jenstark101
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2019
Hand counted paper ballots, (not mailed in or scanned) in each locality, with full public view, is usually considered the gold standard of fair elections. It was done in the Netherlands and a bunch of other countries after the Russia propaganda scare. For example, when the Netherlands did it, their traditional social democratic party lost a ton of votes and the Greens gained a ton of votes, say of that what you will.You know, this is one of the things that cracks me up. First, it was mail-in ballots that were insecure, and OMG, we can't let people vote by mail, that would make easier to commit voter fraud!!!
But now, as more and more fraud claims are being dismissed in courts, we have people yelling about the insecurity of voting machines, and how we can't count on them, they're not trustworthy, etc. Or that paper ballots are being changed by poll workers.
So voting by mail shouldn't be permitted -- it's not secure enough. We need to have people voting in person. Except when people do, their votes are also being screwed, so we can't trust them either. How the fuck are we supposed to vote then?
Make up your goddamned minds.
With both mail in ballots and in-person electronics voting, both are tabulated outside of each locality creating chain-of-command security holes.
In-person electronic voting is much worse than mail-in ballots though, as any election security expert will tell you. Because there's no way to good way to audit 1s and 0s being, but anything in the physical world in theory will give at least some clues of fraud.
Regardless, the Republicans aren't going to do actual electoral reform by getting rid of in-person electronic voting, as if there was any meaningfully widespread election fraud actually going on, they'd probably benefit from it the most given Diebold and ES&S's historic ties to Republican CEOs and lawmakers. (Chuck Hagel etc)
Bush was the one who signed off on the bill creating mass electronic voting anyway.
Last edited: