Voter smashes Diebold machine as e-voting problems crop up nationwide

With this being the first major election to see a significant portion of the population casting their ballots on electronic voting machines, you might expect some problems to arise with the notoriously buggy and untested technology -- and you'd be right. The New York Times is reporting that polling places across the country are experiencing difficulties with their voting equipment, and while we'd love to place the blame squarely on shady manufacturers like Diebold, Sequoia, and friends, it seems that the complications are actually due to human error as much as faulty hardware. According to The Times, Indiana appears to be the state having the most trouble today, with 75 precincts using incorrectly programmed smart cards and nearly half of Marion County's 914 precincts having trouble getting their machines to boot up in the first place. In New Jersey, meanwhile, Republican officials are claiming that Democratic Senator Robert Menendez's name was already lit up when some voters entered the booth, causing them to accidentally choose the wrong candidate. Other areas such as Cleveland, Ohio and Hartford, Connecticut were either unable to start their machines or found the touchscreens to be improperly displaying candidates' names, forcing election workers to move back to old-fashioned paper ballots.

The highlight of the day, though, has nothing to do with shoddy equipment and everything to do with a crazy voter who attacked a Diebold-brand machine in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Forty-three-year-old Robert Young, a registered independent, apparently believed that the e-voting machines had been deployed in a wild conspiracy by Republicans, and decided to make a statement by smashing the $5,000 device with a metal cat paperweight. A remorseful Young was quickly arrested by local police, and although the votes on the destroyed machine can still be saved, the feline paperweight did not fare nearly as well: officials have said that it will likely be impounded before being forcibly euthanized.

Read- Voting problems
Read- Cat-bearing voter

[paul34 @ Nov 7th 2006 7:34PM]

The problem is that "campaign contributors" don't get their "favors" addressed with paper ;-).


So, why did this guy get arrested? He should have gotten some type of reward and commendation from the American people. Oh, that's right, there's no one that actually represents the American people, and the people don't even care.

Whoops, how silly of me!

[Gids @ Nov 8th 2006 11:13AM]

Alden - you hit the nail on the head - $5,000 - they just love spending our money buying kit from their friends. Don't you just love our democracy.

[Kyle @ Nov 7th 2006 5:56PM]

You can't kill a paperweight...

[Todd @ Nov 7th 2006 5:59PM]

Rage against the machine Robert Young!

( Ain't gonna make a damn bit of difference in our corrupt pay-for-play system, but rage against it anyway! )

[Brandon @ Nov 7th 2006 6:11PM]

This system is better then the damn hanging chads. It just is difficult for retarded people to use.

[A_Pickle @ Nov 13th 2006 3:31PM]

Who wants retarded people's votes to count? :D

[jnasato @ Nov 7th 2006 6:13PM]

Oh, man... This is great!

Righteousness 4eva.

[Jeff @ Nov 7th 2006 6:18PM]

Let me ask all of you guys something. When was the last time you heard about voting problems in New York?

Your answer will be "never." You know why?

Mechanical voting machines from the 1960's. No hanging chads. No touch screens that get "misaligned". Unhackable. No memory cards that can get wiped. No "feature" that allows voting twice. No names that run off the side of the screen because the font is too big. No lack of a paper trail. No corporate involvement or closed-source, proprietary, secret software development. No Windows-based OS.

This is the answer. Why don't people actually look at states that don't have voting problems on a regular basis and see what they're doing right?

btw, bonus conspiracy theory: is it coincidence that New York's left-leaning voting trends have remained intact, while the rest of the country's voting trends have moved to the right as closed-source Diebold and Sequoia voting machines have taken over? Just sayin'...

[Patrick @ Nov 14th 2006 12:54PM]

Ha ha. Do you actually believe that only IC based machines can be "hacked." A mechanical piece of hardware can be compromised just as easily.
New York's left leaning . . . Windows based OS . . .yuck yuck, computer based voting machines are the future, the populace will benefit if it needs to be educated. All technology introduced to mass society has a learning curve.

[CharlieX @ Nov 7th 2006 6:19PM]

Most people who read Engadget can probably e-vote no problems. But I must admit the Diebold I used didn't have the best screen layout for choices, and it had this suspicious progress bar for every screen that looked right out of Windows 2000. Also the "Confirm your votes" pages were laid out TERRIBLY and not super easy to confirm.

[tekdroid @ Nov 7th 2006 6:20PM]

going the paperweight at Diebold headquarters might be a better option. Like this the suits aren't frightened. Not that I would encourage this, of course ;)

[shon Dempsey @ Nov 7th 2006 6:20PM]

Damn Yeah!

[Sizer @ Nov 7th 2006 6:22PM]

'it seems that the complications are actually due to human error as much as faulty hardware'

Sorry, if your fancy new-fangled eVoting systems aren't as bulletproof as the old ways they have no business being deployed in the first place.

And really, they're not even /trying/.

[LittleJoe @ Nov 7th 2006 6:23PM]

The Columbus area has had a pretty uneventful polling day with it's Diebold machine with only a couple of moderate problems, 1 just being that 4 machines would not boot up at all, and another instance where they needed to be unplugged and replugged before being used. Otherwise everything has been gravy.

[dddave @ Nov 7th 2006 6:31PM]

Uh, can you get back to us when you get any facts that would support fraud?
Problems are problems, pls enlighten us with the steps to actually get to fraud, which seems to be implied in all these types of articles.

[deepb @ Nov 8th 2006 12:20AM]

"Problems are problems, pls enlighten us with the steps to actually get to fraud, which seems to be implied in all these types of articles."

Where is there any mention of fraud? Sounds to me like a crappy product being run by people with little or no training. Doesn't mention fraud anywhere..

[Ryan @ Nov 7th 2006 6:44PM]

It's a republican conspiracy!!

[Austin @ Nov 7th 2006 6:45PM]

I think the electronic voting machines are a big concern down here in baltimore... that guy with they paperweight stole my idea!

[Simon @ Nov 7th 2006 7:07PM]

"Republican officials are claiming that Democratic Senator Robert Menendez's name was already lit up when some voters entered the booth, causing them to accidentally choose the wrong candidate."

Were's the guy who said you only hear Democrats complain because Republicans were too smart to have any problems? Looks like Republicans are just too stupid to notice.

Anyway, who cares. The USA belong to the corporations. No vote will change that.

[MrWhite @ Nov 7th 2006 7:15PM]

Their first mistake was using windows in the first place. Their second mistake was having a blind person design the layout.

[steve @ Nov 7th 2006 7:18PM]

a conspiracy by the republicans
i think that Young smashing the machine a conspiracy by the paperweight factories to try and kill the hideous electronic machine
the cat was controlling his BRAIN!!!!!

[Murc @ Nov 7th 2006 11:42PM]

what are you talking about paul? The last election (04') millions of people voted...it was the highest voting number since the 60's.

as for the topic...I voted today...on good ol reliable paper.

[joe @ Nov 7th 2006 7:46PM]

is it really that difficult to make a touch screen voting machine? My local gas station has a restaraunte which uses touchscreen displays to order and they never break down. What incompetence.

[elogam @ Nov 7th 2006 7:54PM]

I'm sure the first "horseless carriages" that had people yelling "get a horse!" were pretty annoying too. The first cell phone was the size of a brick and it cut out constantly with it's 30 minute battery. My point is, Technology is constantly changing and even these sophisticated devices will have bugs. In a few years, nobody will even trust those old-style machines that everyone says we should keep. I'm looking forward to Internet voting. If we can bank securely from any computer with internet access, we should be able to vote securely as well.

[barb dybwad @ Nov 13th 2006 1:55PM]

"secure" if you don't mind a little identity fraud now and then...

[Zhoe Garcia @ Nov 7th 2006 7:59PM]

F' YEAH!

he should've unleashed an elbow drop while he was at it.

it's truly shameful how citizens aren't up in arms about this paperless, obviously non-efficient, way of voting.

[airiox @ Nov 7th 2006 8:02PM]

I went and voted today on a diebold machine, no problems whatsoever. In fact I thought they were great, make voting much easier. There is checks and balances too. You can review all what you voted for and make sure it is correct. There wasnt such things with paper ballets, as soon as you punched a hole in, that was your vote. not so with electronic voting. also it printed out a paper ballet just in case the machines forgot how to add and subtract........

[Warren @ Nov 7th 2006 8:08PM]

Good point was made on CNN today. How is it that in 20 years I've never had a problem getting the exact amount of $20 bills from a bank machine (because banks don't want money errors), but these e-voting machines are basically pieces of crap, with limited or no testing, and no quality standards.

[Spencer @ Nov 7th 2006 8:11PM]

yesterday, I went to the bank, and noticed the ATM was made by Diebold... I started looking around for another machine (I was worried it was going to make me vote Republican)

[Wonderer @ Nov 7th 2006 8:35PM]

Yeah, these "errors" in the voting machines are all just "mistakes".

Mistakes that a HUGE ass company with billions of dollars can't seem to fix? Bullshit.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7236791207107726851&q=hacking+democracy

Yay for stolen elections.

[tekdroid @ Nov 7th 2006 10:18PM]

rumour has it that Diebold are diversifying. They are making mp3 players that monitor your playlists, phone home and then end up playing what the highest bidder at the time wants you to listen to.

Such innovative features don't come cheap: the players are rumoured to start at $300 each for the 2GB models.

The public has been divided on the new features. Privacy advocates are outraged, but 98% of those responded said "great, an mp3 player that thinks for me!"

Others have commented on the innovative wireless features "phones home! I wish the Zune did this!!"

A Diebold representative couldn't be reached for comment.

[Matt Brundage @ Nov 7th 2006 10:19PM]

Certainly "Voter smashes Diebold machine..." makes for a better headline than "Voter rips up a paper ballot and storms off in a huff."

[airiox @ Nov 7th 2006 11:48PM]

lol, k. so lets see democrats roll, now shut up about the voting machines being biased to republican. sad how you sheep follow.

[Ferny @ Nov 7th 2006 11:51PM]

can you say widespread virus the week of voting? considering that most people are comp illiterate it would pose as a serious problem.

on a side note why doesn't the state demand a refund from diebold for all the crap they deployed?

[kheller @ Nov 8th 2006 2:42AM]

It's funny watching you Americans from up here in Canada. You come up with these "state of the art" voting systems only for them to literally blow up in your face. Here in Canada, we have a novel way of voting where you write an "x" beside the candidate's name. No hanging chads, no computer malfunctions. Just one simple "x" beside the candidate's name.

[Tech^Cellfish @ Nov 8th 2006 4:05AM]

Do it opensource with a public beta and a one state test-election

[Revrant2394 @ Nov 8th 2006 5:14AM]

Well SOME might say it's purposeful failure, Diebold being of highly questionable political alliance and background, their machines shoddy and deployed MOSTLY in states controlled by the Republicans with no voter approval, which there should be, but that's something else entirely.

It's one of the biggest scandals that no one in the media is really paying attention to, these Oh-So-Masterfully-Flawed electronic voting machines, good thing I'm in Michigan, Paper baby. ;)

[jose ribeiro @ Nov 8th 2006 6:35AM]

For the last 12 years Brazil's population have voted exclusively through electronic means. With a population of more than 180 million and 120 million voters, last presidential elections results where known 5 hours after the elction closing time. Please note that also include population in the middle of the Amazon jungle and in poorest places of the country. There are no doubts about the process.

[Indy2006 @ Nov 8th 2006 4:39PM]

As I recall, the Brazilian machines are made by Diebold! That's how they got their start in the election business.

[Qwikstreet @ Nov 8th 2006 6:51AM]

This happened right by my house. He used the ears of the cat to bust the machine. Someone call PETA OR ASCPA to alert of animal cruelty. After he smashed the machine he just sat down on the ground and waited for police to arrive. When they got their he immediately placed his hands behind his back. Now it will be real hard for him to see who and what candidate is he touching.

Funny, he thought the Repubs were out to rig the election. Apparently they could even do that right since Dems pretty much cleaned up around here.

[zoara @ Nov 8th 2006 7:13AM]

This was an act of feliney, right?

[andy @ Nov 8th 2006 9:24AM]

Someone please explain how these are 'stolen elections' and the Republicans have fixed the election when the Democrats are winning every single election.


QUICK!!! everyone put on your tinfoil hats!!! They're controlling your mind!!!!!!

[Ericdoc @ Nov 8th 2006 10:14AM]

I just saw a show on HBO tonight called "Hacking Democracy" that proved how easy it was to change election results on the Diebold machine without showing a trace of tampering.
Please watch the show yourself before you rip me for anything. Very interesting...

[jeff @ Nov 8th 2006 11:29AM]

Diebold machines can be hacked.. the memory card used to store the votes has executable code that can be changed. All you need is a memory card reader ($40.00 on ebay) and a few dos commands.

believe it ... its totally true and people change votes all the time. and you would never find out because the "memory card" is looked at as the original source.

[Jamie Zigelbaum @ Nov 8th 2006 4:14PM]

Saying that problems were due to human error is bogus -- bad design causes human error.

The vendors have it easy, they get big contracts for big money and we aren't forcing them to give us good products.

We have decades of research in human factors and human computer interaction, we know how to make systems that work (major OS manufacturer excluded).

We can make voting work, it has to happen at the design level. We can't blame human errors, we must blame the vendors, the buyers, and ourselves.

[dede @ Nov 8th 2006 11:32PM]

"Yay for stolen elections"

And that's exactly what happened last night the Democrats STOLE the election using Diebold voting machines. All you moonbats have finally convinced me. I think we need to invalidate last night's election and start all over. :p

[T.Anderson @ Dec 12th 2006 3:04PM]

Nothing can ever be completely foolproof. If you build a better fool proof system, the universe will build a better fool...

I have voted since 1976 and have used every ballot system from the mecahnical booth, to punchcards, butterflies, pen & paper, and most recently the electronic voting machines. I have never experienced a problem using any of them, but then again I'm not a friggin' moron.

Consider: Perhaps voting systems should be even more complicated, as a sort of basic IQ test you have to pass before your opinion can be counted. Perhaps the ballot should also include 5 or 10 questions about civics that each voter must answer correctly before they can cast a ballot. Based on many of the comments here and in discussions I've had with lots of folks over the past few years, far too many voters are far too misinformed (and even ignorant) to be permitted to cast a ballot.