Please don't spread Spoonamore hoax

[creeksneakers2]

I usually debunk right wing frauds but this time I want to debunk a left wing one, the latest nonsense from some guy named Steven Spoonamore that the 2024 election was hacked and stolen. His claims have gone viral, including a link to something called " Duty to Warn Letter - to VP Harris - Re: Election 2024."
I take pride in the fact that my side engages in far fewer kook conspiracy theories and accepts the will of the people without trying Fascist coup attempts. And I love to point fingers at righties for doing those things and don't want next time to end up with them pointing fingers back and saying: "Your guys do it too." Spreading misinformation would hurt our side.

My debunking is at this link: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/11/20/2287695/-Election-fraud-hoax-by-the-left?_=2024-11-20T19:59:39.000-08:00

[Skittles]

1. easy to see why people are so susceptible to such claims

it is deeply disturbing and hard to understand why so many Americans are embracing fascism

[creeksneakers2]

2. Yes. A great many people choose what they believe by

choosing what they WANT to believe rather than weighing facts, evidence and logic. Many shady people use the Internet to take advantage of those who can be fooled that way.

[Skittles]

4. repukes are easily manipulated

they worry about Soros and trans folk while dismissing climate change and the war on women

[wryter2000]

5. And...

Polls said nothing about who would win. Plus, all other indicators suggested Harris would win. I’m in favor of doing all reasonable inquiries. After that, let it go.

[creeksneakers2]

7. Not that easy to inquire

Unless its really close if you want a recount you have to pay for it. Some lady told me she suspected fake voters. I told her the lists of people who voted are public and to have at it. Really doubt she would find anything. Don't know what else can be reasonaby done.

[Skittles]

8. problem is, none of it would make any difference

FASCISM won. America lost.

[creeksneakers2]

10. Absolutely! And lies work!

[jimfields33]

126. Considering the Pennsylvania senator vote was

Recount and senator Casey found nothing nefarious. I think this was a relatively clean election.

[Sympthsical]

3. He's attacking Harris now

It's really a shame to see his material get repeatedly posted (and highly recommended) on DU the way it has.

It's a poison pill. And people are asking for water to help swallow it.

[Miami Blue]

6. This happened in Florida

Last edited Thu Nov 21, 2024, 09:22 AM - Edit history (1)

https://www.google.com/gasearch?q=desantis%20voting%20restriction%202024%20election&source=sh/x/gs/m2/5

[creeksneakers2]

9. Yep. Lots of voter suppression going on

That's not fraud though and its not a hoax. Here in PA they are getting away with tossing out mail in votes that arrive without a date on the outer envelope, even if they arrive by election day and there is no doubt they were legitimate votes. The crooked US Supreme Court is letting them get away with it and it may make the difference between Senator Bob Casey winning or a complete jerk winning. Just awful.

Not what I was talking about in my OP though.

[radius777]

17. +1. Voter suppression is the real issue,

we don't need conspiracy theories to see how the R's have been rigging the game. The RW Supreme Court allows them to, has since 2000 when they helped W win. Those are legitimate issues. But election conspiracy theories on the left only make us look bad, as it allows the media to say that 'both sides' do it.

[creeksneakers2]

18. Exactly!

And with the GOP in firm control of all three branches and a dictatorship at the top its going to get far worse.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

74. It was actually the PA Supreme Court

But point taken.

[TheKentuckian]

82. You can count the ballots eleventy trillion times and

it will never ever capture the votes that never were cast.

It was imperative to pass voting rights but we failed and we knew we failed on that front so there was nothing for it but to try to overcome the best we could because there is NO REMEDY FOR IT and railing about the suppression after we lost is not changing a single ballot.

The bought partisans infrastructure bill probably didn't net a single vote and more likely than not Chump will get the lion's share of the credit for it as seeds sprout during his maladministration just like he got the credit for the economy Obama handed over to him that he wrecked and yet was able to ride back to the Whitehouse on it fueled by dumbass nostalgia.

[Silent Type]

11. I'll believe Spoon when Biden, Harris, etc., say vote result appear bogus.

[creeksneakers2]

12. I'll believe that if they have evidence.

Spoonamore is not evidence.

[MFM008]

13. How could our side

Be any more damaged?

[creeksneakers2]

15. By having the media doubt our future claims

like they do for Trump''s. I want our voters to trust us too. Lying to them hurts that. Lots of ways these things hurt.

[FoxNewsSucks]

14. Yes, by all means, let's take republicon's word for everything.

Because they would never lie, cheat, manipulate or steal anything.

Right?

They've been cheating since 2000 and before. They've only honed their ability to cover it up. Who is naive enough to think they stopped???

[creeksneakers2]

16. I'd be glad to look at any evidence you have.

Tons of ways they cheat. What I'm talking about isn't one of them.

[carpetbagger]

24. I'm taking the words of Democrats here.

Our elections monitors, our elections officials and chiefs, Democratic governors in MI, WI, PA, AZ, NC.

There's no deus ex machina here.

[TheKentuckian]

89. Who is taking the Republicans word for anything?

You are defaulting to working backward from a conclusion and have set up a mental framework which means like the MAGA traitors that you only believe in elections you win with the same or similar rationalizations.

I also don't get the anger at people logically maintaining the same standards for "We wuz robbed" all the time.

Also, where the fuck was all this hair on fire when we needed to do something sane and productive and pass basic voting rights legislation?

Where was the concern when morons where marching around hollering that our administration is genocidal?

Where was all this give a damn when states were passing suppression laws other than some talk of sneaking people a bottle of water (and mostly did no such thing anyway).

Y'all have to at least come up with articulable reasonable suspicion and that does not mean articulating reasons your are holistically suspicious of Republicans.

[creeksneakers2]

98. I'm not taking Republican word for anything

But please think about this. The Trump cabal has taken lots of heat for lying about the 2020 election being fixed. I think it will come up with his AG nominee, who was an election denier. If we spread hoaxes too that will excuse everything they've done and will do in the future.

[Blue Full Moon]

19. Computer security expert not just some guy.

[creeksneakers2]

20. No reason to recognize the credentials

of a con artist.

[LauraInLA]

22. I'm not sure he's an actual computer security expert -- he calls himself a "computer security expert."

[stopdiggin]

29. there's thousands of those in this country

and 1 guy that has made a 20 year career out of peddling this .... Basically innuendo and junk science.

Curious how the rest of the people in this field are not rushing in to bolster and confirm ...

[questionseverything]

39. See post #25...there are more of them

[stopdiggin]

44. not really. did read the post.

not really impressed - while also pointing to the vast bulk of the field still not weighing in. Or perhaps just having the decency and professionalism to hold off until until reliable (and somewhat complete) figures are actually made available? I'e., something to actually get their hands on - teeth into.

Would like to note that the 'other' letter referenced (with these other signatories) - carries a quite different tenor and tone - and notably does not veer off into the wild claims and space lasers that this Spooner character traffics in.

[creeksneakers2]

55. That has no evidence anything happened.

[Mountain Mule]

21. I don't know what to think anymore

The Republicans have proven that they will stop at nothing to gain and remain in power. Low information voters only care about the price of eggs, making sure that xenophobia becomes the national policy, and putting gay and trans people in their place. I'm pretty sure that there were any number of irregularities in the election, but how widespread they were, I don't know. A recount of at least the swing states would make me and a lot of other people around here feel better but I guess that's not in the cards.

[garybeck]

23. Sorry but your critique of Spoonamore has as many holes as his letter.

With all due respect, It says at the beginning that the article is not subject to review by The Daily Kos staff.

You talks about only being able to get the vote totals by opening up the back of the machine. DREs are pretty much extinct (see verifiedvoting.org) . You talk about having to have physical contact with machines in order to manipulate them and fail to recognize the most important vulnerability of the machines which is the memory cards. Spoonemore mentions this specifically and you ignore it

We should all be skeptical but we should also be objective and open-minded.

I'm my opinion your critique of spoonamore is no better than spoonamores letter itself

Science is being Objective, Skeptical, Open minded

[creeksneakers2]

50. Fewer old machines around. But Spoonamore claims a complete count.

In 50 states. So if there are any its not complete. Don't the new machnes also just give totals? Why would they give individual ballots? Ours produce a paper record of each votes but I don't think anybody looks at them unless there is a question about the machine count. Certainly nobody reviews them for "bullet ballots."

Daily Kos does not review but its open for comment. Lots of people furiously believe what they want to believe and I expect plenty of challenges. You are right now. This is also on Facebook and another message board too.

I said cannot be hacked without physical access. The memory card theory requires physical access. Only an insider could do it. And counters are tested many times in the process. I think its done at each poll.

I am completely open minded. If you can debunk what I've written I'll gladly concede.

[pnwmom]

25. Spoonamore isn't the only computer expert calling for a recount. There is also the group of computer security experts

who have signed a letter describing breaches in election system software that were brought to light in 2022 and never addressed.

After describing the breaches, it concludes:

The facts around the voting system breaches are not disputed; it is well documented that there were severe, multiple voting security breaches before the 2024 election. To ensure that voters can have confidence that the breaches in security did not taint the results of the 2024 election, we recommend pursuing hand recounts in, at minimum, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania as they will provide insufficient safeguards against threats posed by the breaches of the election software and will not provide important information in a timely way.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this important matter.

Sincerely,
Duncan Buell Ph.D.
Chair Emeritus — NCR Chair in Computer Science and Engineering
Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering
University of South Carolina*

David Jefferson Ph.D.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory* (retired)
Election Integrity Foundation*

Susan Greenhalgh
Senior Advisor for Election Security
Free Speech For People

Chris Klaus
Founder
Internet Security System*

William John Malik
Malik Consulting, LLC*

Marilyn Marks
Executive Director
Coalition for Good Governance

Peter G. Neumann Ph.D.
Chief Scientist,
SRI International Computer Science Lab*

John E. Savage
An Wang Professor Emeritus of Computer Science
Brown University*

https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324-1.pdf

[garybeck]

26. Yes thank you. This article calling spoon a hoax is not objective.

[creeksneakers2]

28. What makes you say that?

Did he not lie about the bullet ballots?

Is it not impossible to hack a voting machine if its air locked and you don't have physical access to it?

If real voters were being impersonated wouldn't some of the impersonated voters also show up to vote?

What is not objective about these things? They look like solid facts to me.

[garybeck]

46. see my post, i think it is #23, but to answer your questions

"Is it not impossible to hack a voting machine if its air locked and you don't have physical access to it?"

that is simply not correct. you fail to acknowledge the biggest vulnerability of the tabulators (they are not really called voting machines). that is the memory cards. as you should know, the memory cards are removed from the tabulators and reprogrammed in a central location before every election. it is possible to introduce a virus into just one memory card at the central location that would silently infect all the memory cards that are programmed there. You should know that. Spoonamore mentions it specifically and you brushed over it completely.

I really don't know what his theory is on the impersonation of voters who didn't vote. he claims it could be done in real time at the end, when they know who did not vote and then they use those voters to cast fake ballots electronically for them. I don't have any reason to believe that's not possible. do you?

I don't have all the answers, but to simply call him a hoax and is improper at this time. If you talk with him and and ask him your questions, perhaps he would answer them adequately for you. Perhaps not.

but again to simply call it a hoax, that means he just made it all up, to get clicks or something like that. I don't think that's true. but it could be. in the mean time neither you nor I should call it a hoax, nor should we sign allegiance to it.

assuming he's a real person, he is a computer geek. not a journalist. just becuase he didn't cover every question and detail you have in his letter, doesn't mean he doesn't have answers or theories that could alleviate your concerns. I have some of the same questions you have. but i'm not going to call him a hoax and I don't think you should either.

and as someone else pointed out, it's not just Spoonamore. there is a 6 paged letter signed by 9 computer security experts. perhaps you should check that one out. or is that a hoax too?

sorry for the tongue in cheek.. meant respectfully.
peace

[creeksneakers2]

49. That doesn't cover the bullet ballot lie

Not sure about his one card infection theory but machines are retested before elections so if probably wouldn't work. And only an insider would have access to pull that, probably many people involved. Notice I said impossible without physical access. Your theory requires physical access. You would still have the anomalous result problem.

Spoonamore's theory of impersonation is that his hypothetical hacking operation could get a list of voters and hack into all those precincts and install votes for them. I think I debunked that. You seem suggest that could use live impersonators. I've never bought the right wing myth that happens. Elections are little neighborhood events an neighbors often know each other. Poll workers are often community active type who participate in things like little league or PTA or what have you. If someone impersonated a voter there is a good chance someone at the poll would know the voter and call the police. If this wast tried a bunch of times they definitely would catch on. And you haven't addressed the flaw that the impersonated voter would vote to, leading to a discovery that a fraud had occurred. And you you really think they came up with hundreds of thousands of live impersonators without getting detected? Come on!

That other letter other people are talking about had zero evidence of fraud.

[garybeck]

51. no. no. no.

you should know that the "testing" they do on the machines accomplishes nothing. referring to the testing on the machines is first grade stuff. those of us who have been studying this went past it decades ago. the Harri Hursti Hack, which you vaguely reference in your OP shows that the "testing" does nothing.

at the very least, it's very simple. remember how Volkswagon programmed their emissions module to act differently when it's being tested and they got away with it for years? well, the same thing for ballot tabulators.

think of it this way, (using the memory cards which are reprogrammed every election cycle in an unsecured location) program the counters to count correctly for the first 1,000 votes, then start doing the funny business. that would get around all the pre election testing, in one line of code.

this is more complicated than you believe or know. don't dismiss it out of hand and call things a hoax unless you know what you're talking about.

if you're not aware of the memory card vulnerability, you have no position to be calling Spoonamore a hoax

it's fine to *question* him and his theories. but don't attack him and call him a hoax and tell others to call it a hoax unless you have real solid information and a background and understanding of the subject matter. you clearly don't.

I'm sure you mean well.

take care

[creeksneakers2]

53. The "bullet ballot" stuff is definitely a lie

It contradicted by the actual results in North Carolina. Since he lied I can call him a fraud. That you believe one of his many claims is possibly true does not change the fact that he lied about "bullet ballot" results in North Carolina.

Programming a change in results after 1,000 would not help in many places because most have fewer than 1,000 votes. And AGAIN, I say not possible without access. Your theory requires access. And access by a highly skilled person.

I'm not an expert but don't need to be one to know its not possible to hack without access . Many people who are experts will back that up.

[questionseverything]

77. He didn't necessarily lie

He said he showed those bb as of the 14th , y’all didn’t start checking until the 18/19 ?
Lots of votes added in between, if he did time slices of results and it showed what he’s talking about it definitely would be something to look into. A program might record what was needed early and then fill in (precincts) as necessary to look normal.

Now why he would not explain that I have no clue.

I’m not saying that happened but election watchers do time slice results, so it would be possible.

[creeksneakers2]

95. Not sure what you are talking about

Spoonamore's bullet ballot evidence is a lie. So is the voter impersonation theory and the small remote group doing the hacking theory. No passage of time would change that. The votes that disprove Spoonamore's 350,000 bullet ballot claim are from the final result.

[questionseverything]

104. The early results could of shown that difference and then as more results were included the difference disappeared

As more ballots were added

I’m not saying that’s what happened but time slices can show odd patterns

Funny hearing last few days how china has infiltrated the nsa by hacking and they have been poking around since October…. Democratic senator says worst intrusion ever! We aren’t as secure as people would like to think.

[creeksneakers2]

110. Doesn't matter when the votes arrived

If Trump got 350,000 votes just for him that would have shown up in the final result.

[creeksneakers2]

94. I don't think you are paying attention to what I'm saying

I say its not possible to hack without access. You disagree, but the example you offer is one that HAS access. To refute me you need to come up with a way it can be done remotely when there are no phone or Internet lines or wireless. Your example involves insiders with complete control.

[questionseverything]

105. Ask the Chinese and the nsa, every freaking back door is an opening

[creeksneakers2]

109. Even if you are Chines or NSA

You can't just walk into a polling operation open up the back door of a machine and start hacking away. People would stop you. And I'm sure the machines have a code or password or something like that.

Anyway, I'm talking about the Spoonamore hoax. People here keep trying to change the subject the question if its possible somehow someway to steal an election. That's not what my OP is about.

[questionseverything]

114. Ok you are goofing now, talking physical back doors lol

The only spoon more thing i addressed was how some one could of seen a huge number of undervotes and then as more votes came in , it leveled out

[creeksneakers2]

115. Nobody knows how many votes there are until its over.

[osteopath6]

107. Improper?

Improper is contradicting the WH and CISA without offering a shred of evidence. Theories aren't evidence, no matter how many self described computer security experts say otherwise. Why are the authorities saying literally the exact opposite? Free and fair, no manipulation, impossible, etc.

I think I'll call out election denial instead. Seems much more harmful to, you know, the imperative of making sure the party is competitive again in the future. Namely by not trying to out-GOP the GOP with this totaly unsupported straw grasping.

[Mountain Mule]

27. Thank you for this!

There should be a recount in the swing states at the very least, but our leadership is failing us in that regard.

[creeksneakers2]

32. Please don't blame them.

I doubt they could get recounts if they tried.

[creeksneakers2]

31. I was quite worried about this

Trumpsters were caught breaking into voting machines eight times and photographing They said they were looking to prove fraud rather than commit it, but of course I don't trust them. Fortunately, others knew this and I'm pretty sure some precautions were taken to prevent them from gaining access to the machines. Without access they could not be hacked.

If the entire systems were rigged I'm pretty sure they would not have gotten away with it. The machines are tested prior to elections. Also, the differences would have shown up in exit polls. Those polls showed serious problems for Harris that explain her loss.

Your letter states: "We have no evidence that the outcomes of the elections in those
states were actually compromised as a result of the security breaches, and we are
not suggesting that they were." I think before you can get a hand recount you needs some evidence. Generally, recounts are limited to races where the results are very close. When they aren't a candidate that wants the recount has to pay for it . The Trumpsters would go wild if one was requested and would swear up and down we were trying to steal the election. It would not be pretty, and we'd probably lose. Even if we won its very unlikely we'd find anything. Cheating is not really possible.

I understand why after the break ins we should be suspicious. I don't see a winning remedy for it though.

[pnwmom]

34. All the evidence you need is that the breaches did occur. They had the opportunity. And the remedy is simple.

Knowing everything we know about their efforts at voter suppression, and their actual breaches of the voting machines by Trump people, it would be nuts just to trust that nothing happened.

It would have been perfectly possible, as Spoonamore explained, to write software designed to only change results on the day of the election and return to normal afterwards.

The only way to be certain is to do a partial hand recount in the states listed by Prof. Buell.. If serious discrepancies are found, then recount everything in those states.

[DET]

35. Thank You

This is so obvious to me. They stole 2016, they tried to steal 2020, and they remedied their deficiencies in 2024 with the help of Elon Musk - the richest man in the world with access to unlimited financial and intellectual resources. The fate of the world literally hangs on this. How can anyone not demand further investigation?

[pnwmom]

36. They spent 4 years training us to defend the 2020 election, then all elections -- even though

circumstances CHANGED with the revelation of the 2022 breaches.

I guess some of us were too well trained.

[creeksneakers2]

58. If its obvious

where is the evidence?

[creeksneakers2]

54. They would have to find a way get the soltware into the machines.

Not possible without physical access.

[creeksneakers2]

57. The breaches prove they could have found a way to reprogram.

But doesn't cover how they would gain access to the machines to do it.

[pnwmom]

62. The breaches themselves show they had the opportunity to reprogram. nt

[creeksneakers2]

64. They also show they got caught

And they got access to eight machines, but not the thousands of machines they would need to change the outcome.

[pnwmom]

65. So?

[creeksneakers2]

68. So?

So you don't have enough to show the election was fixed. Only that they may have looked for a way to hack a voting machine, and got caught doing that.

[pnwmom]

73. I'm not saying the election WAS fixed. I'm saying there's enough evidence to show it COULD HAVE BEEN FIXED.

The breaches got caught long after they happened. The hackers weren't caught in the act. With the information we know they gained from the breach, they could have gone on to do damage we haven't learned about yet. We won't know unless we do a partial recount.

[creeksneakers2]

96. Eight machines would not have been enough to fix the election.

[pnwmom]

103. With the information gained in the breaches, they could have gone on to hack many more machines

in multiple states.

[creeksneakers2]

111. But you would have to break in to the others. Not easy.

[pnwmom]

112. You don't know that. That's the point. It's very possible that the information gained in the breaches

could have made additional breaches easier. And it took two years to discover the 2020 breaches, so we can't be confident nothing has happened since they were discovered in 2022.

[creeksneakers2]

117. If you don't have physical access

And the machines are not connected to phone or Internet lines there is no way to hack.

[pnwmom]

119. That's what they were saying BEFORE the breaches were discovered in 2022. nt

[ElementaryPenguin]

72. Partial hand recount sounds like a GREAT idea!

[Blue Full Moon]

30. There are more than this

An example

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2142428-hacking-a-us-electronic-voting-booth-takes-less-than-90-minutes/

[creeksneakers2]

33. I've seen demonstations of machines being hacked in minutes

But that is when hackers had physical access to the machines. That's not easy to get. They are locked away and have tamper proof seals. Your article says its possible to get into them with wireless technology. My article says it isn't possible: https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32N26ZV

[pnwmom]

37. They don't need physical access to the machines on the day of the election. They could have tampered with

the coding months or even years before.

[garybeck]

47. yes. but even moreso, it's the memory cards. they are removed and repgrogrammed every election. n/t

[creeksneakers2]

63. By people with physical access.

[questionseverything]

76. Yes by insiders either from the machine company or the election office

One guy from the company could deliver half the state and not know what he was downloading//////

[creeksneakers2]

97. Not that easy because the machines are tested over and over.

[questionseverything]

106. Post # 51

This is getting redundant

[creeksneakers2]

108. We did cover this before, but I still disagree

You said its possible to program the machines to avoid detection of the malicious codes. You said they could only have the theft occur after 1,000 ballots. I said many machines don't have 1,000 ballots to count. Also, there are multiple tests and the programming you are talking about takes place in front of many people. There is also testing after the elections. In most cases there are paper ballots either to begin with or created by the voting machine. The malicious hacker would have no way to know for sure that the election would not turn out close from votes in other jurisdictions, which would lead to a recount where the paper might be looked at, which would lead to the hackers going to prison. And you seem to ignore the fact that very few people have access to the machines. Also, they can detect if an unauthorized entry was made.

I'm not opposed to you and the others doing all you can to protect the integrity of the process. I'm just opposing this hoax from Spoonamore. I'm fine as long as you don't circlulate false claims. I very much want us to keep the Trumpsters on the hot seat for their lies about 2020 being stolen. If our side does it too they'll have an excuse, and once they can show we tell the same lies they'll be free to lie endlessly in elections to come.

[questionseverything]

113. Every thing you said after the second sentence was incorrect, you are mixing me up with some one else

[creeksneakers2]

118. You referred me to post 51

I assumed that was your post.

[questionseverything]

120. You assume a lot about a lot of things

[creeksneakers2]

59. They could not have coded months before

without physical access.

[pnwmom]

61. What makes you think that? nt

[creeksneakers2]

67. Because recoding requires access

The machines are not connected to phone lines or the net. The only way t get access to them is to have physical access. Even if was done months before they still would have needed access.

[nbsmom]

84. I really wish you knew what you were talking about

SIGH.

The voting machines themselves do not have to be connected to the internet (yet—unfortunately— many of them are).

The tabulators, on the other hand, are where it is fairly easy to add some lines of code and — voila — you have Orange Menace the Sequel.

Of course it’s possible that I’m deluding myself. Or maybe there’s a reason the 🍊🤡was so PO’d at Ann Selzer’s poll.

Or a good explanation for why Clallam County in Washington State (paper ballots, air-gapped tabulation, and higher turnout than 2024) ended its 40-year run as a Presidential bellwether state.

But sure, blame Spoonamore for saying something about protecting our cherished democracy.

[creeksneakers2]

85. They are not supposed to be connected.

They found some that were and made sure they were disconnected.

My point about access is that its not easy to hack. You have to have access to be able to do it. The machines are supposed to be in safe hands.

You can't add lines of codes to tablulators without access.

I blame Spoonamore for spreading lies, like the one about the bullet ballots. I don't want my side to turn into a bunch of conspiracy kooks like the right.

[creeksneakers2]

99. I don't care what kind of machine it is

You can't change code without access. And to recode those counting machines don't you need a key or a code or a password or something? I'm sure they don't leave coding open to anybody who walks in and whoever tried it would surely get noticed anyway.

And many of my responses are from people who say its possible that someway somehow an election could be stolen. That's not what my OP is about. I''m saying that a specific article that says it DID happen is a hoax.

[Blue_Roses]

38. In this day of technology

nothing is off the table. I think you're being very naive if you think it's impossible to have our elections tampered with, especially when there are so many inconsistencies. What's really true and what's really not is the REAL question and that answer doesn't happen overnight.

[pnwmom]

48. I think it's interesting that the state of WA, which has only mail in ballots, kept under lock,

and automatically audits samples of ballots and re-counts all ballots by hand whenever there are discrepancies, had virtually the same 58/39 Harris over Trump vote that Biden had over Trump in 2020.

[creeksneakers2]

70. Interesting

But since WA was not a swing state there were probably efforts elsewhere that weren't undertaken in WA.

[creeksneakers2]

60. I think if its going to be alleged there needs to be some evidence

That's what we said when Trump alleged fraud.

[Blue_Roses]

83. That's a given...

We are probably seeing unprecedented election theft right before our eyes. Theft that is so sophisticated that no one would ever believe it's happening. So, finding proof would virtually be impossible since they would not know what to look for, at least not right now, but time will definitely tell.

[creeksneakers2]

86. I kind of doubt it

Many people have worked to make that kind of thing difficult.

[Blue_Roses]

92. With all due respect,

that's a very naive view in this day of modern technology. In fact, my daughter just graduated with a degree in Cybersecurity and this field has never wanted analysts like they do now.

[creeksneakers2]

93. Ask you daughter

If its possible to hack a computer if you are not physically there with it and have no wired or wireless access to it.

[questionseverything]

121. Why don't you ask the Chinese hackers who have infiltrated

The nsa and every back door they use….. I’m
Pretty sure the voting machines security isn’t better than the federal governments especially the nsa

[creeksneakers2]

122. The NSA computers were networked.

[questionseverything]

123. So are the report pages of every sos in the country

And

While the people selling voting machines says they aren’t networked….. no one can see wifi so no one really knows

[creeksneakers2]

124. The report pages are not linked to the machines.

They say wifi isn't there either.

[questionseverything]

125. You pretending you don't understand how a rig could be accomplished doesn't mean you are correct

President Biden’s head of cyber security from 2020 came out today asking for some hand counts of swing states

But I’m sure you would not respect or learn from her either, hopefully the nsa is handling their nation security breach with the Chinese hackers instead of denying and ignoring as some would

[creeksneakers2]

127. I can't find it. What is her name?

[JanMichael]

40. I just can't understand how Trump won North Carolina

Dems won governor and lieutenant governor attorney general, superintendent of schools and some others.

So several thousand people didn't vote for that cretin Robinson but they did vote for Trump who supported Robinson? They also didn't vote for Robinson's puppet Weatherman for Lt Governor but they voted for Trump?

I just don't get it. I'm sure some statistician will explain it well in a couple of years once all of the data is examined.

[Abnredleg]

41. Vote spitting is common in NC

Same thing happened in 2020. We’ve had a Dem governor since 1992 except for 2012-2016. The GOP won every presidential race during that period except 2008.

[JanMichael]

42. I'm aware of that thank you. This wasn't a normal election.

[Abnredleg]

43. But yet the results are typical for NC

It appears to be a perfectly normal election, albeit with disappointing results.

[ScratchCat]

66. There's more

And I keep posting this:

Rick Scott won by 15% when polls had his opponent "within the margin of error". So did other Republicans in Florida and other States(Won by much larger margins than any poll was showing).

Just do selected hand recounts and be done with it. If they show similar totals as what we have been told, I'll readily admit I was wrong.

There is just simply no way to provide "evidence" that software changed votes without a hand recount. We have numerous security experts, we have exit polls that don't jibe and the fact that the Republicans were likely pulling a big "Look, SQUIRLL!!" distraction with all their talk of fraud and lawsuits(where's all their lawsuits???).

[creeksneakers2]

71. I'd be all for a movement to have that every time

So long as we don't push a hoax to promote it.

[questionseverything]

87. It's illegal to hand count ballots in Florida

[RandomNumbers]

45. Please summarize your debunking in the OP.

That would be kind to DUers.

I am agnostic on the argument - what I saw suggested some reason for some precinct level audits. I have long been a supporter of auditing elections similar to the kind of audits my employers undergo. Random unless there is a reason to focus in a particular area. Small scope first, then expand if issues are found. It's basic common sense.

But I have no opinion on the validity of Spoonamore's argument. I would be interested in your points, if you summarize them in your OP. Just saying "go read it at this other site" is not compelling. (even if the other site is a well known usually liberal-ish site).

[garybeck]

52. i read his article

it has as many holes as Spoonamore's. he's not an expert and he throws out blanket statements that are incorrect. we have no reason to think Spoonamore is a hoax or to call him one, just because this guy thinks it's so.

I find his OP, especially the title of it, to be inappropriate.

[tritsofme]

56. His magic bullet ballot thing was definitely a lie, that's not in dispute.

l suppose everyone can choose for themselves if they want to give credibility to a known liar on this subject.

[creeksneakers2]

100. Its very appropriate

For years, as we should have, we've gone after Trump for falsely claiming that the 2020 election was stolen. If we start spreading hoaxes too they'll say "See? Your guys do it too!" When you spread these hoaxes, and I proved its a hoax but your refuse to accept that, you help Trump get away with his election lies and give them a pass to do it again and again.

[creeksneakers2]

69. I had to use a link

When I try a long post DU rejects it My explanation is at the link. I wrote the post at Daily Kos.

[DiamondShark]

75. Spoonamore is a republican.

He made the claim in his first letter to Harris and Walz.

[nbsmom]

78. Wondering why someone who's been on DU since 2003 has no recollection of the crap GOP has been pulling since HAVA

[Much of this I have already posted on another thread.]

Why are you so convinced that what Spoonamore is saying is part of some sort of hoax? Is it really that hard to imagine that Pumpkin Spice Palpatine wasn’t telling on himself when he was saying that “he had all the votes”? Does it strain credulity to imagine that Elon might have figured out a way to leverage the Dominion Systems software (gained through the various election investigations and the CyberNinjas”investigation” of the results in Arizona following the 2020 election?)

The recent discussion with Stephen Spoonamore on Thom Hartmann unleashed a load of Deja vu for me.

In 2002, Spoonamore was one of the people who investigated the malfeasance that flipped the results of the Max Cleland/Saxby Chambliss election (Max Cleland was initially reluctant to accept his help, but later admitted that Spoonamore had been right all along.)

In 2004, he was part of the team that investigated the man in the middle exploit that resulted in Kerry’s loss in Ohio.

In other words, this guy knows when people are doing funky things with people’s votes. If what he’s saying isn’t true and that he’s pulling numbers out of thin air, then why did Musk flag Spoonamore’s account on Twitter/X after his AMA on Reddit?

Spoonamore himself is saying his suspicions were raised because Musk held a “lottery” to grab addresses from would-be voters. Then on Election Day, the bomb threats at primarily Dem precincts in PA. Ultimately, he’s really only saying he’s seeing flags, and that the only way to know for sure is to do hand counts in the two precincts with outlier results. If those track with the tabulated totals, then he’s wrong.

But the thing is, Spoonamore is not the only one. There’s a different group of election and cybersecurity officials (part of the Free Speech for People group) who have also shared a letter with VP Harris. And I have also seen some analysis done of both the Arizona and North Carolina races by different data professionals. All of them are saying, “the math ain’t mathing.”

Finally, and this is what tips it for me, is that Harris herself wrote about how vulnerable our elections are (see Chapter Nine in “The Truths We Hold”).

I don’t pretend to know anyone’s background or impugn anyone’s expertise. It looks like you’ve been a part of the DU community for a long time.

But as others have pointed out on this thread, there is a lot at stake, and it’s important that we do everything we can to fight to save our democracy. After all, as Madam Vice President likes to say, “When we fight, we win.”

[iemanja]

80. The last thing election deniers care about is democracy

Their notion of democracy depends on their side winning. That is not democracy. Trump is indeed a threat to democracy, but so are the denialists.

[TheKentuckian]

90. I'm all for fighting. I'm opposed to flailing.

Who is disputing that the Republicans are villains ever up to skulduggery even on their best days?

That doesn't mean that our wins are legitimate, their wins are cheating and therefore if they win they had to cheat to do it so we have to find out how.

Which in turn means if you are calling "We wuz robbed!", it requires you to say who, what, when, and how with some specific suspicions not "we will let you know when we find it".

Right now folks are on some mirror 2020 shit but with even bigger margins so automatic recounts don't kick in.

In the end, I am super dubious of the idea that the same people pounding the table for a dragnet fishing expedition now would be doing so if we had won.

You either trust in the integrity of the system or you don't and the standards for that trust or to call for extraordinary tests of its integrity have to always be the same.

Personally, if we had won and Chump predictably started his shit again, I'd be going to the firewall standing on the results and would want him neutralized by whatever means and methods were necessary.

So, sorry but if I am going to fight the battle is going to have to be more defined than what vaporware folks are offering at present.

[creeksneakers2]

101. Yes, If Trump lost he would say it was fixed

And we would be outraged. I don't want Trump and the right to have the "Your guys do it too" excuse.

[creeksneakers2]

91. I gave the reasons its a hoax

The bullet box claim is a lie. Can't be true and is debunked by actual NC results. The name collection for fraud can't be true either for reasons I discussed. And Spoonamore's claim that a handful of people in a remote location could have hacked into all those precincts is not possible, since to hack one needs access and those handful of people in a remote place would not have had it.

I recognized Spoonamore right away from the 2004 man in the middle hoax. He claimed that a hacker could intervene and change vote totals when they come from polling place before they arrive at a central location. I did not believe this, because people at polling places and precinct committee people know what their results were. They get published on the net and newspapers. If they were changed somebody would have noticed. Spoonamore had no evidence this happened, just a theory that it could.

I don't think Elon had access to Dominion software. Trump's results were all over, not just on Dominion machines. Machines go through lots of tests.

I don't know about Spoonamore's account on Twitter. If he was flagged it was probably for fraud.

That other letter going around about potential fraud contains no evidence or accusations.

I haven't seen this other letter. Link?

I have been here for a long time. I''m fighting this because I believe spreading hoaxes hurts our cause.

Please look again at my reasons for doubting Spoonamore. They are solid, especially the claim that there were 350,000 bullet ballots in NC. The results prove the claim wrong. Other DUers pointed out this same thing on previous threads.

[iemanja]

79. Sadly, our side doesn't engage in less

Except for our politicians, who have integrity. That's the big difference. It turns out more than a handful of Democrats are engaged in denial, completely without evidence, just like the Magas. I would think they'd be ashamed, but alas that's not the case. At least I know who not to pay attention to ever again.

[stillcool]

81. that's what you call a "hoax"?

I'm tired of it.

[marybourg]

88. Just playing with syllables here-

Spoon a more
Spew ma nure

[osteopath6]

102. Thank you

The election denial should be called out. It's ridiculous and is flawed from the get-go. Reported totals vs actual state processes for sending its electors are conflated, false statements are made, the entire enterprise is a scam by people who made money for 4 years by stoking anger, another 4 insisting justice/prison was right around the corner and now they want us to sit here for another 4 while fantasies are spun? Yet some sit around the campfire with bright eyes and keep asking for more. It would be sociologically interesting if it weren't our party's credibility and future electability on the line.

Enough of the election denial! General distrust of Trump/Gop doesn't somehow equate to evidence. Election deniers take the conclusion they've already reached and cling to any bit of information to support their position while ignoring mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Our candidate said the election was fair. President Biden said the election was fair. The CISA also said there weren't any significant incidents. I believe them. If they want to call them liars, they should provide some evidence to back it up.

The OP of that X is a scam artist however. The core letter was never written by the VP. Great post!