America's achilles heel - election system

How many votes did the Russians steal? How many ballots did the Russians change?

 

The correct question is how many votes did russians influence? That number will never be known.

To suggest that NOBODY decision making process was effected by the russian cyber attack is to suggest that advertising, marketing, and propaganda don't work at influencing people either

Ludicrous nonsensical rhetorical arguments demanding to know how many votes were hacked and changed after casting them is an attempt to focus on the wrong component of the overall russian assault strategy and the tactics they deployed.

 

Has America ever attacked the Russian voting system?

 

What are you talking about he tried to form a commission to study just such things and the MSM and Democrats got their panties in a wad over it.

Also in our country the federal government does not hold elections, only the states hold elections and they are the responsibility of the states, Trump can't do anything about what Georgia does or does not do vis-a-vis their elections.

 

You mean their $40,000 in facebook ads versus the billions spent by the campaigns?

 

When the machines are put in place, with Democrat and Republican poll watchers right their, they run test ballots through the machines to test for tabulation errors. As soon as the voting is complete they run another set of test ballots through the machines to again insure they are accurately recording votes.

In my state we use the optical scanners. The machines are not online or connected to the internet. They are stand alone. The results are called in by phone.

 

If the voting machines could be hacked, they would have been. There is no way Russia et al would use social media and subterfuge if they could just change the results.

 

While true, and a very weird story, the voting machine had no ballots in it, and there's no actual evidence it was ever used. For one thing, ballots have to be deposited in a ballot box overseen by poll workers if they're going to get counted. So at the very least, Slosberg would have needed some co-conspirators at the polling place or county election office. And if he had such co-conspirators, there would have been far easier, less visible ways to commit vote fraud than keeping a voting machine in his car.

Do you ever get tired of spreading this crap? In-person voter fraud -- the only kind that would be stopped by Voter ID -- is vanishingly rare in this country. This has been proven over and over again, despite concerted GOP efforts to prove it's a problem.

So if a problem doesn't really exist, why should we spend time and effort trying to "fix" it?

Meanwhile, we know stringent ID requirements would effectively disenfranchise lots of legitimate voters, who for various reasons -- mostly having to do with being elderly or poor -- have difficulty obtaining an ID that meets Voter ID requirements.

So let's see: disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people in order to "fight" a problem that doesn't actually exist. Sure! Why not? Sounds like a great idea!

I've said before that I would be fine with a Voter ID requirement IF the state went out of its way to ensure that EVERY eligible voter who wants one can easily get one. And by that I mean things like vans with ID-making equipment that will come to your house if you call them, and reasonable processes for handling predictable problems with obtaining an ID -- like lack of a birth certificate (a major hassle for older people) or lack of ID with your current address (a problem for poor people, who tend to move frequently).

But stuff like that is never part of the Voter ID proposals put forth by conservatives. Because Voter ID proposals are about voter suppression, not protecting the integrity of the voting process.

Meanwhile, conservatives are entirely unconcerned with efforts by foreign countries to interfere with our elections, which is not only a legitimate threat but has actually happened.

 

nonsense. That commission (for the joke it was) was looking into voter fraud as illegal immigrants and duplicate voters in an effort to prove that the fearless leader didn't lose the popular vote by a few mill.

I am well aware of the fact that the federal government does not run the elections.

I am also aware that state level security of electronic voting machines is pathetic. Hell even kids can hack tabulation machines.

You can learn the dire state of affairs by starting here.

https://www.defcon.org/

 

I watched children hack the election system as exposed by RT. Then others on the Democrats side screamed murder because it was RT exposing it.

Trouble is that people can currently mail in ballots. At least here in CA. And those are paper.

 

Oh look yet another piece of bumpersticker bullshit. Seems some people are fixated on a small ad buy on one platform.

It takes a rare mind to be able cherry pick one small element of a far larger campaign and use in some idiotic attempt to suggest the russian military cyber attack had no effect whatsoever.

Despite all them retweets of russian troll fake news by the trump campaign. Despite tens of thousands of bots and fake users being discovered. Nah, it's all about a single ad buy.

Unfortunately such a pathetic and lame "rationale" to dismiss russian military interference seems to work well in trumpland.

 

Yet if those same poor people get educated and want some professional license, suddenly they get help with ID requirements and must provide to the state a certified accurate birth certificate. States can control ID since they currently do. All of them do it.
All states per federal law will ask for ID for licenses that are such as: Appraisers and mortgage lenders. I know in CA it also does it to Real Estate agents at both levels, Broker and Salesman.

 

*Sigh.* Being licensed is not a civic right. Please stop with the loopy irrelevancies.

 

Show me in my discussion me calling licenses a right? I am saying the state has tools to use when they want you to prove your identity. Voting is at a minimum at the same level of needing to ID citizens as a license is.

 

Incorrect. If you don't get a license, no right has been abridged. If you are denied the right to vote, you have been disenfranchised.

And given that EVERY look at in-person voting fraud has shown it is vanishingly rare, there is no point in implementing a strict ID requirement for voting. All it does is disenfranchise legitimate voters in an attempt to solve a non-existent problem.

 

BS tap dancing. Look at the facts. Slosberg - a Democrat politician - had a voting machine, the same machine used in that county during the election. Slosberg was ordered to turn over the machine, he refused, and police had to confront him and take the voting machine. Slosberg was around the Gore-Bush recount. During the recount, boxes of ballots kept turning up, boxes of uncounted ballots which were supposedly "misplaced".

Because he was not caught in the act of punching ballots with the machine you think he was totally innocent. Why did he have a Votamatic machine in his car, why did he refuse to turn it over when the Supervisor of Elections ordered him to return it, why was he around the recount?

And where did he get that machine, which was state property? Who gave it to him?

Utter BS. Requiring ID wont disenfranchise any legitimate voter. States that try to implement voter ID go to great lengths to make it easy for people to get the ID including waiving the fee and providing transportation.

You have to show a picture ID to get a library card, to buy beer and cigarettes, to get a drivers license or a state ID, to get a govt job, to enroll in school, to open a bank account, to cash a check, even to get utilities turned on in a house or apartment.

Nobody complains about not being able to do any of those things because they cant get an ID.

People opposed to voter ID want fraud, that's the only reason anyone would oppose such an obvious and rational and common sense idea such as voter ID.

 

Like I said, it’s a weird story. But what I said is true: for him to have successfully stuffed a ballot box, he would have needed co-conspirators in the election office. And if he had those, he wouldn’t need to drive around with a voting machine in his car. So nothing about it adds up. If you have a plausible alternative explanation, I’m all ears.

You know, you asserting something doesn’t make it true.

Cite me one of the laws.

#1, that is irrelevant; none of those are civic rights.

#2, the level of ID required for such thing is generally way more flexible than the strict voting ID standard.

#3, you keep ignoring the part where in-person voter fraud is so ridiculously rare that not only is it not worth trying to fix, but you’d only have to disenfranchise a couple of dozen people for it to do more harm than good. Why are you so adamant about fixing a nonexistent problem?

Well I guess we’ll just discount all the actual research on this subject and go with “Battle3’s personal impression”.

I’ve given you multiple reasons. And since in-person voter fraud ALMOST NEVER HAPPENS, your criticism doesn’t even make sense.

 

They say only 30% of the populace voted in the 2016 election but that's a lie. Tens of thousands of votes were suppressed with many minorities being told they were not registered voters or their names disappeared from voting rolls. This along with the fact that so many districts are gerrymandered is the reason why the Republicans "win" elections even though they are not the majority of voters.

 

I would have started with the actual numbers rather than hearsay lol.

Official Population total 325 million, 129 million voters that's 40% of the population so whoever they are. They are full of ****.

When you start to remove those under 18 and convicted felons that 325 million is going to come down a lot and the voting percentage for eligible voters is a lot lot higher.

 

And why don't we only open the polls on the second tuesday from 10 to 1 and not tell anybody but Republicans. You're already getting rid of most of the military (absentee ballots) and lots of poor people who can't afford to take time off to register (motor voter)

Do you REALLY think that keeping ALL but the rich from voting will help you that much?

 

Nobody knows. I think it is SOME but probably not enough to swing the election.

And the number INFLUENCED is, as Jonsa says, probably much larger but will always remain unknowable.

And the main problem is it shouldn't be ANY, our votes in the election shouldn't be influenced by illegal means AT ALL. Nixon resigned because he was caught just covering up that sort of crime. Trump has rather clearly covered it up and even tried to illegally stop the investigation

I will ask again the question I have asked conservatives in this forum several times before and NEVER got an answer to. IF Trump is innocent WHY is he trying so hard to stop the investigation? Why doesn't he AID Mueller to exonerate him if he has done nothing wrong?

 

Because voting is a right and has such power, it should have a higher degree of integrity than getting a library card. Every false vote disenfranchises a legitimate vote.

Voter fraud does occur. A simple search turns up many proven cases. This site lists over 1,000 cases.
https://www.heritage.org/election-i...-voter-fraud-pile-liberals-look-the-other-way

When doing the search, many far lefty sites claimed there were no cases of fraud. Since there are cases where people were convicted, this also proves the Left is lying about the issue.

 

It is no secret that voting lines often go around the block in inner cities. This because of society's effort to suppress or to minimize their voting power. Absentee voting is needed to insure that these folks will get a chance to vote. Further, there are others who use absentee voting because they cannot be at their home districts on election day or they cannot stand on line waiting to cast their ballot ~ my self for example: I'm arthritic and cannot stand for a prolonged period of time. Thus, I send in my ballot during the presidential elections.

 

There is also the problem of selective enforcement of the law which leads to voter disqualification, thereby suppressing the vote in the inner cities.

 

Still ignoring the fact that since voter fraud is vanishingly rare, a strict Voter ID requirement disenfranchises more people than doing nothing.

Yes. Now look at the types of fraud, and recognize that almost NONE of them would be stopped by Voter ID. For instance, neither of the cases Heritage highlights would be affected by Voter ID:

1. An election worker who altered votes. Would not have been stopped by Voter ID.
2. A Colorado woman used a mail-in ballot to vote for her dead father. Would not have been stopped by Voter ID.

Most of the other cases involve absentee ballots, or people voting despite being ineligible (for instance, because they were convicted of a felony). Neither type of fraud is affected by Voter ID. False registrations? Also not stopped by Voter ID.

So thanks for inadvertently proving my point: in-person voting fraud -- the only kind of fraud that Voter ID would stop -- is vanishingly rare.

I see.

#1, it is a huge logical failure to say "because some far-left sites said 'no' voter fraud, the entire "Left" is lying".

#2, who cares? Does that change anything I wrote? In-person voter fraud is ridiculously rare. Study after study has proved it. GOP attempts to prove the opposite have ended up confirming that it is extremely rare.

So why are you trying to fix something that isn't actually a problem? Especially because your proposed fix will result in MORE legitimate votes being canceled than if we just do nothing?