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

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: Hacked election [View all]

JonLP24

(29,322 posts)
28. I think Trump was talking about himself when he said the election is rigged
Wed Nov 23, 2016, 08:25 AM
Nov 2016

I don't trust voting machines.

Documented problems

A number of problems with voting systems in Florida since the 2000 Presidential election.[65]
Fairfax County, Virginia, November 4, 2003. Some voters complained that they would cast their vote for a particular candidate and the indicator of that vote would go off shortly after.[66]
The Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems) TSx voting system disenfranchised many voters in Alameda and San Diego Counties during the March 2, 2004, California presidential primary due to non-functional voter card encoders.[67] On April 30 California's secretary of state Kevin Shelley decertified all touch-screen machines and recommended criminal prosecution of Diebold Election Systems.[68] The California Attorney-General decided against criminal prosecution, but subsequently joined a lawsuit against Diebold for fraudulent claims made to election officials. Diebold settled that lawsuit by paying $2.6 million.[69] On February 17, 2006 the California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson then recertified Diebold Election Systems DRE and Optical Scan Voting System.[70]
In Napa County, California, March 2, 2004, an improperly calibrated marksense scanner overlooked 6,692 absentee ballot votes.[71]
Omesh Saigal, an IIT alumnus and IAS officer, demonstrated that the 2009 elections in India when Congress Party of India came back to power might be rigged. This forced the election commission to review the current EVMs.[72]
On October 30, 2006, the Dutch Minister of the Interior withdrew the license of 1187 voting machines from manufacturer Sdu NV, about 10% of the total number to be used, because it was proven by the General Intelligence and Security Service that one could eavesdrop on voting from up to 40 meters using Van Eck phreaking.[73] National elections are to be held 24 days after this decision. The decision was forced by the Dutch grass roots organisation Wij vertrouwen stemcomputers niet[74] ("We do not trust voting computers&quot .[75][76]

(Snip)

Cuyahoga County, Ohio: The Diebold computer server froze and stopped counting votes then the printers jammed so paper copies could not be retrieved for many votes and there was no way to be sure of the accuracy of the votes when the votes were being counted.[79]
Waldenburg, Arkansas: The touch screen computer tallied zero votes for one mayoral candidate who confirmed that he certainly voted for himself and therefore there would be a minimum of one vote; this is a case of disappearing votes on touchscreen machines.[78]

(Snip)

In Finland, the Supreme Administrative Court declared invalid the results of a pilot electronic vote in three municipalities, and ordered a rerun of the municipal elections (Karkkila, Kauniainen and Vihti). The system had a usability problem where the messages were ambiguous on whether the vote had been cast. In a total of 232 cases (2% of votes), voters had logged in, selected their vote but not confirmed it, and left the booth; the votes were not recorded.[81] Following the failure of the pilot election, the Finnish government has abandoned plans to continue electronic voting based on voting machines. In the memo[82] it was concluded, that the voting machine is not developed any more, and Finnish government will follow the development of different electronic voting systems worldwide.
2008 United States elections:
Virginia, Tennessee, and Texas: Touch screen voting machines flipped votes in early voting trials.[83]
Humboldt County, California: A security flaw erased 197 votes from the computer database.[84]
In 2010, graduate students from the University of Michigan hacked into the District of Columbia online voting systems during an online voting mock test run and changed all the cast ballots to cater to their preferred candidates. This voting system was being tested for military voters and overseas citizens, allowing them to vote on the Web, and was scheduled to run later that year. It only took the hackers, a team of computer scientists, thirty-six hours to find the list of the government’s passwords and break into the system.[85]

(Snip)

The Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems) AccuVote-TSx voting system was studied by a group of Princeton University computer scientists in 2006. Their results showed that the AccuVote-TSx was insecure and could be "installed with vote-stealing software in under a minute." The scientists also said that machines can transmit computer viruses from one to another "during normal pre- and post-election activity."[89]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting

This is coming from computer scientists advising to check it out.

Hacked election [View all] apcalc Nov 2016 OP
Rugh ro! Cats fucking fighting in the bag! Can't stop them now. lonestarnot Nov 2016 #1
Do you REALLY believe Hillary will challenge the outcome? napi21 Nov 2016 #2
She ran for the presidency. athena Nov 2016 #7
Those districts in question had voting by electronic tabulators. AFAIK there is NO AUDIT TRAIL. napi21 Nov 2016 #12
I believe athena Nov 2016 #13
They discovered in one WI county using electronic machines that there were more votes pnwmom Nov 2016 #25
This is about election rigging/padding. She's just the catalyst to make the call. ffr Nov 2016 #16
Don't think she will elmac Nov 2016 #20
It was irresponsible when Trump said it before the election loyalsister Nov 2016 #3
You can't find irrefutable evidence unless you investigate. bigmonkey Nov 2016 #4
Exactly. athena Nov 2016 #5
It's more like investigating deaths of people who drink water mythology Nov 2016 #8
How do you explain athena Nov 2016 #11
There is evidence, preliminary evidence. bigmonkey Nov 2016 #21
I'm saying don't start screaming that it happened without proof loyalsister Nov 2016 #6
No one is saying it happened. athena Nov 2016 #9
Calling for the proof to precede the investigation? bigmonkey Nov 2016 #10
Evidence is not even required for an investigation, athena Nov 2016 #14
Neither Wisconsin nor Pennsylvania came within 0.5 percent, so those are pretty much moot. WillowTree Nov 2016 #17
That's for an automatic or free recount. The candidate can always request a recount. athena Nov 2016 #18
Talk about the percentages & it sounds like tiny differences. Hard numbers tell a different story. WillowTree Nov 2016 #22
An investigation is one thing loyalsister Nov 2016 #27
Again, you are calling for the facts before the investigation. bigmonkey Nov 2016 #33
You need facts to justify an investigation loyalsister Nov 2016 #34
The hurdle for investigation is lower bigmonkey Nov 2016 #40
This is not court loyalsister Nov 2016 #42
This message was self-deleted by its author bigmonkey Nov 2016 #43
It's more court than politics. bigmonkey Nov 2016 #44
Look how smug the presumptive winner was awoke_in_2003 Nov 2016 #19
Computer faculty at Berkeley and MIT are calling for an audit of three states, pnwmom Nov 2016 #26
Do you have a link for this? forthemiddle Nov 2016 #31
In the article and yes malware can be installed through the ballot printing/entry machines. no inter Sunlei Nov 2016 #37
Will the senate seat audit that they are doing forthemiddle Nov 2016 #39
I don't know. I want machine software checked by experts & the large chunks of BLANK ballots looked Sunlei Nov 2016 #41
I think Trump was talking about himself when he said the election is rigged JonLP24 Nov 2016 #28
I know he was loyalsister Nov 2016 #29
I hardly consider voting machines conspiracy theories JonLP24 Nov 2016 #32
Was that the only option? loyalsister Nov 2016 #35
I would have to research each individual area JonLP24 Nov 2016 #36
Are those straight or flexible straws they're grasping at? WillowTree Nov 2016 #15
There is no question it was hacked. world wide wally Nov 2016 #23
KnR Hekate Nov 2016 #24
"The group apparently has no proof of hacking..." jmg257 Nov 2016 #30
because NONE of the machines are checked by anyone. Sunlei Nov 2016 #38
MI uses paper ballots. roamer65 Nov 2016 #45
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hacked election»Reply #28