"Watch How insanely easy it is to hack US voting machines"

[triron]

Link to tweet

But somehow the Russians chose not to do this in 2016. Yeah, right.

[TheFrenchRazor]

1. yep, that's exactly what we're supposed to believe; and GOP chose not to do it either... NOT. nt

[triron]

2. I bet they teamed up to do it!

Bunch of traitorous crooks of the highest kind. No punishment is too severe for that though I stop short
of capital punishment.

[sarah FAILIN]

3. The Sequoia has already been proven to have recorded massive amounts of Trump votes.

Far above other systems in the same area.

[triron]

4. You have a reference for that? Would be nice to collect all

the data we can. I would like to eventually send Rachel a summary of this.
Perhaps she wouldn't do anything but it's worth a shot.
Even voter registrations were probably hacked.

[sarah FAILIN]

6. It was posted here some time back

https://sean-case.github.io/avcedgetrump.html

[Captain Stern]

5. It actually doesn't appear to be that easy at all.

Going by the video, it looks like the hackers are actually having to take the machines apart, and hook their laptops directly to them.

I can see why the Russians chose not to do this in 2016. Somebody probably would have noticed if there were people taking voting machines apart, and hooking their laptops to them.

[sarah FAILIN]

7. Are you new in town?

Those hackers are taking things apart because they can. Do you think the Russians didn't do the same? Just because they do it once to see how everything works does not mean they have to do it to every machine. One of the guys specifically was getting access by wi-fi.

The Russians didn't have to hack individual machines though, they just had to get access to the programmer or programming and that is easy enough to do, especially with their deep pockets. The one person that controls what the machine says controls everything.

[Captain Stern]

9. The video shows hackers specifically hacking individual voting machines.

The video doesn't show anything to do with anyone getting access to the programmers, or programming ...which is easy enough to do (according to you, anyway).

If "the one person that controls what the machine says controls everything", and it's really easy to get access to that one person (again, according to you).....then the video showing hackers going through the trouble of accessing individual voting machines is pretty meaningless, isn't it?

[sarah FAILIN]

11. Trump is not our President.

We know that. People like you run over here anytime we bring up the truth.

WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. Eventually we will be able to prove it.

[Captain Stern]

15. Cool. I look forward to seeing your proof if/when you get it. nt.

[mythology]

20. You don't understand the hack

But if Russia hacked the actual votes, why were the polls more accurate than in 2012? Let me guess, they hacked those too.

Vote hacking is a specious conspiracy theory with zero supporting evidence.

[questionseverything]

36. how can we find evidence when no one looks?

.. Desi Doyen said on 10/17/2017 @ 4:00 pm PT...

Hi, Karen --- It was actually DHS, specifically acting undersecretary Jeanette Manfra, who acknowledged that DHS had not conducted a forensic examination on any individual voting machine during her testimony at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on June 21, 2017. The relevant segment starts at about 58 minutes:

https://www.c-span.org/v...ted-russia-2016-election

Here's Brad's article on it: http://bradblog.com/?p=12192. More on it can also be found here.

Desi

[Hoyt]

10. Agree, Captain. It's not as easy as they make it, and there is no evidence it happened in 2016

Could it have happened -- sure. Did it, not likely.

Heck, why would anyone need to hack the vote totals when you had Comey, Trump campaign lies, years of BS/lies about Democrats, white wing poll workers, white wing voters beating us in getting out the vote, racist backlash against President Obama, trump spouting hatred, etc.

[triron]

21. Why then this? I suppose you are more an expert than this scholar.

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/22/1603289/-MIT-professor-cryptographer-UC-Berkeley-statistician-call-for-a-presidential-election-audit

[Hoyt]

27. Another it COULD happen. No evidence it did happen.

We lost because enough people didn't get out to vote for Clinton, and/or too many Democrats decided they'd vote for trump, vote for 3rd party candidate, stay home in protest, took victory for granted, etc.

[triron]

30. I refer also to posts 19 and 23.

And the exit polling along with pre-election day prognostication.
I already know pretty much what you will say about this.

[Hoyt]

32. #23 says nothing. I didnt read 19 because I saw the link about gerrymandering, which has absolutely

nothing to do with hacking the election.

Now if you want to change the subject, that’s fine. Gerrymandering exists, but has nothing to do with trump or hacking.

There’s no evidence of hacking, and I think there would be if it happened. I also think it would have taken enough people that someone would have squealed by now, or left a trail.

We lost because deplorables out voted us where it mattered.

[triron]

33. Biggest reason for lack of evidence is nobody looked.

Let's pretend everything is secure.

[Hoyt]

34. Never said it was secure. We are way behind in that respect. But, thats not why we lost.

[TheFrenchRazor]

40. when was there a meaningful, comprehensive investigation that would obtain this evidence? never,

never, that's when. you clearly are ok with this state of affairs; some of the rest of us are not.

[Hoyt]

44. Im not OK sounding like a beat boxer saying it was rigged. We lost, we could

have won if people voted, or didn’t vote for a 3rd party candidate or trump as some kind of protest.

B sides, at this point it doesn’t matter. 2018 mid-terms are the best way to get back at them, not a bunch of whining that isn’t going to change a darn thing.

[triron]

8. "we can add fake voters, subtract voters from the voter record, vote multiple times..."

[sarah FAILIN]

12. Exactly.

They can do whatever they want including changing the names of the votes registered.

[triron]

13. And we will always have our naysayers.

The raw exit polls also indicate election tampering.
Again the naysayers will say exit polls are not reliable.
Yet they are used in many countries to determine whether election was valid.
Oh I get it. It is only our exit polls that are no good (sarcasm).

[sarah FAILIN]

14. Some don't want to consider the possibility themselves

Ignorance is bliss for some.

Some don't want us to consider the truth. It makes hiding it so much more difficult.

[triron]

16. A good resource for election system corruption

https://www.unhackthevote.com/author/mikefarb/

[RandomAccess]

19. A few more, assorted

States have bought voting machines from vendors controlled and funded by religious fanatics, political partisans, politicians, and convicted felons. https://medium.com/@jennycohn1/states-have-bought-voting-machines-from-vendors-controlled-and-funded-by-religious-fanatics-1773f0b5f83e


COMPILATION of @jennycohn1 THREADS ON ELECTION INTEGRITY
https://twitter.com/i/moments/900160104493858816


Recommendations to Secure our Election System; Important Proposed Amendments to the Secure Elections Act, including Ballot Marking Device Limitation & Ballot Image Preservation. https://medium.com/@jennycohn1/recommendations-for-improving-election-security-before-the-2018-midterm-elections-1cc8eff2f783


This is the best explanation of gerrymandering you will ever see
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/01/this-is-the-best-explanation-of-gerrymandering-you-will-ever-see/


U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Elections
Expert Testimony by J. Alex Halderman
Professor of Computer Science, University of Michigan June 21, 2017
http://bradblog.com/Docs/AlexHalderman_Testimony_SenateIntelComm_062117.pdf


New Bill Aims To Get Rid Of Paperless Voting Machines https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210048297
It's unlikely that we can get this passed in 2018, but a Democratic majority could very well do this next year. Via Ars Technica:

A bipartisan group of six senators has introduced legislation that would take a huge step toward securing elections in the United States. Called the Secure Elections Act, the bill aims to eliminate insecure paperless voting machines from American elections while promoting routine audits that would dramatically reduce the danger of interference from foreign governments.

The legislation comes on the heels of the contentious 2016 election. Post-election investigation hasn't turned up any evidence that foreign governments actually altered any votes. However, we do know that Russians were probing American voting systems ahead of the 2016 election, laying groundwork for what could have become a direct attack on American democracy.

"With the 2018 elections just around the corner, Russia will be back to interfere again," said co-sponsor Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.).

https://crooksandliars.com/2018/01/new-bill-aims-get-rid-paperless-voting

[triron]

23. I really find the testimony by Halderman to be an eye opener.

Did MSM ever talk about this? I bet not.

[RandomAccess]

25. I'm beginning to think that both the MSM and our politicians

have convinced themselves, wrongly IMO, that talking about our voting problems will in itself suppress the vote. I think that's counterproductive in at least 2 ways --

1. We need to KNOW problems in order to solve them and
2. Massive turnout is one of the best short term "fixes" for election fraud of the types we've been experiencing, so tying THAT message to the truth about our problems could be very helpful.

[TheFrenchRazor]

41. IMO, paper receipts are useless. we need all paper ballots, all hand-counted, all the time. nt

[RandomAccess]

45. 100% agree

[kwijybo]

17. Why bother?

It's like retail vote fraud that the Republicans scream about. Why bother? It's far easier, far safer to hack the district level and state level computers that the voting machines report to. In the early 2000's, they ran using Microsoft Access (and no passwords).

[triron]

18. Perhaps that's exactly what they did.

[BamaRefugee]

22. all those tow-headed, fresh faced youngsters with funny accents

All over the place in summer 2016, and the locals in those rural Midwest counties kept telling each other they must be Mormons or Jehova's Witnesses....then suddenly in November, 90% of the voters "show up" in a landslide for tRump....yeah right

[rtracey]

24. thats why

ugggg just fucking PAPER BALLOTS AND 1 EACH PARTY COUNTERS TOGETHER....WITH A MONITOR

[TheFrenchRazor]

42. this. in the final analysis, hand-counting is the gold standard. nt

[Sophia4]

26. I observed INSIDE a precinct in Los Angeles during the Democratic primary.

Lots of confusion.

[JohnnyRingo]

28. There should always be a printed paper trail

One that is printed in real time as the vote is cast and reviewed by the voter before leaving the machine. That way the voter knows the vote was accurately recorded and stored under lock & key for a number of years in case of a dispute with the electronic tally. That paper trail, if properly signed off by workers at each step, would make it simple to track foul play.

Machines also have no reason to be connected in any way to the internet. Do any states actually have machines that are connected? Why? Are there still states that don't have a physical paper record?

I'm in Ohio, and we watch our vote print in real time, which then heads for secure storage at the county elections board for a number of years. The paper spools are mated to each machine by s/n and must agree on the count. Regardless, manual recounts are relatively easy.

[TheFrenchRazor]

43. what proves that the receipt and the vote recorded in the machine are the same? that too is hackable

bottom line is we need all paper ballots, all hand counted, all the time.

[JohnnyRingo]

46. You get to see the printed paper as the vote is cast

At the end of the night, the paper is signed by 4 poll workers (2 from each party), locked up and transported to the election board where it's securely stored for a couple years. If an electronic tally reports an unexpected result, that paper reel can be manually counted and compared with the machine total from which it came by s/n.

If someone can somehow hack a machine that doesn't have a wi-fi connection, the skew would have to be slight to avoid a recount trigger. Meanwhile, the paper trail sits like a time bomb waiting to go off on whoever would rig a machine. Such a deterrent is as close to a paper ballot as one can get in the modern age, and likely more accurate. I would never trust a manual paper ballot count in a republican state.

Besides, nobody wants to wait two days while election judges count and debate the intent of poorly marked paper ballots.

[TomVilmer]

29. Senseless confusion...

First try to understand how the election system is organized. And then explain how Russian agents sneaked in to around 100,000 polling places without getting caught...
https://www.livescience.com/56787-how-are-votes-counted.html

[triron]

31. What are you talking about? There has been no suggestion that anything like this happened.

[TomVilmer]

35. - except a lot of the answers...

Why publish a story about "How insanely easy it is", without explaining that it would be nearly impossible to affect an election this way in reality?

[questionseverything]

37. personally i think the fix is ussually done at the reporting level

but we also have seen machines manipulated on election day to fix "time stamps" way back when max clevlend lost

the point is, the machines are non transparent, non secure and WE THE PEOPLE ARE NOT ALLOWD TO OVERSEE OUR OWN COUNTS

.. Desi Doyen said on 10/17/2017 @ 4:00 pm PT...

Hi, Karen --- It was actually DHS, specifically acting undersecretary Jeanette Manfra, who acknowledged that DHS had not conducted a forensic examination on any individual voting machine during her testimony at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on June 21, 2017. The relevant segment starts at about 58 minutes:

https://www.c-span.org/v...ted-russia-2016-election

Here's Brad's article on it: http://bradblog.com/?p=12192. More on it can also be found here.

Desi

[triron]

38. kick for visibility

[triron]

39. knr