enough to fix, but not important enough to get the information correctly displayed for all voters? On what fucking planet does this remotely constitute fixing the original problem?

By: smackfu

smackfu — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 07:04:24 -0800

You are SO outraged.

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 07:32:45 -0800

Apparently, the problem surfaced when the font on the voting page was enlarged. Why would that happen? [Me] Probably cause the elderly complained about not being able to read it. Damn those old people, always ruining elections. [smackfu] My question was actually, "Why would enlarging the font on the voting screen cause truncation on the confirmation screen?"