2 ms·
Don't worry, I do mean the "cannot" version. Reread my post and note how I described the process. Asking the people I knew who had worked at the election commis
by 27182818284 14y ago
Don't worry, I do mean the "cannot" version. Reread my post and note how I described the process. Asking the people I knew who had worked at the election commission in the last few years was only to confirm what I had concluded from my own experiences voting. The method used (in my state at least) does not have a way to identify me personally, even if a corrupt politician stole all the boxes post election and emptied them in his office. So that takes care of the "won't" case vs the "cannot" case.
- specialist 14y agoWe cool. Thanks for following up. I assumed too much about your circumstances. Paper ballots cast at a poll site is the only way to absolutely ensure voter privacy. The Australian Ballot method. The reason it works is because the ballot box scrambles the order of ballots, so they can't be tied to individual voters. (There are some exceptions, like very small precincts.) Voting electronically eliminates that anonymizing scrambling. If it scrambled the order, they'd never be able to audit the process. Postal ballots (aka vote by mail) has to be done just right to protect voter privacy. Many jurisdictions don't scramble the ballots because of the added expense.