• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Guide to Stealing an election

If any machine/system can be compremised at any level of the vote; then going back to the hand controlled ballot with human supervision at the tabulation levels would seem to be the only way.

Slow but the safest - not fool proof though, but it gets technology out of the picture
 
I still don't understand the difficulty of making a voting machine with a visible paper trail that is printed for each and every vote that can be verified at the time of the vote. Also allow transparency in the coding for the machine so that it can be independantly verifiable. That would solve the issues with current set of voting machines. Also I am a firm believer that the maker of the voting machines shouldn't be an active supporter of a particular party. If only for the reason that it leads to speculation of foul play.
 
Seems a machine that printed a paper documentation at the time of vote that required a stamp of the thumb to be notarized would be simple enough to implement.
 
Originally posted by: csteggo
I still don't understand the difficulty of making a voting machine with a visible paper trail that is printed for each and every vote that can be verified at the time of the vote. Also allow transparency in the coding for the machine so that it can be independantly verifiable. That would solve the issues with current set of voting machines. Also I am a firm believer that the maker of the voting machines shouldn't be an active supporter of a particular party. If only for the reason that it leads to speculation of foul play.
Click to expand...

 
Originally posted by: csteggo
I still don't understand the difficulty of making a voting machine with a visible paper trail that is printed for each and every vote that can be verified at the time of the vote. Also allow transparency in the coding for the machine so that it can be independantly verifiable. That would solve the issues with current set of voting machines. Also I am a firm believer that the maker of the voting machines shouldn't be an active supporter of a particular party. If only for the reason that it leads to speculation of foul play.
Click to expand...

I see this discussion point quite often. I'm just wondering though if the election results were "fugded" by tampering it wouldn't it be a real mess to try to get everyone to turn in their "receipts"?

because of the hassles involved in reconciling the electronicall tabulated results with the receipts I think it unlikely to every be done unless there was clear evidence of hacking. Meaning any unnoticed hacking would be successful.

I hate the whole idea of electronic voting. If you can't punch out the chad, I don't really give a damn if your vote counts or not. You're just too much of a dumbass.

Fern
 
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
If any machine/system can be compremised at any level of the vote; then going back to the hand controlled ballot with human supervision at the tabulation levels would seem to be the only way.

Slow but the safest - not fool proof though, but it gets technology out of the picture
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????
Click to expand...

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:
Click to expand...

Another one liner, while avoiding your obvious mistake. Keep it up. It's what we expect from you.

Actually, I'd prefer you tell me what slashed tires have to do with hacking electronic voting machines. Come on, you can do it. I'll wait on it, just like in the other threads.
 
Originally posted by: Pens1566
Actually, I'd prefer you tell me what slashed tires have to do with hacking electronic voting machines. Come on, you can do it. I'll wait on it, just like in the other threads.
Click to expand...

It was a light hearted attempt at humor. But, naturally, you missed it. :laugh:

Libs and 'stolen election' conspiracies ... I'd be a millionaire if I could get a penny for each one.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Pens1566
Actually, I'd prefer you tell me what slashed tires have to do with hacking electronic voting machines. Come on, you can do it. I'll wait on it, just like in the other threads.
Click to expand...

It was a light hearted attempt at humor. But, naturally, you missed it. :laugh:

Libs and 'stolen election' conspiracies ... I'd be a millionaire if I could get a penny for each one.
Click to expand...

Maybe that passes as humor in Iowa.. the rest of the world must have much higher standards...

Point out one conspiracy in the above article... It is unamerican of you to want a confirmed insecure election system as a way to elect our officials...

You claim others are "Sheeple", yet you don't question anything as long as you get your way. I know you think highly of yourself.. Maybe, I guess... for Iowa!
 
IMO, the best method if a computer voting system that prints out a ballot for the voter to view, and then that ballot is inserted and counted in another machine.

Computer to vote on makes sure that the vote is 100% correct, no double vote etc etc

Paper allows recounts, and creates a trail.

Two tiered system (one to vote, one to count) makes it harder for hackers.
 
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Point out one conspiracy in the above article... It is unamerican of you to want a confirmed insecure election system as a way to elect our officials...
Click to expand...

Can you please direct me to the thread where I said I would like a 'confirmed insecure election system'?

You claim others are "Sheeple", yet you don't question anything as long as you get your way. I know you think highly of yourself.. Maybe, I guess... for Iowa!
Click to expand...

Your lame-ass Iowa attack lines only further to prove my point.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Point out one conspiracy in the above article... It is unamerican of you to want a confirmed insecure election system as a way to elect our officials...
Click to expand...

Can you please direct me to the thread where I said I would like a 'confirmed insecure election system'?

You claim others are "Sheeple", yet you don't question anything as long as you get your way. I know you think highly of yourself.. Maybe, I guess... for Iowa!
Click to expand...

Your lame-ass Iowa attack lines only further to prove my point.
Click to expand...


You have a point 😕
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Pens1566
Reading comprehension????
Click to expand...

Boy, the libs are sure up tight lately. Feeling the heat are we? :laugh:
Click to expand...

The survival of this Country at stake is not funny.

I fear for the the U.S. not being to make it to 2009 if the Dems don't win back at least the House.
 
Originally posted by: Martin
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/evoting.ars

fairly long and detailed (but still easy to understand) article on the many, many ways to manipulate elections using e-voting machines, both on a per-machine basis and on county/state level.
Click to expand...
Excellent article, and probably the most important thread on P&N. If you have any IT infrastructure experience, you should be shocked at the incomprehensibly incompetent design of these systems. A stolen election can be worth literally billions of dollars, yet many of these systems are less secure than your average corporate desktop. They don't even meet the minimal security standards of your average cash register.

Anyone who believes in democracy should find this scandalous, yet the mainstream corporate media have largely ignored it. (It's hard to make pretty video clips out of computer architecture issues, you know, and besides that it's pretty geeky -- most Americans would rather hear about Brad and Jen.) As a group of people who are generally technology savvy, we should be spreading the word to the public and pushing our elected representatives to close this gaping hole in our election process. This article is a great place to start.
 
Honestly I think its hilarious all the hype over stealing elections with electronic voting machines.

Sorry, its a diversion from the fact that one party is not advancing the ideas needed to win so they are willing to come up with any excuse to explain the loss.

Look, elections can be rigged with paper ballots and confirmations, been so for many years and still are today. The only reason its a concern now is that FUD works great on the ignorant masses especially when you toss in some buzzwords, technology, racism, etc.

Yeah the current electronic forms of voting have some areas of lacking. What is most striking however are the same groups lamenting over electronic voting, its security, its authenticity, are the same ones who go out of their way to prevent verifying that the voter is who they say they are.

Simply put, if you won't verify the voter with a picture ID how in the hell can you claim fraud later in the process
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Point out one conspiracy in the above article... It is unamerican of you to want a confirmed insecure election system as a way to elect our officials...
Click to expand...

Can you please direct me to the thread where I said I would like a 'confirmed insecure election system'?
Click to expand...

This one- right here!
 
Originally posted by: Shivetya
Honestly I think its hilarious all the hype over stealing elections with electronic voting machines.

Sorry, its a diversion from the fact that one party is not advancing the ideas needed to win so they are willing to come up with any excuse to explain the loss.

Look, elections can be rigged with paper ballots and confirmations, been so for many years and still are today. The only reason its a concern now is that FUD works great on the ignorant masses especially when you toss in some buzzwords, technology, racism, etc.

Yeah the current electronic forms of voting have some areas of lacking. What is most striking however are the same groups lamenting over electronic voting, its security, its authenticity, are the same ones who go out of their way to prevent verifying that the voter is who they say they are.

Simply put, if you won't verify the voter with a picture ID how in the hell can you claim fraud later in the process
Click to expand...

It can't be rigged with paper if the election is done like Canada does it.. everyone is free and able to watch the ballots being counted and then called in.. if there are any discrepancies, they do the recount there again in front of everyone.

Whereas voting machines have been shown to be faulty and A FEW STATES HAVE OUTRIGHT ELIMINATED THEM... but I guess it is all politics to you.. do some research will you!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top