**AND** they fucked with our voting machines...

[LaydeeBug]

Yep...I said it....*again*

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/2016-elections-russia-hack-how-to-hack-an-election-in-seven-minutes-214144

[malaise]

1. Until Americans wake up and go public on this reality

Last edited Mon Apr 3, 2017, 04:31 PM - Edit history (1)

ReTHUGs will continue acquiring power and wealth by any means necessary.

I still can't believe it's business as usual led by these goons.

[Hortensis]

16. And yet neither the GOP or the Russians took that route

in 2016. Surely we don't think it's because they were too ethical or lacked the resources, do we?

This is a serious issue, and I spent the past 8 years concerned about it. But amateurs weren't exactly the only ones noting this danger and no need to wish others would "wake up" just because we didn't receive personal notices informing us, "Hey, we're not going as bare as some might imagine."

Computers don't just steal votes, they track many patterns only experts are aware of and reveal numbers that don't add up. They do it many different ways, building up a serious body of evidence, and in very little time. More and more also, tampering can be traced, no matter how careful. Plus, our voting is extremely decentralized, so they would have to take major risks in various believed-to-be-key locations, multiplying their chances of being detected.

And that's all a real problem for would-be electronic vote thieves, which I feel quite sure the Kochs and Mercers and many, many others, are.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

2. Sing it!

[unblock]

3. it is interesting how little play this story has gotten this cycle

plenty of controversy over the actual stealing of votes ever since electronic voting machines (and in fact, stories of stealing or destroying votes goes way, way back, well before that)...

... in pretty much every close election cycle except this last one.

plenty of talk about russia and fake news and even hacking voter rolls in order to target fake news, but very little about actual vote-stealing.

as if we've solved that problem....

[triron]

14. They hacked voter registrations and then didn't do anything

other than produce fake news?? What you say is true but there is more.

[unblock]

28. right. if you believe the msm, then all they did with that data

was to better target their fake news, by knowing who was actually registered to vote.

but, really, they hacked that but wouldn't hack the actual voting machines or central tabulators?

[Blue_Roses]

4. K&R

Nt

[mythology]

5. And again failed to offer even the slightest evidence

Repeating something doesn't actually make it true.

As I've repeatedly cited, the counties in Wisconsin that hand recounted didn't differ statistically from machine recounted counties.

[LaydeeBug]

8. And of course you know that a sampling of hand recounts in a sample of cunties does not a hand

recount make.

But this perturbs you. a lot

[Bear Creek]

41. Back door

[link:https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=1thcO_olHas|
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=1thcO_olHas

[Bear Creek]

42. Cheat sheet to make the hand count match

[link:http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0601-34.htm|
The part about Triad. I believe the was a court hearing on it and Bush put a gag order on the ruling.

[TheFrenchRazor]

45. you have absolutely no evidence that it DIDN'T happen; admit it. and if you don't recognize

recognize that voting with invisible (for all practical purposes) ballots is a gigantic problem, in and of itself, that's your choice, but don't expect anybody else to be quite that naive. given that neither side has conclusive evidence, let me offer this logic: if they *could* steal it, they would, and they could, therefore, they did.

[Oneironaut]

53. Both those arguments make no sense.

1 - You can't prove a negative (that something didn't happen). That makes no sense.

2 - Just because something could happen doesn't mean it did. I mean, an asteroid *could* hit the earth, but we're all still alive. In a more related comparison - hackers *could* also bring down the power grid - it doesn't mean that hackers have found out how to do it yet, though.

At the moment, there is no evidence that any votes were changed.

[TheFrenchRazor]

55. you completely ignored everything i wrote; anyway, if you wish to be a faith-based voter,

that is your choice. i want hard-copy paper votes, counted by human hand/eye ball every time.

[LaydeeBug]

61. amen!!!!

[ElementaryPenguin]

65. The suspected counties DID NOT hand count - judge ruled against it.

[Maven]

6. Yup. I think so too.

It's entirely doable. And why wouldn't they? Why would they stop at manipulating voters, when they could also manipulate votes?

[brooklynite]

10. Maybe because feeding fake news stories to gullible voters is perfectly legal?

Not to mention cheaper and far easier?

[cwydro]

22. Fake news is sure popular on DU these days.

[brooklynite]

9. I CAN make risotto...that doesn't mean (absent evidence) that I DID.

Name a candidate, Party leader or Campaign Manager (who would love to have an excuse as to why they didn't win), who says that voting machine hacking occurred.

(answer: none)

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. Sure, but if you work at an unsanitary restaurant you shouldn't be allowed to cook

It should be closed down for being unsafe, whether or not there is evidence of anyone having gotten sick eating there. The standard is cleanliness, not the known rate of hospital admissions.

If a bank vault is left open and unmonitored, and the contents are never meticulously counted, but a quick visual once over appears to indicate that nothing out of order has happened to the contents - so a full audit is never conducted- there is no evidence of any robberies there either. The point is not to leave bank vaults open and unmonitored in the first place.

[brooklynite]

24. The proper maintenance and protection of voting machines has nothing to do...

...with the hyperbolic screaming (without evidence) that vote flipping has already occured.

And I can make a very clean risotto.

[Tom Rinaldo]

37. Probably tasty too I bet :) n/t

[brooklynite]

38. As Jon Podesta says, you have to add the loquid slowly...

[LaydeeBug]

39. Thank you for this. nt

[TheFrenchRazor]

46. precisely; this shouldn't even have to be stated. some people are either naive, uninformed, or

flat-out like the hackable system, and hope to use it to their advantage.

[Amishman]

11. Not this again

Hacking the voting machines would require physical access to tens of thousands of voting machines. There hasn't been any real evidence of this.

Making unsubstantiated claims like this undermines the efforts to expose the meddling that actually did happen.

[jmg257]

27. The Russians had guys with screwdrivers and

ROM chips standing by - even in states without these oldest troubled machines.

They are very crafty.



"Clutching a screwdriver, he deftly wedged out the four ROM chips—they weren’t soldered into the circuit board, as sense might dictate—making it simple to replace them with one of his own:"

[L. Coyote]

31. When switching 40,000 votes reverses the electioral college, your numberrs FAIL.

You need to look at the real number, not invest some.



?1480636609

[Glitterati]

12. Look, it's even easier than this.....

There's a reason the voting center at Kennesaw State University was hacked this election.

Because they DESIGN every single ballot in the state right there in ONE place.

Let me give you just ONE example.

I have a touchscreen ballot like this....

Joe Smoe

John Smith

Now, I have to design the touch SCREEN itself.

So, first I make Joe Smoe the DEFAULT candidate.

Then, I make HIS section of the touchscreen encapsulated by a large box, so that a touch ANYWHERE inside that box selects Joe

Then, the box for John Smith is tiny. Smaller.

So, when a voter misses that tiny box for John Smith, the touch screen chooses the DEFAULT.

Because the voter touched John Smith's NAME, not the tiny space designed as John Smith's selection box.

[sarah FAILIN]

32. exactly.

They don't need a screwdriver and access to all machines, just 1 programmer.

[LaydeeBug]

40. Yes, and in a micro targeted area or areas. nt

[TheFrenchRazor]

47. correct; this is an important point. nt

[The Wielding Truth]

13. If votes cannot be verified in recounts or physical evidence there is no fair vote.

[LaydeeBug]

17. absolutely this. And the pretense of "concerted efforts were made everywhere else, but

there's no way the hacked the vote" is what enables more of this shit to happen.

[TheFrenchRazor]

56. not even in recounts; they must be counted by hand/eye the FIRST TIME. nt

[jeanmarc]

15. They tried.

They didn't get in.

[LaydeeBug]

18. Prove it.

[jmg257]

19. Keep digging you'll get some real proof eventually

Trump talked about it for months - he thinks there was widespread voter fraud too.

[KittyWampus]

21. The article doesn't say what your OP declares. You can post this crap forever

but you're still posting FAKE NEWS.

And it takes away from the real issues involved by posting stuff with clickbait titles and making false claims.

[briv1016]

23. That article dates back to August and provides no proof that electronic voter fraud happened.

Not saying that they didn't, just that the article is very far from a smoking gun.

[crosinski]

25. Why hack machines when it's so much easier to hack the data?

How much voting data was reported via computer / internet? Precinct to county, county to state? Very small pieces of code required to bugger the deal if so.

[jmg257]

29. Supposedly they're not connected to the net...

Among possible targets, foreign hackers could attack the state and county computers that aggregate the precinct totals on election night—machines that are technically supposed to remain non-networked, but that Appel thinks are likely connected to the Internet, even accidentally, from time to time.

[pnwmom]

59. 25 states use machines with the capability to connect to the internet, though it isn't clear

how many are actually connected.

[TheFrenchRazor]

48. no doubt there are multiple ways the results could be manipulated. nt

[Alea]

26. This thread proves 1 thing to me

Both sides push fake news and makes young voters like me not know who the hell to trust!

[TheDebbieDee]

30. If you don't KNOW that the Russians would have hacked the vote totals if they could have...

Then you may NEVER be ready to vote!

[StevieM]

33. Welcome to DU, Alea!! Do you mind if I ask how old you are?

I think that Democrats are way more trustworthy than Republicans are. There is no Democratic version of Pizza-gate, let alone a despicable conspiracy theory like the ones that Republicans built up after Benghazi.

[NightWatcher]

34. The "both sides" is a bullshit rw talking point. If you honestly think...

...that Hillary would've been just like trump so far, you shouldn't be allowed to own anything sharper than a plastic spoon.

Obama was a great statesman and trump bitches on twitter about Saturday Night Live skits that portray him as a moron.

If you can't tell which side is the better alternative, please don't vote. Let the adults try to salvage what we can in 2020.

[Alea]

35. wow

[Alea]

43. My reply wasn't about dems or reps

It was about which news to trust. So you don't want me to vote? I've already voted democrat in two presidential elections and 1 mid term. Once with an absentee ballot I mailed from afghanistan. I said I was a young voter, not a child, but thanks for acting like you know me.

So can I at least have a spork?

[StevieM]

57. Times are tense, Alea. Sorry you got unfairly roughed up in this thread.

And thank you for your service to our country.

[RandiFan1290]

63. Welcome Back! nt

[KittyWampus]

44. That poster didn't even come CLOSE to saying Hillary would've been just like Trump.

And the OP is nonsense. It takes an article from the Summer and makes a FALSE ALLEGATION.

It is essentially fake news on DU.

Why are you defending it?

[Oneironaut]

54. That's false - I've seen multiple fake news stories from Liberal sources.

The fake news machine is running on both sides. In fact, just recently there was an obviously bull crap story about an "insider" claiming that Trump was ready to resign.

I don't think the poster said that "Hillary would be just like Trump - " just that both sides buy into fake news.

[pnwmom]

58. You need to do more research. There is no reason to feel confidence that the Russians

didn't hack the vote in at least some key states.

The Obama administration was well aware of the risk but got pushback from some of the states, who thought they didn't need any help making the voting process more secure.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028890363

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/critical-discovery-during-wisconsin-recount-cellular-connectivity-tabulators-131700727.html

A cellular capability is available as an option on the latest Election Systems and Software (ES&S) DS200 model of optical scanner.

SNIP

Cellular wireless connections can not only link directly with the internet, but they are built to have a longer range and be harder to detect than regular Wi-Fi networks. There is universal agreement among computer professionals that anything connected to the internet is hackable.

When FBI Director James Comey told the public, and Congress specifically, that none of our election equipment is connected to the internet, perhaps he was unaware of these connections or did not fully understand their implications. It is possible that no government agency ever examined, tested or certified this newest equipment.

There are currently over 26,500 ES&S DS200 optical scan vote-counting machines in 25 states. It is not yet known how many of them have the cellular capability at present, nor whether other equipment models have the same or similar capabilities. DS200 scanners count ballots electronically; ballots are fed in by hand but are counted by a computer inside in accordance with programmable instructions.

[LaydeeBug]

62. thank you. bookmarked.

[stillcool]

36. this should be an issue...

in each state in 2018. The process of voting...beginning to end. There is no reason why we can't have safe, secure, accountable elections...and it has to happen at the state level. Any attempt at a fix by the US Congress could prove fatal.

[TheFrenchRazor]

49. there *is* a reason; the PTB like the current fraudulent, hackable system. nt

[Achilleaze]

50. Republicans let them do it

Republicans let them do it

[flamingdem]

51. The hackers admitted as much

It's a piece of cake for them

[cilla4progress]

52. I have felt this from the beginning

Too many coincidences. Congress.

[Lee-Lee]

60. So your claiming that "they" physically picked the locks of voting machines

shut them down, inserted new memory chips with hacked software, closed the machines up and nobody noticed?

For every machine "hacked" they did this?

How many machines did they do this too?

Where?

How did they pull it off with nobody noticing?

How many machines would you have to do this too in order to pull off a meaningful change to results?

How did they know in advance just how much and where to have them change to get the results they needed?

If you don't have these answers, and only have a somewhat limited article from 2016 that just says how one person messed with a machine (with no actual proof his new firmware worked other than his claim) then all you have is an overactive imagination.

[LaydeeBug]

66. That'd be "you're" for starters.

After that, please read this thread. Thanks.

Overactive imagination? O-kay.

[ElementaryPenguin]

64. I agree, LB - and believe this will ultimately be revealed

To the public. I just hope it's not done 50 years from now.