0
0

[–] 15045409? ago 

I haven't heard anyone mention it, but prior to the 2016 election, Terry Mcauliffe allowed non-violent felons to get their voter rights back; and did so without them asking for it. I heard later that the state said it was unlawful, but my cousin was still able to vote.

0
0

[–] 15063791? ago 

Mc Awful and lawful, mutually exclusive.

0
0

[–] 15046768? ago 

Pick a month, first Saturday, 4am-8pm, ID, voter registration. Upon voting the registered name goes inactive, if someone shows up and is inactive then a provisional ballot. Just my two cents but Virginia is good about it (surprising given the weasel Kaine and many others).

0
0

[–] 15047734? ago 

The only thing that matters is who COUNTS the votes. Especially in a paper based system.

This is why I advocate the blockchain. Distributed, encrypted (parts), transparent (parts) so that it can't be changed or manipulated and you can verify that your vote counts the same way it did when you cast it.

You can produce a 'count' of the votes from any computer with internet access. If any of the counts from any computers are off, something is wrong.

You can't change part of the votes - because then your blockchain wouldn't match all the others. You'd be found to be tampering...we could go with a paper backup if we wanted, but I think we should just vote again if there's a problem.

The only challenge I see is: voter identification, but this could be changed. You'd have to go to a recognized location, such as we do now, they would verify your ID and you would set a passcode of your choosing into the blockchain on your vote record. Then, you could go anywhere and using your passcode, cast your vote to any blockchain. Which would propagate to all the other blockchains. Your vote can't be tampered with because a record can't be modified. This is how the blockchain works.