Will the 2016 Primaries Be Electronically Rigged?

[marmar]

Will the 2016 Primaries Be Electronically Rigged?

Thursday, 28 January 2016 12:18
By Victoria Collier and Ben Ptashnik, Truthout | News Analysis

"You've heard the old adage 'follow the money.' I follow the vote, and wherever the vote becomes an electron and touches a computer, that's an opportunity for a malicious actor potentially to ... make bad things happen." — Steve Stigall, CIA cyber-security expert, in remarks to the US Election Assistance Commission

Primary election rigging in the coming weeks and months is all but assured if American voters and candidates don't take steps to prevent it now. Evidence that US voting systems are wide open to fraud and manipulation should be taken seriously in light of the unprecedented high-stakes elections we're facing.

Not in recent history have American voters been presented with such radically polarized candidates, forcing a crucial choice for the direction of our future, and possibly upending long-established centers of power.

It's no secret that US primaries have been tightly controlled by the two ruling parties, usually to the benefit of their favored candidates. If this internal manipulation (some might call it rigging) is not publicly condoned, neither is it loudly condemned.

This year, however, the primary season is shaping up to be a battle royal between the political establishment and outsider insurgencies who are challenging the party elites and defying their usual filters, money and manipulations. And it seems all bets are off.

As a brazen Donald Trump kicks down the door of the GOP, tens of millions in super PAC dark cash has (so far) failed to buy the candidacy for a lackluster Jeb Bush. Accusations abound that Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz has stacked the deck for Hillary Clinton. Yet nothing - not even corporate media's censorship or outright hostility toward Bernie Sanders - has blunted his skyrocketing grassroots campaign. ...................(more)

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34607-will-the-2016-primaries-be-electronically-rigged

[tazkcmo]

1. Bet on it.

Makes turn out even more critical.

[yuiyoshida]

71. absolutely!

Which is why something should be done to prevent it, spend lots of money to make sure this is a fair election, we don't need A PRESIDENT TRUMP in the white house!

[tazkcmo]

72. Transparency.

None of this proprietary bull crap. Those are our machines and our elections and we should have total control and say.

[Katashi_itto]

2. Oh hell yes.

[peacebird]

3. We have new machines, we mark a paper ballot, take it over to be scanned, view the result

on a screen, approve it by pushing "vote" button. The paper copy is retained inside the locked belly of the scanner.

That 'feels' safer than the old touch screen machines, is it?

[questionseverything]

48. depends on wether they count the ballots or not

relying on the "print out" is a trust me system...not democratic

[SamKnause]

4. We don't have honest elections in this country.

Why would this election be any different ???

None of the problems have been addressed or repaired by

the Democratic politicians, so I guess they are fine with it.

[leftynyc]

5. I see people all ready

to make excuses if their favored candidate doesn't win. I guess that was predictable.

[marmar]

6. Whatever. Perhaps you should start making up your own excuses.

[leftynyc]

20. Don't need one

I've already said I'd vote for whoever had the D behind their name. I don't need conspiracy theories to make me feel better.

[restorefreedom]

7. what if everyone takes a photo of their vote?

if they get a paper ballot to put in the machine, before they leave the privacy of the booth, everyone takes a photo on their cell phone. i realize not everyone has a cell phone, but a lot of people do, and most millenials do.

[Smarmie Doofus]

8. It really shouldn't be that hard.

We just want to *vote*.

[restorefreedom]

9. it shouldn't. but tptb will not go down easy. they are not

going to just hand bernie the keys.

[Melurkyoulongtime]

39. I posted this a while back

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027130510 but it didn't get much mileage. However, the replies were educational and informative. I still think it's be one of the simplest and best ways we could stop this shiite in its tracks

[restorefreedom]

41. its worth a try, if nothing else, to stop the temptation to cheat.

thanks for the link to the earlier conversation.

[SusanCalvin]

52. That would work only if

Each ballot could be tied to a specific person - bar code or something. Given our history of secret ballots, doubt that's going to happen.

[restorefreedom]

53. isn't each ballot numbered?

we don't have to identify ourselves, but we can account for esch ballot and how many there are for each candidate..i thought they had some number on them in tiny print

[SusanCalvin]

55. Almost certainly, I imagine, now that you mention it.

Still, I think it would be interesting proving with certainty whose was whose and organising recounts.

I'm for paper ballots, hand counted at the precinct level with a webcam watching, results posted on the door before the ballot box leaves, also watched by webcam.

[restorefreedom]

56. that is a great idea! electronic is inviting trouble. nt

[SusanCalvin]

59. .

[lunamagica]

10. Don't you know, if sanders wins, is legit, if Hillary wins

is rigged...

[Smarmie Doofus]

11. Yeah. And....well?

nt

[lunamagica]

12. And? this is unbelievable. You are already making excuses for your guy losing

You are already saying that it's rigged in Hillary's favor...what will you say if he wins?

[Smarmie Doofus]

15. What if it IS rigged? n/t

[lunamagica]

16. What will you say if he wins?

[Smarmie Doofus]

22. That it probably wasn't rigged.

But... again: what if Clinton wins, and it IS rigged?

[lunamagica]

27. Why would you believe that if Sanders wins "it problably wasn't rigged", but if Hillary wins

it is rigged?

[elias49]

34. Because Clinton seems part of an aristocracy that I thought we left in England

centuries ago?

[Smarmie Doofus]

36. General horse sense compiled from being a reasonably astute observer...

of the political scene since the 1960s.

Plus the likelihood of Clinton and Co. having access to the organizational levers that would likely be necessary ( i.e. at the state party level, nat'l party level, etc.) to accomplish said rigging.

And the likelihood of Sanders NOT having such access.

[lunamagica]

37. She's ahead in the polls. her winning would only be consistent with it

it looks like you know he is going to lose, and are making excuses for it

[Smarmie Doofus]

42. I can't help how it "looks".

It looks however it looks.

I keep answering your questions but you haven't answered mine:

What if Clinton "wins"..... but the computers were hacked or the process was in some other way "rigged" to produce that outcome?

Let's say.... for example.... she didn't know about it herself. That it was rigged/hacked by some individual or group of individuals who favored her nomination in NH (where she's BEHIND in the polls, btw). Say, hypothetically, that he/she/they are NH state gov't employees whose jobs depend on DEM party biggies further up the food chain. And their loyalty is to the big shots... already publicly committed to Clinton, for whatever reason: personal or political or professional. Local law enforcement ( i.e. DA's, etc.) is in the hands of state DEM party. Obama Justice Dept is not interested. ( Why WOULD it be?)

(Remember : this all hypothetical.)

Are you ok with that?

If so.... how do you justify it?

If you aren't, why not?

And what course of action would you follow? How would you advise others?

[lunamagica]

45. Of course I'm NOT OK with that!

and I believe that Hillary will win IA, and Sanders will win NH, legitimately.

You guys are really grasping at straws...

[Cal33]

43. How about this?: " Sanders won in spite of being rigged." In order to do this, Sanders

must win by a very large margin.

[Hortensis]

21. I'm guessing selective memory is already replacing

every "conservative," "GOP," and Republican" reference in that article with "Hillary" in berned minds, and they'll be complaining from now to the grave that no one stopped her.

[lunamagica]

31. Looks like it. So pathetic

[Sunlei]

13. I do think someone should take a hard look at early votes and mailin votes and where they come from.

about half? of Americans don't even register to vote and plenty never vote. Many times just a couple thousand votes makes the difference in states, sometimes a hundred in small counties.

[Wounded Bear]

14. Microsoft is working on it....

It would, at first blush, seem that the caucus system would be pretty bullet proof, since it involves real people, face to face and all that.

But cue Microsoft, who is marketing new apps for their hand helds that will more quickly 'transfer the data through the cloud' to the collection points. Anybody smell a rat here?

[elias49]

38. Inexcusable IMO

Remember back in the 80s when Microsoft was being BAD, and the US brought anti-trust charges against MS?
My recolletion is that, eventually, MS pad a fine (Banks anyone?) and pretty much went on their way.
They STILL bundle their operating system and browser together.
I wouldn't trust MS vote counting apps. MS has become a part of the monster.

[brooklynite]

17. Conspiracy theories belong in CREATIVE SPECULATION

Lazy condpiracy theories don't belong here at all. Everyone who jumped in with a "yes" just claimed tge DNC engages in criminal activity, and also ignored the question of why the Republicans, who allegedly set up the vote righing system, turned it over to the Democrats.

[Atman]

30. Bullshit.

Who are you defending? I used to be Assistant Registrar of Voters. Our training involved the inner workings of the old lever voting machines. They were fail-safe. They were perfect, really. Three redundant counters, plus a recorded paper tally (like an old player piano sheet music). Now we have magical computers which have copyrighted code and no access to normal folks like me, people who used to be able to look inside the voting machines and verify the vote counts. Now they're run by special interests and for-profit companies with agendas.

Creative speculation? Bullshit! It's just common sense. Too much money to be made. Why are billionaires running for a $450,000 a year job?

[brooklynite]

40. ...and I used to be a Ward Committeeman in Philly

...where I learned how eady it was to ring up extra votes on a lever machine, assuming the 1950s technology didn't just jam up.

That said, there is no elected official, candidate, party leader or campaign manager who says they lost an election because of electronic rigging.

And, I note, you completely ignored my challeng about laying this at the DEMOCRATIC Establishments feer.

[questionseverything]

50. judge rawl said he lost because of electronic rigging

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7899

he took it to the sc dem board who did nothing

/////////////

Speaking to the oft-cited fallacy being forwarded in the media that both candidates were equally unknown entities, who each did little or no campaigning, Ludwig re-iterated what Rawl has been saying in his recent media appearances. "There is an inherent presumption that these were equivalent campaigns. We campaigned, the other guy just simply didn't."

Rawl has said he'd raised hundreds of thousands of dollars during the campaign, appeared at some 80 campaign events all across the state since March 1st, and had hundreds of campaign volunteers. By way of contrast, Greene didn't have a campaign website, had no volunteers, no campaign literature, and doesn't even own a computer or a cell phone.

I pointed Ludwig to a number of academic findings in regard to the state's Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, usually touch-screen) voting systems which he hadn't yet known of, and discussed my concerns about the sensitive memory cards used in those systems for both programming the ballot and recording votes.

As manipulation of the memory cards are one of the direct ways to potentially manipulate the machines, I've been very troubled by reports received by the campaign that some pollworkers were said to have been repeatedly accessing and swapping out memory cards throughout Election Day. Ludwig says that the cards have yet to be examined or quarantined. I strongly advised, as I have since first reporting this story, that someone get a court order for that immediately.

[CommonSenseDemocrat]

18. What is this conspiracy theory nonsense?

No, Microsoft is not rigging the election. Barack Obama was really born in Hawaii. 9/11 was not an inside job.

[Atman]

32. Thank you for clearing that all up.

[karadax]

19. I thought voter fraud was a right wing conspiracy.

Now all of a sudden we're worried about it ? From within ?

[Fumesucker]

25. Voter fraud and voting fraud are two quite different things

Republicans rant and rave about voter fraud but are totally silent on voting fraud.

Which tells me they are trying to distract attention from one to the other.

[Atman]

33. ^^This.

Voter fraud is virtually non-existent. It is a very rare individual who is willing to commit a felony that has almost no chance of swaying an election result. Like, zero. You'd need to contract thousands of people willing to commit such a felony in order to sway an election. It's just math. But it doesn't take much to do the hanky-panky stuff behind the scenes, at the level of the computer program, the vote counting software. That is child's play.

[valerief]

29. The question was about election fraud, not voter fraud. But you knew that, and

that's why you've been chosen to join my Forever Ignored club.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

23. Rigging = Super Delegates

[ancianita]

24. Every one of the 3,143 US counties could hire techs to monitor machines from voter input to

county server point to state collection point. How many each county would need is a question only techies, precinct and county people could answer.

My belief is that an honest outcome is worth the costs, on so many levels, to this country.

[questionseverything]

51. or we could use paper ballots and have 5th graders count them

no citizen should have to trust some expert for the true results...there is no reason for everything to not be transparent

[ancianita]

58. I'm totally down with paper ballots. But the printing and shipping costs would be

likely greater than hiring techie monitoring. Also, there have to be ballot guards from each precinct to each state counting point to make sure there's no dumping or tampering. You know, whole ballot boxes replaced with Republican-filled ballot boxes, etc.

Also, I'm all for waiting until each and every ballot -- mail-ins, foreign votes, etc. -- are counted and certified. Even if it takes days.

[questionseverything]

60. paper ballots counted at the precinct in full view is the answer

[ancianita]

62. Not completely. Watching the entire shipping route to the point of state certification

is equally, if not more, important. Remember, it's not just who counts the votes, it's who certifies the votes. In a close majority of cases, that's a Republican appointed position.

[questionseverything]

63. the ballots themselves do not need to be shipped

once they are publicly counted and that number is publicly announced then yes the reporting of votes must be double checked

http://bradblog.com/?p=7875

2010 monroe ark......thousands of votes disappear

you are correct the electronic spreadsheet is just another blackbox

[ancianita]

64. Works for me.

[questionseverything]

65. thank you for being interested

[ancianita]

66. Hell, I've been bitching on the nets about vote rigging and $ in politics since 2008.

The costs and rigging were even obvious even then.

This is a big country. It's got hella work to do to make even one change. But this is one of the two most important that can change everything. And I mean everything.

[questionseverything]

67. have you seen the rta election rigging case?

http://fatallyflawedelections.blogspot.com/

http://www.sweetremedy.tv/fatallyflawed/media/RTA_Fraud_Flyer_3_7_12.pdf

it is the best documented election theft i know of....we have been suing them for years trying to keep the next election from being rigged

[ancianita]

68. Yes! I don't know what legal teams are on this. More evidence should get courts moving.

The fact that the hard drives in each vote stall are property of the companies running the machines is probable cause enough for courts to rule in favor of establishing public ownership of all those hard drives and voting results. Right now, the drives and results are the property of the machine corporations. This should have been taken to court the first year of these machines' use.

America shouldn't have to depend on tech and legal teams to keep voting and vote counts honest.

[librechik]

26. Yes

we must overwhelm the swing states with voter turnout. Otherwise we get Trump or Cruz.

[valerief]

28. Bradblog.com has been tracking electronically rigged elections for years.

This election shouldn't be any different from the others.

[azmom]

35. Bet on it.

[moondust]

44. Lots of red states now.

After 2010 and 2014,

The GOP now controls 68 out of 98 partisan state legislative chambers -- the highest number in the history of the party. Republicans currently hold the governorship and both houses of the legislature in 23 states (24 if Sean Parnell wins re-election in Alaska), while Democrats have that level of control in only seven.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/11/11/the_other_gop_wave_state_legislatures__124626.html

I wonder what they've been up to?

Cheaters gonna cheat. Why stop at gerrymandering and voter suppression?

[Matariki]

46. Jeb Bush has a surprise GOP victory?

[JEB]

47. Pencil on paper ballots with public hand counting. eom

[Smarmie Doofus]

49. Good god, YES. ^^^^^^^

It's not friggin' brain surgery.

[Separation]

54. Hell, colored marbles in a jar at this point would be better

[pnwmom]

57. The caucuses will be a big, confusing mess, because they always are.

In Nevada, for instance, Obama won the most delegates even though Hillary won the most individual voters.

It's an old, creaky system but it's what some state parties, like the Democrats in my unfortunate state, continue to prefer.

[mwrguy]

61. One campaign already got spanked for some shady hacking

I expect them to try again.

[Thor_MN]

69. I don't know about other states, but in MN caucuses there are no electronics involved.

My precinct more often than not votes on Post-It notes. (3M is, after Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing)

If other caucus states are similar, the question is stupid.

[ancianita]

70. Got a new rigging case here.

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/kansas-mathematician-states-voting-machines-are-rigging-elections-need-audit/

[Pathwalker]

73. Bookmarked. One of the most disgusting threads

this election season.

[L. Coyote]

74. Don't Vote, Don't Vote, Don't Vote, .... This is voter suppression psychology at work.

What a pile of overused hyperbole!