Elections Experts: False claims on voting machines obscure real flaws

[helltoupee]

Okay well it looks like these voting machine can be tampered with whether or not they were tampered with. What should be done to address this issue?



https://www.courthousenews.com/expe...lczY9ob013bnvUBQq0Q3dwow5awGkCRVYOyY_jbd1TC0w

Just as I say to the antivaccers, it's generally pretty simply to sit back and criticize things.

It's something entirely different to actually come up with solutions. If you think the current voting machines could use some improvement, by all means, suggest some practical solutions. I think you will find that attempting to appease everyone is incredibly difficult.

Generally, this has been the Republican playbook for the last 50 years. Let's tear everything down, like Obamacare, but offer absolutely no solutions of our own. It's better to rile people up with criticisms of everything, and then offer no alternatives because the GOP is not interested in anything except finding new ways to disguise and implement trickle down economics. Full stop.

 

[Striderxdj]

lefties 2016: elections can easily be hacked, more security is needed

lefties 2020: elections are perfectly safe

Reasonable people (forever): Provide proof that it actually happened and to both the degree/impact you claim, or shut the f**k up.

The mere existence of potential vulnerabilities does not = "Trump won, the entire election was rigged" and Russian interference in 2016 does not = "Votes were changed, Hillary won"

 

[Heisenboom]

What if someone foreign wanted to bring attention to the method some people will go to in order to not relinquish power via fraud.

How do you do that?

Weaponise a target group of marks.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Make it so only people that are committed to their positions will vote. That has some merit to it. There are a lot of people that show up to vote just to show up to vote. I could doing that encouraging votes by only people committed to their position which in turn correlates to being informed about their position.

Which has zero to do with election security. Thanks for coming clean on the actual motives of the right-wing neo fascists who support the blatant undermining of democracy.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Giving out water at a polling station is not illegal.

Giving out water while telling the the recipients that Candidate Bob Smith provided these refreshments is illegal.

Likewise, handing out refreshments at a polling station is not illegal. But, handing out refreshments while wearing a "Vote for Bob Smith" button is illegal.

More right-wing disinfo, aka, bullshit lies.

If we're talking Georgia, the law makes it a misdemeanor for anyone to give away food or water within 150 feet of the outer edge of a polling place building or within 25 feet of any voter in line. Violations of this law are punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

It doesn't matter what you are saying or what shirt you have on. Offering refreshment within that designated physical space to people waiting in line to vote is a violation of the new law. Period.

The only exception the law allows (but does not mandate) is for polling stations themselves to set up unattended water drinking sites.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...about-georgias-ban-food-water-giveaways-vote/

 

[AWilder]

I feel like if there was one thing the country could get behind is a unified federal election overhaul.

Put it on the blockchain. Have a voter ID card sent to every eligible citizen. Transparent and fair.

But then Republicans will lose elections and it's a lot harder to run the election fraud grift.

 

[Rob Battisti]

But then Republicans will lose elections and it's a lot harder to run the election fraud grift.

So its both sides that would be against it?

 

[Fugazy]

They aren’t handing out TVs. Also, they weren’t allowed to hand out water wearing any political message nor were they allowed to endorse any candidate. It was people giving other people water.

That’s not what the law addresses.

 

[Lead]

Make it so only people that are committed to their positions will vote. That has some merit to it. There are a lot of people that show up to vote just to show up to vote. I could doing that encouraging votes by only people committed to their position which in turn correlates to being informed about their position.

No, you don’t get to decide who is more/ less worthy based on their viewpoints/ knowledge to get to vote. For libertarian leanings, that is a very authoritarian view to take. Once we get into that game, we have far worse problems then even finding common ground on how elections should be administrated/ faith in the results. Also, I’m pretty sure that law was to prevent campaign workers from giving out things in order to sway their vote. It wasn’t meant to be some type of endurance test on voters because if you think about it for five minutes, you’d realize some people experience longer lines than others. It could’ve been given clearer language and I think got a lot of flack for that reason.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

Just reading through this thread, and I've gotta say the voting machines aren't your problem.

Your problem is the fact that some Americans are incredibly pathetic and place no value on the idea of democracy - seriously, standing in line for a couple hours, having to plan ahead and bring a bottle of water, or being able to register for an ID are really too much to expect?
Fuck. If that's as seriously as you take the whole thing, I'm not sure how anyone could have faith in the legitimacy of your elections.

Have paper ballots, insist on IDs, mark people who've voted, employ objective media arbiters, and hire quicker, more accurate counters. Make the process of dealing with objections more transparent and less expensive.
Done.