Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 08:51 PM Jun 2012

A brief but very important word about election rigging.

It seems like you can't go five minutes here today without seeing someone proclaiming that the vote in Wisconsin is rigged in favor of Walker. Speaking as someone with actual real-world experience in election logistics, voter data, and ferreting out fraudulent election numbers, I felt I should clarify some things.

Rigging the vote tally of an election, and doing so in a way that can't be traced or exposed, is about a thousand times harder than most people here think. Between multiple counts, election observers, poll watchers, paper ballots, et al, it's very hard to actually just make up the results of an election if anyone is paying even the slightest attention. And if the situation is uncertain in the least, such as, say, not knowing roughly how many people are going to vote, it gets harder again by another order of magnitude.

Now as always, the most effective way of putting your thumb on the scales of an election is to make sure people don't vote in the first place. It's nearly impossible for the system to "forget" a ballot, but there's no ballot if the person doesn't cast one. Misinformation about when and where to vote, jamming get-out-the-vote operations, fraudulent robocalls, demoralizing base voters, these are the sorts of things that are the real tools to try and illicitly swing an election.

A case straight out of the real world: in 2008, I was busting my butt on a New York State Senate campaign against a very entrenched incumbent, with all of us hoping that the coming Obama surge would have coattails. Come election day, the district was blanketed with some very, very illegal robocalls--no ID on them, no claim of responsibility--encouraging people to get out and vote for Barack Obama... and insert the name of the Republican State Senator here. They were banking on confusing first time or low-information voters who were enthusiastic about Obama, but didn't know the local candidates that well. At least several districts in the area were hit the same way. I doubt it swayed any of our local elections, but in a tight race even a few hundred votes can make a difference.

The metaphor of the thumb on the scale is an accurate one; none of these things can stop a landslide, but under the right circumstances they can shift the balance. That's why the best counter isn't paranoia, it's vigilance.

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
3. I seem to remember thousands of votes magically appearing in Waukesha County last year
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 08:56 PM
Jun 2012

They appeared on a secret computer system set up in the office of an extremely partisan election official no less, I think that gives people cause for concern. Wisconsin used to have clean elections but Waukesha County has tainted their reputation big time.

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
5. You might want to check with DUer PeaceNikki.
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 08:59 PM
Jun 2012

She was an election judge all through that race and recount, and pretty much stood up against the prevailing mood here to say that no, the temporary loss of ballots in Waukesha was sloppy but didn't provide evidence of fraud.

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
10. Lots of other people were there as well, many of whom disagree with PeaceNikki
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:06 PM
Jun 2012

I read her posts during that debacle and I read reports from many other people on the ground as well, there was lots of doubts about the numbers out of Waukesha County.

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
17. I am not just talking about DUers, there were lots of people reporting on what was happening
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:10 PM
Jun 2012

DU is not my only source of information, there were plenty of people investigating what was happening in Waukesha and a number of those people suspected fraud.

PeaceNikki

(27,985 posts)
11. ballots were never ever ever lost.
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:06 PM
Jun 2012

An entire municipality was omitted from the tally given to media on election night. Very different. The preventative measure is that she is now required to release ward totals rather than just county total. In addition, we are observing and reporting numbers to boiler room as the tapes are run at the polls. State party has totals before Kathy does.

Literally waiting for those now.

I've never been an election judge, an observer at polls for OFA today and county party in past. I observed at recount for Kloppenburg.

Initech

(100,068 posts)
4. Just remember - University of Indiana found it was harder to rig a Vegas slot machine than a touch screen voting machine.
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 08:57 PM
Jun 2012

That's why the majority are so quick to call bullshit and election rigging.

SoutherDem

(2,307 posts)
6. I am not disagreeing but what about areas with paperless ballots
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:00 PM
Jun 2012

I keep hearing of how those machines are "easy" to fix by simply loading a bogus program, one which no matter how the voters vote it give the result wanted?

Are these just urban tells or is this really a possibility?

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
8. Most of Wisconsin has paper ballots of one kind or another.
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:03 PM
Jun 2012

As far as purely electronic machines, it depends entirely on the machines. We'd have to know the exact make and model in order to know if there's been any security testing. However, I doubt any of them on the market are quite so easy as that these days.

Drew Richards

(1,558 posts)
9. I don't disagree with you but I AM perplexed in how it can be 50 50 with a 119% turn out
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:05 PM
Jun 2012

But, I will wait and see the results before I try to claim deceit in results.

Mutiny In Heaven

(550 posts)
14. I don't think it's that astonishing...
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:08 PM
Jun 2012

Afterall, Walker has generally had a healthy 5-7% lead over the last few months. The huge turnout may have turned it into a squeaker, whereas the previous 'likely voter' metric if replicated today would see Walker claim a comfortable victory.

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
15. First off, as far as "119%" goes...
Tue Jun 5, 2012, 09:09 PM
Jun 2012

I believe that only applies to one town or area. Wisconsin has same-day voter registration, so if a lot of people showed up to vote in an area that doesn't normally have high turnout, that's not unreasonable.

As far as 50/50, that's actually not bad for us so far. Walker was up by several points in polling pre-election.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A brief but very importan...