7 ms·
> If there is one thing I fail to understand it is the impulse to electronic-ify our elections. The part that gets me is that there is no organic, grassroots p
by darpa_escapee 8y ago
> If there is one thing I fail to understand it is the impulse to electronic-ify our elections.
The part that gets me is that there is no organic, grassroots push from the people who actually vote to implement electronic voting.
Usually when someone, or many people, advocate for a cause, they have something to gain from it.
Who is advocating for electronic voting and what do they stand to gain?
- rayiner 8y agoThere’s always people complaining how backwards it is that we don’t have electronic voting, how it suppresses the youth vote, etc.
- jpfed 8y agoInteresting! I'd never heard the idea that the lack of electronic voting suppresses the youth vote. Do you have a link for someone arguing that position?
- rayiner 8y agohttps://www.bbc.com/news/business-39955468 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-39955468 > Online voting is a good way to engage with younger voters, busy workers, and even Estonians living abroad, Mr Koitmae says.
- s73v3r_ 8y agoThere are several miles of difference between what they said and 'claiming that not having it suppresses the youth vote.'
- pjc50 8y agoDiebold salespeople.
- squiggleblaz 8y agoAfter it took a few weeks to find out the result of our last election there was a push to electronicify it. (I think some people were also upset that they had to stand in a queue and why can't we just do it from our phone?) The push was rejected since (a) the body responsible for running the elections believes it would be less secure and (b) it would still take two weeks to finalise since postal votes can come in up to two weeks after the election as long as they're postmarked before the election. But people are interested in fast results. And they're lazy.