Sabotage the election process?

Yes

3 (42.9%)

No

4 (57.1%)

Total Members Voted: 6

[Alex Libman 14]

OK, for electronic voting machines I have a small device that emits a powerful electromagnetic pulse that scrambles many types of storage devices.  It has to be small enough to hide in the booth for later activation by timer, so it ain't exactly cheap, and they could get around this by perpetually offloading the data to an off-site server.  Of course if you're willing to be arrested the device can be bigger, and thus much cheaper to manufacture.

And for paper ballots I have an even better solution - thin transparent chemical strips you just peel off and attach to your ballot - ten minutes later the whole ballot box is on fire.  I'm working on giving it more time, but it ain't easy w/o introducing a recognizable odor, etc.

Best to come in just before the polls close to wipe out as many votes as possible, but not in the last minute so you draw suspicion.  And best to do it with multiple people in multiple polling places.

If you wish the avoid arrest, then practice is needed to handle those devices without leaving your fingerprints / DNA evidence.  They'll have you on the suspect list, because they'll know you voted X minutes before it happened, so how easy it would be to get away with it is anybody's guess.

We have the technology.  We just don't have a resolve.  Because it's probably a very bad idea.  I myself am voting No.  But I'm curious what everyone else thinks.

[TimeLady Victorious]

I think it's a very, very good idea.

Too bad I don't vote.

[Alex Libman 14]

Well, doing this wouldn't be voting, since your "vote" would be wiped out along with everyone else's.

It would be more like...  anti-voting... 

[mikehz]

I'm not sure what the point would be.

In any case, elections have been done away with in my state (Washington), at least for presidential elections. A couple weeks ago, the governor signed a bill into law that will throw our electoral votes (the only ones that really count) toward whatever candidate the rest of the country picks. So, even if our entire state were to vote for one candidate, the elector votes still can go to someone else.

It's a Democrat scheme. The idea is that if they can get enough states to do this (they have five now, I believe), then they'll never lose another election.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

I'm not sure what the point would be.

In any case, elections have been done away with in my state (Washington), at least for presidential elections. A couple weeks ago, the governor signed a bill into law that will throw our electoral votes (the only ones that really count) toward whatever candidate the rest of the country picks. So, even if our entire state were to vote for one candidate, the elector votes still can go to someone else.

It's a Democrat scheme. The idea is that if they can get enough states to do this (they have five now, I believe), then they'll never lose another election.

You're joking right?

[Alex Libman 14]

The state of Washington...  I wouldn't be surprised. 

Anywho, back to ballot boxes (not) going boom.

BOOOOM!