All votes really need a numbered receipt, like a tracking number, that shows what that number voted for, and then posted publicly. This way if you think you’re vote was changed you can go and look online to see if it matches how you voted…but doubt this would ever be put in place.
I don’t think that’s a good idea at all. Leaks happen all the time and everyone knows that a lot of those machines are compromised. If republicans know exactly who voted for who, that could be an Alligator Auschwitz trip for certain people.
The problem is, that it’s either a system with checks or you get a system with no checks and potential fraud.
This would still be anonymous, you vote, it prints out a ticket number just for you not assigned to anyone but the votes that have been cast. You walk out of the voting booth with a ticket that has a number assigned to the votes nothing more.
I was thinking if it’s just a ballot that has a number but it’s not attached to your name. I.e. if the person handing out the ballots gives you a random one and you’re the only one who knows your own number. I’ve never used electric voting machines but maybe a randomly generated number that you can know but nobody else would know?
The problem with any kind of system like this is that if you can verify your own vote, then someone else could always force you to show them that verification.
That’s illegal in most places. Votes are anonymous specifically on purpose. Numerous people have been threatened to vote certain ways in the past all over the world. If there is no record of you specifically voting a specific choice, you can’t be forced to vote a specific way. And you can’t be targeted after the fact for that vote.
when votes are anonymous you can just not give a fuck about what they paid you to vote, you can take as many bribes as you want and vote for yourself regardless, thus people don’t really bother buying votes.
nobody can say that for sure… republicans still support him, people protest voted, kamala was unexciting… there are so many reasons that probably contributed
i’d guess his campaign probably got some people to vote when they otherwise wouldn’t have, but i’m not sure it would’ve changed anyone’s vote
You can pay someone to vote a specific way, but with the current system, there doesn’t exist a way for you to verify that they actually voted how you told them to.
That is a bad idea because now someone else can also check how you’ve voted. I.e. you can be coerced or threatened to vote a certain way. The current system is anonymous. You can vote X but say you voted Y and nobody can prove different.
The idea of it being numbered is that you are given your number when you vote to check against later, but nobody else is given that number so they can’t tie the vote to you.
Often times the people this would hurt most would be the spouses of abusive individuals. They could force the receipt, and would be able to confirm their victim voted the way they were told.
Not at all saying we shouldn’t look into the abuse, but unless the victim tells someone, there’s no way to know it’s happening? I don’t really get what you’re suggesting here.
I’m suggesting that if the abuse is large enough that it swings entire elections, then it should be looked into as a why it’s happening vs saying we shouldn’t do something about voter fraud because something else might happen.
Spousal abuse is only one concern, also parent/child coercion (you’re an adult now, you can’t live in my house unless you vote the way I want). Another would be buying votes, and using the “receipt” to collect payment.
That would be nice. Hugely impractical. Especially with today’s government. Pretty sure no fault divorce is going to be revoked soon, so it’ll only get worse.
Also, was not suggesting that abusive relationships would be enough to swing the election one way or the other, only that this is a valid concern that needs addressed before any sweeping change.
But you can be coerced to give up that number. People can buy your vote and you can give them your number as proof. That’s a huuuuge problem. You should not be able to prove (to someone else) how you voted. Ever.
What you need is some kind of systeem that allows you to verify your vote, but which is useless to someone else. It’s probably possible. But your idea isn’t it.
You could literally just throw it away and then they wouldn’t be able to do anything. If someone is threatening you to vote a certain way and they’re doing this to enough people that it makes a change… we’ve got much bigger problems than vote tracking.
the point of anonymous voting is coercion. if you can validate your vote outside of a safe polling place then someone else is able to validate how you voted and force you to vote a particular way
voting systems you need to be able to validate that your vote is submitted as you wanted (imo only paper based voting allows for this), and then that the system for counting the votes is inviolable (that’s where scrutineers come in)… again, imo that’s not something you can do electronically - or at least practically
Can’t we be coerced to get in our car, drive to a polling place, and vote for a particular candidate? Blackmail, other threats, or financial incentives etc, I’m not sure why a physical polling place is safer than being able to vote anonymously
No matter who threatens you, they can’t see what’s on the paper ballot you put in a box. There’s people at the polling station that ensure that.
If there’s any way of tracking your vote, someone could threaten you, force you to vote a certain way, then force you to show the verification afterwards.
The safest way to ensure everyone gets a fair vote is paper ballots in a box.
I know the US uses a lot of mail-in voting, and that you generally deem it to be secure. I also understand that the US is a far less densely populated country than my own, which makes mail-in voting more necessary. However, we don’t have that in my country, and the reason I’m glad for it is exactly this: There’s no truly effective way to prevent anyone from forcing someone else to mail in a specific vote.
In your home, someone could force themselves in, force you to vote for someone and verify you did so.
With anonymous voting at a polling place, sure someone could force you to go there, but since the vote itself is anonymous (and there’s people around to check it is), they would never be able to verify that you indeed voted X or Y way. It’s also why most countries ban taking pictures of your vote; no proving to anyone how you voted!
Your examples are still the same. Polling places which require you to fill out your ballot by hand verify that you voted for someone because you can be watched or recorded as you were filling it out.
I’m not trying to be antagonistic. I literally just don’t see the difference.
because you can be watched or recorded as you were filling it out
You expressly can’t do this. This is why there’s a voting booth and observers who make sure you’re alone in the booth. And after you fill out the ballot, it gets folded inward and placed in a box that is closed off until election day is over. There’s no way to verify who you voted for, as your name isn’t on the ballot.
worth noting here that this is verification that your vote was submitted as you want it. from here, the system protects the integrity of the vote. interested parties (usually the major political parties) can organise scrutineers to follow the boxes from polling places to counting centres to ensure the boxes aren’t tampered with (along with seals and other physical security features). from there, people - multiple per vote - read and tally the big pile of votes… scrutineers here validate that the count is being conducted correctly (again, these are usually from any major party so anyone with something to gain or loose all agree on every single ballot that is counted). generally, if scrutineers disagree about a ballot it gets held for further processing of some kind
in these systems, it ensures integrity because the individual can ensure their vote is for sure cast how they want, and then anyone is able to validate the integrity of the count and process itself. there’s no place where this system can be measurably subverted (small scale fraud is pretty rare because it’s really not worth doing. large scale fraud is basically impossible to achieve without completely subverting an entire step in the process across the entire country, which is absolutely going to be noticed)
Could this be done such that a person cannot prove that they voted a certain way (the source of the problems people mention, like vote selling becoming viable)?
Maybe with a schema that allows a one time verify, and then churns your entry. If that verify occurs upon entry synchronously at the time you vote, if possible, that’d be no less safe than the paper ballot you feed into the machine.
All votes really need a numbered receipt, like a tracking number, that shows what that number voted for, and then posted publicly. This way if you think you’re vote was changed you can go and look online to see if it matches how you voted…but doubt this would ever be put in place.
I don’t think that’s a good idea at all. Leaks happen all the time and everyone knows that a lot of those machines are compromised. If republicans know exactly who voted for who, that could be an Alligator Auschwitz trip for certain people.
The problem is, that it’s either a system with checks or you get a system with no checks and potential fraud.
This would still be anonymous, you vote, it prints out a ticket number just for you not assigned to anyone but the votes that have been cast. You walk out of the voting booth with a ticket that has a number assigned to the votes nothing more.
I was thinking if it’s just a ballot that has a number but it’s not attached to your name. I.e. if the person handing out the ballots gives you a random one and you’re the only one who knows your own number. I’ve never used electric voting machines but maybe a randomly generated number that you can know but nobody else would know?
The problem with any kind of system like this is that if you can verify your own vote, then someone else could always force you to show them that verification.
Relevant XKCD
That’s illegal in most places. Votes are anonymous specifically on purpose. Numerous people have been threatened to vote certain ways in the past all over the world. If there is no record of you specifically voting a specific choice, you can’t be forced to vote a specific way. And you can’t be targeted after the fact for that vote.
Also because it’s an effective way to prove you voted a certain way to a vote buyer.
What’s stopping this now? Vote buying would happen regardless of a system.
when votes are anonymous you can just not give a fuck about what they paid you to vote, you can take as many bribes as you want and vote for yourself regardless, thus people don’t really bother buying votes.
Musk literally bought peoples votes…there are plenty of people who have no morals and absolutely would vote how they’re paid.
we can’t really know that… musk paid people to vote, but we and he have no idea if people actually voted how he wanted
i’d say selection bias (people willing to engage) played more of a part than actually telling people how to vote
The turnip won. It definitely helped
nobody can say that for sure… republicans still support him, people protest voted, kamala was unexciting… there are so many reasons that probably contributed
i’d guess his campaign probably got some people to vote when they otherwise wouldn’t have, but i’m not sure it would’ve changed anyone’s vote
You can pay someone to vote a specific way, but with the current system, there doesn’t exist a way for you to verify that they actually voted how you told them to.
That is a bad idea because now someone else can also check how you’ve voted. I.e. you can be coerced or threatened to vote a certain way. The current system is anonymous. You can vote X but say you voted Y and nobody can prove different.
The idea of it being numbered is that you are given your number when you vote to check against later, but nobody else is given that number so they can’t tie the vote to you.
Often times the people this would hurt most would be the spouses of abusive individuals. They could force the receipt, and would be able to confirm their victim voted the way they were told.
Sure while this is a concern, why aren’t we instead looking into the abuse vs suggesting we no do something because of another problem?
Not at all saying we shouldn’t look into the abuse, but unless the victim tells someone, there’s no way to know it’s happening? I don’t really get what you’re suggesting here.
I’m suggesting that if the abuse is large enough that it swings entire elections, then it should be looked into as a why it’s happening vs saying we shouldn’t do something about voter fraud because something else might happen.
Spousal abuse is only one concern, also parent/child coercion (you’re an adult now, you can’t live in my house unless you vote the way I want). Another would be buying votes, and using the “receipt” to collect payment.
You could just burn your number then.
That would be nice. Hugely impractical. Especially with today’s government. Pretty sure no fault divorce is going to be revoked soon, so it’ll only get worse.
Also, was not suggesting that abusive relationships would be enough to swing the election one way or the other, only that this is a valid concern that needs addressed before any sweeping change.
But you can be coerced to give up that number. People can buy your vote and you can give them your number as proof. That’s a huuuuge problem. You should not be able to prove (to someone else) how you voted. Ever.
What you need is some kind of systeem that allows you to verify your vote, but which is useless to someone else. It’s probably possible. But your idea isn’t it.
Transparent urn and public counting ?
You could literally just throw it away and then they wouldn’t be able to do anything. If someone is threatening you to vote a certain way and they’re doing this to enough people that it makes a change… we’ve got much bigger problems than vote tracking.
This is the exact use-case for a blockchain, a public immutable ledger where you can validate your vote, but nobody can tie it back to you.
the point of anonymous voting is coercion. if you can validate your vote outside of a safe polling place then someone else is able to validate how you voted and force you to vote a particular way
voting systems you need to be able to validate that your vote is submitted as you wanted (imo only paper based voting allows for this), and then that the system for counting the votes is inviolable (that’s where scrutineers come in)… again, imo that’s not something you can do electronically - or at least practically
Can’t we be coerced to get in our car, drive to a polling place, and vote for a particular candidate? Blackmail, other threats, or financial incentives etc, I’m not sure why a physical polling place is safer than being able to vote anonymously
No matter who threatens you, they can’t see what’s on the paper ballot you put in a box. There’s people at the polling station that ensure that.
If there’s any way of tracking your vote, someone could threaten you, force you to vote a certain way, then force you to show the verification afterwards.
The safest way to ensure everyone gets a fair vote is paper ballots in a box.
I know the US uses a lot of mail-in voting, and that you generally deem it to be secure. I also understand that the US is a far less densely populated country than my own, which makes mail-in voting more necessary. However, we don’t have that in my country, and the reason I’m glad for it is exactly this: There’s no truly effective way to prevent anyone from forcing someone else to mail in a specific vote.
Thanks for trying.
What do you mean?
I appreciate you sharing your insight and knowledge, honestly, I’m grateful
I’m stubborn and hard to convince, is what i meant
In your home, someone could force themselves in, force you to vote for someone and verify you did so.
With anonymous voting at a polling place, sure someone could force you to go there, but since the vote itself is anonymous (and there’s people around to check it is), they would never be able to verify that you indeed voted X or Y way. It’s also why most countries ban taking pictures of your vote; no proving to anyone how you voted!
Your examples are still the same. Polling places which require you to fill out your ballot by hand verify that you voted for someone because you can be watched or recorded as you were filling it out.
I’m not trying to be antagonistic. I literally just don’t see the difference.
You expressly can’t do this. This is why there’s a voting booth and observers who make sure you’re alone in the booth. And after you fill out the ballot, it gets folded inward and placed in a box that is closed off until election day is over. There’s no way to verify who you voted for, as your name isn’t on the ballot.
worth noting here that this is verification that your vote was submitted as you want it. from here, the system protects the integrity of the vote. interested parties (usually the major political parties) can organise scrutineers to follow the boxes from polling places to counting centres to ensure the boxes aren’t tampered with (along with seals and other physical security features). from there, people - multiple per vote - read and tally the big pile of votes… scrutineers here validate that the count is being conducted correctly (again, these are usually from any major party so anyone with something to gain or loose all agree on every single ballot that is counted). generally, if scrutineers disagree about a ballot it gets held for further processing of some kind
in these systems, it ensures integrity because the individual can ensure their vote is for sure cast how they want, and then anyone is able to validate the integrity of the count and process itself. there’s no place where this system can be measurably subverted (small scale fraud is pretty rare because it’s really not worth doing. large scale fraud is basically impossible to achieve without completely subverting an entire step in the process across the entire country, which is absolutely going to be noticed)
You’re forgetting about the traffic analysis and key distribution problems
No different than how it’s recorded today. We can improve from there but it’s not worse with the upside of a public ledger.
You can do much better than a ledger with a commitment scheme and transparency log.
Could this be done such that a person cannot prove that they voted a certain way (the source of the problems people mention, like vote selling becoming viable)?
Maybe with a schema that allows a one time verify, and then churns your entry. If that verify occurs upon entry synchronously at the time you vote, if possible, that’d be no less safe than the paper ballot you feed into the machine.
No one seems to be understanding that your system doesn’t make who you vote for public…
Yea… I’m kinda seeing that. It’s not a hard concept lol it’s a paper receipt. Toss it away if you’re worried about it.
Under your system republicans would just send everyone who voted democrat to death camps.
At least with a secret ballot they can only do that to everyone they think voted against them.
Under this system, the votes are tied to a randomized number, not to a person. They wouldn’t know.
I don’t think that’s how a technofascist surveillance state works. They would know.
If you’re at that point then what makes you think they’re not using facial surveillance to watch how you vote? And worse is mail in ballots.