>They didn't show anything about the electronic voting machines that are employed here over your way?

Not that I can recall. But I remember the stink over the FL vote and recounts, by which GWB got in.

>
>There were several interesting stories over the last couple years about them. The first I heard was from a software guy who worked at one of the places that designed them. He said he was asked to put in code to allow for rigging the vote. He said he would, but only if x,y,z safeguards were put in place also. The system that got sold included his backdoor software, but minus any safeguards.
>
>There was a documentary about a lady who decided to campaign against the electronic voting units. A software security expert teamed up with her. I watched a documentary about them. An election official down in Florida who was concerned about the systems asked them to look at the new boxes he was ordered to use.
>
>The security expert was able to reverse engineer some code and easily hack the system. So when they tested it, they had 3 people vote No and 4 vote Yes. But when they ran the tally sheet it came out opposite.

The hell you say! And this is in a country whose citizens are sent abroad to to tin-pot nascent democracies as observers that the process is being observed legitimitely. Who guards the guards, indeed!

>
>>>>>http://www.nysun.com/article/48925
>>...
>>>
>>>Then we have Texas politics. More people vote than are registered. You just count deceased voters who automatically voted for you. The neat thing about electronic voting machines is no one has to go to the poles to vote. Someone can program who the winner is and save us the trouble of wasting our time.
>>
>>Wow, I didn't know that, Tom. Even in the US we can have a seriously flawed voting system. This smacks (in a different way) of the old "Rotten Boroughs" in the early days of the English parliament (Back when only certain MEN, such as land-owners and rich merchants had the vote).
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_borough
>>
>>Terry