4 ms·

So you'd have to fill out eight ballot papers instead of our two or three. Or perhaps, you'd fill out a single perforated ballot paper and it would be ripped ap

by hugh 18y ago

So you'd have to fill out eight ballot papers instead of our two or three. Or perhaps, you'd fill out a single perforated ballot paper and it would be ripped apart before counting. I've seen Australian ballot papers which are about three feet by one foot, and list a few hundred candidates for the state upper house (later they changed the law to make it harder to get on the ballot sheet). Anyway, if we can cope with that, I'm sure you guys could cope with having multiple elections on one big perforated sheet. The Scantron system actually sounds sensible enough though. If that were implemented nationwide it would be a good system. But I can't understand this district-by-district (or is it county-by-county?) disparity of voting schemes.

LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
Oh, it does sound like you have a good number of entries on your ballots. Sorry for making assumptions. To be honest I've never voted in an election which didn't use Scantron ballots. I believe the voting devices are selected and allocated on a state-by-state basis though. The federal law mandates certain requirements the states must meet but leaves the implementation up to each individual one. I've lived in North Carolina, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Utah, and used Scantrons in each location. Maybe the computerized systems are used in more urban or wealthy districts?