consider this, blotus was so convinced he was going to lose

[Motley13]

and was gong to blame it on rigged elections, that his small mind can't even let go of his verbage

[Jacob Boehme]

1. Kind of like a "Locked In Syndrome" of his mental process.

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. Even he knew the only way he could win is if Russia hacked voting machines

and I guess they couldnt tell him they were doing it because he has such a big mouth.

But make no mistake, hacked they were.

[longship]

3. Umm! No voting machines were hacked.

That's cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs conspiracy theory garbage.

Here in Michigan everybody votes on a mark sense paper ballot which is registered at one of the thousands of precincts and township halls all over the state, none of which are connected to the Internet.

To hack the Michigan voting machines one would have to employ thousands of conspirators. Needless to say, that did not happen here, let alone anywhere.

Yup! We lost this one. And shit! Even my home state went for Drumpf -- very sad about that. But the machines here were not hacked.

The way the GOP wins is not hacking but by Gerrymandering, opposing voting rights, etc.

They don't need to hack the machines!!!! (if they could even get away with such a thing, which I doubt.) All of the voting and ballot counting is observed every step of the way by well trained bipartisan observers. I have served in such capacity on more than one occasion.

[Eliot Rosewater]

5. Eventually the theft of the election will be known, but it will be too late

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028530270

[longship]

8. Proof is needed.

That's something the "election was hacked" screechers do not have.

Again, the GOP is not so stupid to attempt hacking thousands of voting machines in the thousands of state precincts just to win a single state.

They don't need to hack the machines when they have so effectively Gerrymandered the congressional districts, made mandatory picture voter identification, and all sorts of other voter suppression tactics.

It's easy peasey when your party has the vast majority of the state legislatures and governorships. No hacking necessary.

We need to get our shit together on local elections in order to turn this around.

[Eliot Rosewater]

9. CROSSCHECK is election fraud. But yes, you are right, proof is needed.

No GOP can win any national election ever, there are more of us than them.

[longship]

12. Well, I know my precinct is honest.

I've voted there for years. The same people work the polls. There are always observers. There is no Internet for miles and cell connections are hit and miss. More deer live nearby than humans. Boris and Natasha were not hiding around the corner. Most Michigan precincts are just like mine.

[Bear Creek]

10. The machines can be compromised

The machines can to be hacked. Not through internet. There was a case in Ohio with a company Triad. There was a court judgement, Bush put a gag order in place.

[longship]

11. How many precincts needed to turn a state?

Why not just make voting more difficult in Democratic precincts? How?

Start by moving the precinct location. Require a picture voter ID. Gerrymander the congressional district. Reduce the number of voting machines in the precinct. Etc. Etc.

No voting machine hacking necessary. Too damned difficult anyway; there's too many of them. It's easier to just rig the whole game in ones favor and then count the votes honestly the way it's normally done.

Only an idiot would attempt to hack voting machines in the hundreds of state precincts.

[Bear Creek]

15. Easier than you think

I believe that Howard Dean and a computer expert did it on tv news. Colleges have gotten into them to play school fight songs.

[Mister Ed]

19. Only an idiot would attempt to hack voting machines in the hundreds of state precincts.

Smart hackers would target the central tabulators instead.

That doesn't mean anyone did, and I know of absolutely no solid evidence that anyone did.

[haele]

16. Don't need to hack the voting machines.

Just need to limit who can vote.
There were a lot of reports of long-time registered voters who suddenly came up as ineligible - especially in precincts who got their information from Crosscheck.
Reports of hacks of quite a few State registrar of voter's computer networks indicates to me that there might be voter suppression. It's much easier run an algorithm that flags names in certain precincts where there might be a higher incidence of poverty or where there's a higher concentration of a certain party registration, than flipping votes. Not only that, there's a greater chance that at the moment they show up to vote, voters who find they are not eligible to vote will just leave because either it's already taken too much time to get to the poll, or they become intimidated and give up. Even if they do convince the poll worker and are able to vote by provisional ballot at the site, there's a potential net loss of a significant number of votes cast for a certain candidate when it comes down to the preliminary counts, and frankly, most locations don't count provisional ballots unless one candidate complains after the mail in and official poll ballots are counted.
Clinton probably lost close to 150K votes in critical swing districts just due to voter suppression and Crosscheck fraud forcing provisional voting in those districts.

And voter suppression like that could be brushed off as "just a mistake". They'll do better next time...
After the fact.

Haele

[longship]

17. I think that's what I said. nt

[malaise]

4. Wrong

He was rigging it - classic inversion of reality.
Meanwhile Dems were saying it can't be rigged. It was and I'm sticking to that. History will absolve me.

[HipChick]

6. Actually agree with this..

He set the Dems up..

[malaise]

7. Precisely

When I asked folks if he was talking about rigging to rig - they said it couldn't happen - it did.

[Applan]

14. Agree

Saying he expected to lose and was shocked when he won? It's all part of the con.
Greatest con man whoever lived pulled off the greatest con in world history.

[Takket]

13. yeah and does anyone remember........

that things were so hopeless a few weeks before the election it looked like there was a good chance that Pence was going to abandon ship and drop out?

[wiggs]

18. Maybe because he thought he would lose, he and some RWNJ group like Project Veritas

arranged for fake registrations and voters in known locations so they could be 'found' afterwards and call into question the whole process?? Think OKeefe wouldn't do it, especially for a little money?

I'm sure he would have whined about unfair elections, but the question is how is he practically guaranteeing that some voter fraud will be found?

We shouldn't just be concerned about hacking of voting tabulations and machines...in this context we should also be worried about hacking that falsifies registration and voting RECORDS. Even if he didn't have physical bodies using false identities to register and then vote, how easy would it be to plant a bunch of fake registration names and records and CLAIM FRAUD? Would the Russians find it easy? Would 400 lb RWNJs find it easy? James Okeefe?

Of course...if you are POTUS in 2017 you don't have to really and actually prove there's fraud you can just claim there is.

Now I'm worried that he will find fraud...not real fraud but manufactured.