I have no problem with showing a photo ID when voting. I think it make sense, but as far as votes not counting the bigger issue is the modern voting machines.

"Only 27 states have laws requiring the use of voter-verified paper trails in electronic machines. Eight more states utilize a paper trail in their machines but don't require it, leaving 15 states with no mandated requirements for safeguarding your vote. But with no national law in place, our midterm elections are being threatened by a system lacking any real regulation and standards.

The problems with electronic voting aren't necessarily new, yet we're still not ready for the midterms. During the 2004 presidential election, one voting machine in a Columbus, Ohio, suburb reportedly added nearly 3,900 additional votes to Bush's total. Officials caught the machine's error because only 638 voters cast presidential ballots at that precinct, but in a heavily populated district, can we really be sure the votes will be counted correctly?

The May primary election in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, was nothing less than a complete debacle. A report from the Election Science Institute found the electronic voting machines' four sources of vote totals -- individual ballots, paper trail summary, election archives and memory cards -- didn't even match up. The totals were all different, and the report concluded that relying on the current system for Cuyahoga County's more than 1.3 million people should be viewed as "a calculated risk." Are we really willing to risk our democracy?

This problem is obviously not limited to Ohio. During Illinois' March primary, Cook County delayed the results of its crucial county board elections for a week as a result of human and mechanical problems at hundreds of sites with the new voting machines.

The recent primary elections in Montgomery County, Maryland, also highlighted just how unprepared many polling places are for the midterms. The state election administrator is demanding to know what went wrong after election workers did not receive access cards to operate the Diebold voting machines for the county's 238 precincts on time, forcing as many as 12,000 voters to use provisional paper ballots that ran out quickly. Some were simply told to come back later and vote." - Lou Dobbs

"In Volusia County, FL in 2000, an electronic voting machine gave Al Gore a final vote count of negative 16,022 votes.

The 2003 election in Boone County, IA, had the electronic vote-counting equipment showing that more than 140,000 votes had been cast in the Nov. 4 municipal elections. The county has only 50,000 residents and less than half of them were eligible to vote in this election." - openDemocracy.com

Yes, let's be sure to whine about electronic voting. At least this posting didn't bring up the "Diebold Conspiracy" theory.

To recap--there is one reason, and one reason only, that electronic voting was pushed through in this country in a haphazard, rushed, poorly-executed fashion: George W Bush's victory in 2000. Democrats filed suit on behalf of people too stupid to successfully push a stick through a piece of paper. It was determined that people who could not find the little hole that corresponded to Al Gore had been "disenfranchised," and that (since it would be too expensive to hire voting nannies to hold their hands from start to finish) the answer was to go all digital.

I'm a network admin. If it can be transmitted, it can be altered. Electronic voting as a replacement for a physical ballot is the dumbest idea I've seen in a long time. But since it gives ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/FOX/MSNBC/CSPAN the voting tallies sooner than any other method, the sheep...er...voters will be convinced that it "safeguards" their franchise. Meanwhile, the liberals who continue to lose will continue to allege conspiracy, while cherry-picking only those examples of errors or fraud that favor Republicans. No mention of disallowing military ballots that were properly cast, by the due date, and managed to push the stick through the paper in the right place. Those were clearly some sort of evil geniuses whose vast intelligence we all ought to fear...

I don't have a problem showing photo ID at the polls. Though the lights and placement of the machines makes the screen difficult for these 71 year old eyes to read the ballot, I manage. There have always been counts and recounts for as long as I remember, and if you're as old as I am, you'll remember that when Gene Talmadge was Georgia's governor, most places didn't even bother counting the votes. I don't know how the election this year will turn out, but I'm pretty sure the big one in 2008 will go pretty heavily for the Democrats. Though I'm Republican - and have been since the days of Eisenhower - our party has not done well in these last six years. I think that whatever means we have of voting will be contested because those people who don't like the way the election is turning will contest and find something to complain about. Of course fraud goes on, it always has and it always will. My philosophy is simply whatever precautions you put in to prevent fraud, someone will come along who is smart enough to beat it. I don't think it's the machines, folks, I think it's the people who tally them at the end of the day...

There is nothing wrong with our voting system here in America. At least we have the right to vote freely if we wish and then to argue and fight over the results just because we didn't get our way. You can argue until you are blue in the face that our system is flawed and perhaps it is. But how would you like to cast your ballot and the dictator throws them all out and appoints himself anyway. Now don't try to tell me that is exacrly what President Bush did because all it will prove to me and others is that you are ignorant and still brooding. Perhaps a better system might be to have every body in this country vote by registered mail, after all, it couldn't take any longer than all these recounts we have to endure. If you agree with this process then write or call your congressman before midnight.

Ah, to vote or not to vote is that the question? Whether we vote electronically or push a stick through paper is not really the question. The question is why so relatively few Americans vote, we have one of the lowest voter turn-out in the western world. What is even more apalling is that those who don't bother voting are often the loudest loudmouths when things don't go their way.
I do think that voting on a Tuesday should be changed to making it on a more convenient day such as a week-end day or perhaps all week-end. We live for convenience, we even name stores after them.

This is why I vote for 3rd parties only. That way I'm not disappointed when they lose, I feel pretty good about my vote, I don't have to worry so much about my vote not being counted (because they're not going to win), and I get to complain about whomever won. Most people vote straight ticket without knowing what those individual people stand for. I think we've all done that before, getting to and and seeing some position on the ballot that you've never heard of so you just say well he's got a (D) by his name or an (R) by his name and just voting because they're in that party. I'm sure the avg. American does that when they go to the polls because not many people care to be educated about who or what they're voting for. And politicians love that because they can just snag votes without having to explain much.