Does Anyone Have Confidence in These Voting Machines ?

I don’t.

Something about them doesn’t sit right.

Seems like it makes cheating a lot easier.

Before you tell me I’m old and don’t get it.

That have literally hacked every computer ever built.

Something about a paper receipt.

Anyone else ? Coherent thoughts ?

a reply to: whyamIhere

Nope.

You’re pretty much spot on.

Keep in mind, if you question it you’re the enemy.

Coming from the folks that would have you believe “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

Just my two pence.

And everyone conveniently forgets how a (Professor, I believe, from UofM) (Not sure 100%) but a guy, in a courtroom, hack one in with a pen?

Holy heck I remembered!!!

How does one hack a machine that has no internet access?

I voted early, in Texas on Monday.

Registered voter for 16 years and this was the longest wait I ever experienced at the polls. I suspect record turnouts this election.

Went in. Showed my DL. They printed up a ticket with a number. You enter that number in a booth, then vote. Machine spits out a paper ballot and you hand it to a volunteer.

Put it this way, if you really believe that voting is rigged, don't even bother.

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

Read the article I posted.

Seems it was pretty easy.

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

How does one hack a machine that has no internet access?

By standing in front of it?

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

I've voted a little longer than you have, also in Texas, and this has always been my experience more or less. Once, I was new to the area so I had to do a provisional ballot, once the old guy couldn't find my name, despite me pointing to it, but one of the other people helped me instead

Never had a vote "flip" on the screen. Never questioned the legitimacy of the vote in my area bc it's always lined up. Never been nor seen anyone turned away for a non legitimate reason. Never seen someone even argue being turned away honestly.

a reply to: whyamIhere

Kinda funny how a computerized vote system can take several days or weeks to tally a vote, when the old way it was finished overnight.

I thought computers were supposed to be more efficient than humans.

Electronic equipment can make vote tallying more efficient, and if the electronic records and ballots match, are kept secure, and can be audited, it's an improvement in election security, from hand counts alone, in many ways.

Electronic equipment is also super helpful for people with disabilities.

I would say that, anyone using electronic equipment to vote should take the time to verify that their vote is being recorded correctly because software can make mistakes and is also vulnerable to malicious attacks.

What I find concerning is the software used to adjudicate votes electronically via the ballot images, as was demonstrated in Georgia after the 2020 election by an election worker. If the adjudication process isn't closely monitored, it is ripe for abuse.

Georgia GOP Chairwoman Demonstrates Dominion's Ballot Adjudication Process

I also found it concerning when I saw a video (that I can no longer find online) of a couple of election software salesman from a company that starts with a D, talking about how their software can not only change ballot marks on the electronic ballot images, but it could do so in an imperfect way that resembles a human mark.

a reply to: underpass61

I might be wrong, but my understanding was that the reason things took so long the last two times, comparatively, is that the checks were happening more or less by default.

Basically, that until the last decade or so, trust in electronic voting was higher than it wasn't at the very least. But as time went on, trust has wained. So we're double checking before announcing vs the old way of electronic tally, announce, then double check.

That is just MY understanding of it. Could be very wrong, but it's how I interpreted everything.

Um just look at the people in charge. The CEO of the voting machine company is Nancy Pelosi's chief of staff and the head investor is married to Elizabeth Warren. The fact that isn't a conflict of interest should enrage American voters.

Edit: Sorry, Diane Feinstien...not Elizabeth Warren...

a reply to: whyamIhere

I voted yesterday and the voting machine I used seemed fine. It was easy and all of my selections printed out correctly on the paper tabulation. But the thought that entered my mind after leaving was about the tabulator. It's electronic as well and there is no immediate visible verification that my vote was tabulated correctly.

What's the old saying? It doesn't mater how a person votes? It only maters who counts the votes?

“Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.”
― Joseph Stalin

In Oklahoma we have used the same system for years and years and it works. We have a paper ballot that we fill in similar to a large scantron. For those not old enough to now what that is it is the test sheet where you fill in a space with pencil or pen and a machine reads it. We fill out our ballot and then walk over and feed it into a locked machine where it is scanned and the results are uploaded in almost real time. We have our results almost immediately after the polls close. It is easy and works and we do not have to rely on some funky touchscreen BS and if necessary we have paper ballots to resort back to a manual hand count from. Anywhere using nothing but touchscreen machines worries me and anyone still using dominion machines either wants cheating to happen or doesnt care if it happens because those machine were designed with cheating in mind.

a reply to: charlest2

But we have no IDEA if the machines add votes for one candidate or tabulate two times the votes for one party. All we know is that the multiple investigations into the voting machines all yielded warnings from experts that the machines were absolutely altered with strange programs that the experts testified would only be on the machines if someone planned to cheat. And the machines absolutely are connected to the internet even though they claimed they weren't. All they need to do is have a country they are giving billions to, go in and hack the vote so if they are caught they can blame that nation ::cough cough Ukraine and your war costing 75 thousand dollars per bullet yea right and democrats going nuts and threatening to shut down the government when more funding isn't constantly approved to give you while wars have broken out in hundreds of countries since the US became a place but it is only Ukraine where we must give billions to defend democracy:: And nobody could do anything about those expert opinions since it has become such an evil and anti democratic thing to question an election. Heck, last week they made it legal to use lethal force on election deniers basically...

Essentially unless you can verify who you voted for online or elsewhere it's ripe for abuse. Especially with mail ins

a reply to: AlexandrosOMegas

But we have no IDEA if the machines add votes for one candidate or tabulate two times the votes for one party.

That's why I call in the question about the tabulators. The voting machines, right or wrong, only record the vote. The tabulators put it all together and there is no immediate visual confirmation your vote was recorded properly. If there is no dispute, the tabulated totals become official.

As far as the rest of what you state, I can not deny or refute any of it. Our federal government has become "The Abomination Of Desolation".

a reply to: AlexandrosOMegas

But we have no IDEA if the machines add votes for one candidate or tabulate two times the votes for one party.

This is why it's important to preserve all ballots, electronic records, adjudication records, and chain-of-custody records, so that full forensic audits can be conducted as needed.

How does one hack a machine that has no internet access?

By standing in front of it?

They all get hooked up to the internet when the polls close. Every district sends their information up the chain via the internet at the end of counting.

a reply to: charlest2

"Weighted votes", it's not a bug it's a feature.🤬

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

How does that eliminate the cheating signature verifications mail ballots and transportation adding and redirecting ballots in other states? 😁