Wasn't sure whether to believe the Anonymous/Rove story,until the reaction telling us to shut up @it

[dreamnightwind]

280. Good post

You're thinking correctly, in my opinion. ORCA, and the posters who obsessively bring it up to refute the supposed CT, is part of the misdirection, it was just GOTV.

I read the Anonymous announcement a little differently than most, apparently. I read that they did something to ORCA (why? seems that they should not have, but we'd need to learn more about their claim), and they did something else to quarantine the tunnels they found which could supposedly be used for vote total manipulation. I did not (and do not) think they claimed that ORCA was about manipulating votes.

Regardless of what they claimed, we don't know who they are anyway, or if their claim has any credibility.

When I start reading denials of exit polls as reliable indicators of fraud, it raises a big red flag for me. I know plenty about exit polls, I studied the "fixed" results in 2004 from the media consortium exit polls, and I studied the raw results that came from election-day screen shots before the fix was in. I know the difference, and why they say they correct them to match the results of the election before releasing them to the public. The media consortium claims the polls were designed to analyze voting trends, not to monitor the veracity of an election. It's odd, though, how the arguments change when it's Russian or Iranian exit polls that appear to indicate fraud.

This whole unverifiable election business is 100% bogus. Personally, I would like to see the Anonymous claim treated seriously, it would bring much needed scrutiny to system vulnerabilities.

Anyway, I found your post right on. It makes a lot of sense that they'd program any vote count changes to stay closer than the recount threshold. And you are right to look at tabulator-level man-in-the-middle attacks, not at something like ORCA which monitored individual voters (but not their votes).