On 11/11/2012 12:25 PM, Pete Theisen wrote:
On 11/11/2012 01:10 PM, lelandj wrote:
http://watchdogwire.com/florida/2012/11/10/massive-voter-fraud-in-st-lucie-county-florida-141-turnout/
"official St Lucie County, FL 2012 election results. Only one precinct
had less than 113% turnout. The unofficial vote count is 175,554
registered voters 247,713 vote cards cast (141.10% ). The National
SEAL Museum, a St. Lucie county polling place, had 158.85% voter turn
out, the highest in the county."
How would Texas cope with that?
Florida should engage one of the big four accounting firms to perform an
operational audit of the current system, and make recommendation
Hi Leland,
How would the auditors identify the fraudulent ballots? THAT is what
has to be done!
Just off the top of my head, an internal control might work something
like this. The starting point in a voter casting a ballot is
registering to vote. Because many people have the same name, at the
time a person registers to vote, they could be issued a unique ID number.
In order for the voter to receive a ballot, when they go to vote, they
could be required to present their unique ID number. This number could
be check, and if its valid, and has not already been used, the voter
could receive a ballot.
If the system is automated the voter could be required to enter his
unique ID to cast a vote. The voting machine would check to see if the
unique ID number had not already been used within a statewide voting
system; before, accepting the voters input.
This kind of system would need strong security to protect the voters
privacy.
Without some kind of internal control in place, such as the example I
provided above, it may not be possible to identify fraudulent votes.
Regards,
LelandJ
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
