Posts Tagged ‘voting’

Election Day Roundup: What to Read Once You’re Back from the Polls

Technology’s Top Ten Election Lows—and yeah, they’re pretty low.

Sarah Palin’s health is “excellent.” Her running mate’s, less so.

Stop the presses! Study shows that political candidates may actually tend to keep their promises.

The “Bradley Effect” may have been neither from Bradley nor an effect. Discuss.

The latest in media bias research asks: Is it possible to quantify a partisan slant?

As it turns out, being alive is not always a prerequisite for having your vote counted—and perhaps rightfully so.

And this from Russia Today: “Supporters would sell soul to see Obama.” Hey, the selling-something-intangible strategy worked so well with credit default swaps.

November 4th, 2008 Tags: , , ,
by Melissa Lafsky in The 2008 Election | 1 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

E-Voting Put to the Ultimate Test

Chances are you’re not reading this, because you’re standing in some epic line at a polling place. Or maybe you’ve brought your iPhone, and you’re surfing the Web to pass the timed. Either way, the polls are jammed, lines are interminable across the country, and election officials, politicos, pundits, and just about everyone else are bracing themselves for the technological messes that are sure to ensue.

The good news, according to a recent report from Election Data Services, is that the number of ballots cast on electronic voting machines will drop today for the first time since DREs wormed their way into our lives. In the 2008 election, 32.6 percent of all ballots will be recorded on an electronic voting machine, compared to 37.6 percent in 2006.

Of course, 2006 wasn’t a presidential election year, particularly one with expected “record-shattering” turnouts. By comparison, 22 percent and 29.2 percent of votes were cast electronically in 2000 and 2004, respectively.

Then there’s the little matter of key swing states, including Ohio, Indiana, and Nevada—all of which are relying heavily on electronic voting machines.

(more…)

November 4th, 2008 Tags: ,
by Melissa Lafsky in Science Goes to Washington, The 2008 Election | 2 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Being Smart Makes You Vote, Or Vice Versa

So, yeah, there’s this election tomorrow, in case you hadn’t heard. And if you need any more incentive to head to the polls, here it is: A study out of Scotland’s University of Edinburgh found that people with higher IQs voted more often, regardless of their occupation. The data came from a U.K. study begun in 1970 that has tracked the recent voting habits of about 17,200 people born that year.

They found that for every 15 IQ points above a score of 100, a participant was “38 percent more likely than average to have voted in the United Kingdom’s 2001 election.” In addition, “[p]eople who took part in a political meeting or rally in the last year, those who took part in a public demonstration, those who signed a petition, and those who were fairly or very interested in politics had higher mean intelligence test scores at age 10.”

But did IQ make any difference in which way people voted? Any mention of this question in the past has usually been enough to incite a frothing frenzy. Here’s how ABC News summarized the latest findings:

“Childhood intelligence is associated with…support for political ideologies that are based on ecological sustainability and social liberalism,” conclude the Intelligence study authors. For example, voters were 32 percent more likely to vote for the UK’s more left-wing Liberal party over the Conservative party for every 15 IQ points they scored above average as children. They were more likely to be tree-huggers too, voting more often for environment-oriented parties.

So the smarter you are, the more you like trees—we report, you decide.

Related:
RB: Election 2008: Everything You Need to Know to Avoid Being Disenfranchised
RB: Voting in America: Let the Pre-Game Mess Begin!
RB: Voting in America, Redux: You Can’t Vote Here, But You Can Vote in Space

November 3rd, 2008 Tags: ,
by Melissa Lafsky in Science Goes to Washington, The 2008 Election | 2 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Election 2008: Everything You Need to Know to Avoid Being Disenfranchised

voting booth ballotTomorrow, we vote. Estimates place the turnout at around 130 million or more, possibly the largest in American history. Of course, not everyone registered will necessarily be able to cast their ballot—and even uglier, not every ballot cast will necessarily be counted. Before you head to the polls tomorrow, here’s a list of all the facts you’ll need to ensure your vote doesn’t end up trapped forever in the bowels of the technology/Democratic leviathan.

Avoid being one of the 3 percent who cast ballots in error (and that’s without the machines messing up) by following these guidelines, compiled by researchers at the University of Maryland. (Hint: Beware the optical scanner.)

Last chance to check your registration! So far it’s been one of the biggest problems voters have faced at the polls.

Having trouble with your DRE or optical scan ballot? Look for a camera to document your woes: PBS and YouTube are joining forces to collect and stream user-generated video from polling places nationwide.

If there’s no video evidence, you can still exercise your right to protest crummy voting technology via the Internets.

Speaking of which, technology has enjoyed unprecedented domination over this election—which might continue into the next administration.

(more…)

November 3rd, 2008 Tags: , , ,
by Melissa Lafsky in The 2008 Election | 0 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Think You’re an Undecided Voter? Your Brain May Disagree.

With less than a week before showtime, the polls are already jam packed. But the real stars of the eleventh hour are the undecided voters, who still (incredibly, miraculously) haven’t made up their minds. And apparently they’re more numerous than one might think, with one in seven voters saying they might go either way, according to a recent poll.

But are these vacillating voters really still deciding? Or could their minds have already formulated a choice, without their even realizing it? University of Virginia psychologist Brian Nosek suspects the latter is true, and has partnered with colleagues at Harvard and the University of Washington to test whether humans form mental associations that differ from what their conscious recognizes.

To do this, the researchers used the Implicit Association Test, which has been up and running for a decade now and has logged around 7 million responses. Since the 2008 presidential race began, the team has tested more than 25,000 voters on their implicit preferences concerning the two candidates. Of that group, around 4,000 (15 percent) declared themselves undecided. But the test results for a significant number of these so-called undecideds showed a clear implicit preference for Obama or McCain. Here’s how the team summarized their results:

(more…)

October 31st, 2008 Tags: , ,
by Melissa Lafsky in Science Goes to Washington, The 2008 Election | 1 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Voting in America, Redux: You Can’t Vote Here, But You Can Vote in Space

astronautOne week left ’til Election Day 2008, and voter turnout is expected to obliterate records. Of course, whether those record numbers of voters turn into record numbers of counted votes remains to be seen. In addition to the smorgasbord of disasters that could befall your vote before it gets tallied, the first hurdle will be voter registration, creating a gatekeeper you’ll have to pass just to get in the door.

Chances are, your voter registration information has been entered into a computer database run by your state. And chances also are that it’s been entered wrong—no, seriously, it has. As a result of all this error and confusion, just about everyone is worried that legions of voters could be turned away at the polls. Even the Association for Computing Machinery is getting in the act, stating the following in press release:

Experts from ACM’s U.S. Public Policy Committee (USACM) will be monitoring and analyzing the reliability of registration records and voting equipment around the nation as Election Day approaches.

ACM’s report on VRDs [voter registration databases] includes 99 high-level recommendations to help states establish best practices for computerized statewide electronic databases…For example, the ACM report recommends that when driver registration databases are used for eligibility checks, they should apply only to screening voters, not to automatically enrolling or de-enrolling them.

Yes, great idea! Call us when it’s implemented in 2012.

Of course, in the irony of all ironies, NASA is making sure that any Americans currently in orbit are able to vote from space, courtesy of a secure electronic ballot uplinked by the Johnson Space Center. This year, two men aboard the International Space Station plan to cast their ballots from 220 miles above the Earth. Let’s just hope they’ve been reading the news.

Related:
RB: Voting in America: Let the Pre-Game Mess Begin!
RB: Lose Your House, Lose Your Vote, Lose Your Self-Esteem
RB: Advocacy Group May Have Registered Phony “Voters.” But Does It Matter?
RB: Be Very Afraid: Online Voting Systems Fail Even for Political Bloggers

October 28th, 2008 Tags: ,
by Melissa Lafsky in Science Goes to Washington, The 2008 Election | 1 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Be Very Afraid: Online Voting Systems Fail Even for Political Bloggers

Voting and technology have nothing resembling a smooth relationship. And as Nov. 4th fast approaches with its expected record voter turnouts, there’s a pretty good (translation: 99.999 percent) chance that the computers and scanners we rely on to register our identities, store our personal information, and correctly record our votes will fail us—in fact, screw-ups are already being reported, and it’s not even the October home stretch.

Given this heartening news, the question is not “Will voting technology break down during this election?” but rather “How can I keep the cyberworld from chewing up and spitting out my vote before I’ve even cast it?” Thankfully, while voter databases and e-voting machines are apt—perhaps even destined—to crash and burn, voters have an ally in the Internet, which offers a means of keeping an eye on details like whether you’re registered correctly (or at all).

So how likely is it that your local voter database has already made an error? Well, to test the system we decided check our registration status in New York, RB’s home state. And while RB endeavors (ahem) to remain non-partisan, we were very not at all surprised to find the following error:
republican computer error

To avoid suffering the same fate, we suggest you check your registration status online (all voters in New York can use this link). Find any errors in your home state’s database? Let us know in the comments!

Related:

Wired: The Interactive Voting Problems Map

DISCOVER: Protect Your Vote with Invisible Ink
RB: Voting in America: Let the Pre-Game Mess Begin!
RB: Sarah Palin Still Butchering Science, Redux
RB: Rumors Aside, Sarah Palin Is Still Butchering Science
RB: Don’t Know Much About Technology: McCain Tackles ScienceDebate Questions

October 23rd, 2008 Tags: ,
by Melissa Lafsky in The 2008 Election | 1 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Weekly News Roundup

• Expert tells Texas voting officials: You’re Screwed.

• And if you do find yourself given the disenfranchisement middle finger on Nov. 4, be sure to report it on Wired’s interactive voting booth map!

• The one place where the economy is still strong and credit flows like rivers: Second Life.

• Sure, we’ve got Joe the Plumber slapped on every headline these days, but how about “Joe the Solar Guy“?

• Your complete guide to claiming green tax credits in 2008—perhaps the only money you’ll squeeze from the government this year.

• Pfizer settles all those pesky class actions over Celebrex and Bextra, to the tune of $894 million.

• Like tuna tartare? Better get it while it lasts (hint: won’t be long now).

October 17th, 2008 Tags: , , , ,
by Melissa Lafsky in Health Care, The 2008 Election | 0 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Voting in America: Let the Pre-Game Mess Begin!

voting machineDespite all the wonders modern technology has dumped on us, it has yet to create a foolproof, fraudproof way for 150 million Americans to vote. But while the nation’s smartest computer scientists and cryptography experts have been busy churning out ideas to solve our voting woes once and for all, their efforts may be moot if we can’t figure out how to get eligible voters registered in the first place.

You’d think that after the last election’s slew of technological fiascoes, states would have ironed out their database woes. Not so: Wired (via ABC News) reports that glitches in states’ voter databases are as bountiful as always, and could wind up leaving thousands disenfranchised. The biggest issue is the haphazard creation of centralized databases, which were mandated for federal elections following the debacle of 2000. The law’s intent, as usual, was to do good—consolidating voter lists into a single database would presumably simplify the process and keep voters from being arbitrarily turned away at the polls.

Unfortunately, as with voting machines, the reality has been closer to chaos: The databases, which are unregulated by any federal agency, have been plagued by human error, confusion, cost overloads, and a smörgåsbord of other mess-ups.

(more…)

September 25th, 2008 Tags: , , ,
by Melissa Lafsky in The 2008 Election | 0 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >