Posted on 12/01/2016 4:03:17 PM PST by Ray76
I nominate that for post of the day.
“The claim comes from the fact that California banned touch screen voting machines that didn’t also print the ballots. Wisconsin’s touch screen voting machines do print a permanent record of the voters’ ballots, so it is not similar to California’s case at all. “
So Wisconsin’s machines are illegal because California passed a law against using some other kind of machine in California?
That’s a “I’m not a doctor, but I play a lawyer on TV” kind of reasoning.
Good grief, she’s annoying. My sympathies to her husband.
Will somebody please arrest this Communist tool, and Tase her a couple of times in the process?
Gee, I’m sure that the Democrat Secretary of State over there absolutely adores hearing about this from her, eh?
If she were challenging a Clinton win it'd be another case of arkincide.
Why didn’t the ho worry about this BEFORE the election?
She said Hillary was a liar.
Are they Soros brand machines? Could get interesting.
I wonder if she was stupid enough to put this claim in her legal filing for a recount. They could very well be considered perjury....
LOL too easy
When Wisconsin has illegal voting machines, only outlaws will have voting machines..
You can have my illegal outlaw voting machine...when you’ve pried it from my cold dead foundations!
Capitalizing on voter discontent and perhaps looking to broaden her political base, Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein raised millions of dollars over the Thanksgiving holiday to pay for presidential election recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
On Nov. 26, 2016, a Saturday evening, Stein explained the effort on her weekly broadcast on Facebook — and made a provocative claim about Wisconsin and the election here.
“Hello, good evening, Facebook friends, revolutionaries, citizens of the planet and of America,” the Massachusetts activist and physician began on the video. Later, she declared:
“Wisconsin uses voting machines that have been outlawed. They are illegal to use them because they are so prone to tampering and hacking. They are an invitation, really, for malfeasance. Those are used in the state of Wisconsin.”
It seems like something more serious than a recount would be under way if outlawed voting machines had been used to help Republican Donald Trump win, if not in a landslide, the White House.
Stein’s campaign told us the candidate was actually referring to California banning electronic, touch-screen voting machines, but acknowledged that the machines are not banned in Wisconsin.
Hmmm.
Legal in Wisconsin
In 2004, California’s secretary of state banned the use of a particular brand of electronic voting machines because of security and reliability concerns and decertified others until steps could be taken to upgrade their security. Part of the concern was the touch-screen machines didn’t provide a paper trail at the time of voting.
In Wisconsin, the vast majority of voting machines are optical readers. Voters fill out a paper ballot and feed it into the machine, which then electronically records the vote.
A small percentage of votes in Wisconsin are cast on touch-screen machines — but those in use here do generate a paper record for each ballot cast.
All voting equipment in Wisconsin has been approved by the Wisconsin Election Commission (or one of its predecessors), Kevin Kennedy, Wisconsin’s former elections director, told us.
And in order to be approved, the equipment had to first pass national testing standards. Before 2006, the equipment was tested under the auspices of the National Association of Election Directors (NASED). Since 2006, testing has been done under the auspices of the U.S Elections Assistance Commission, a federal agency.
There are no federal requirements that states must use certain machines, said Lawrence Norden, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.
In other words, each state decides what’s legal.
Our rating
Stein said: “Wisconsin uses voting machines that are outlawed, they are illegal.”
California banned electronic, touch-screen machines. But the touch-screen machines that are used by a distinct minority of voters in Wisconsin are approved by the Wisconsin Election Commission. They’re legal.
For a statement that is false and ridiculous, we rate Stein’s claim Pants on Fire.
Sue her, Wisconsin. That will shut her up.
I was wondering if it would come to that... they "forgot" to add that it was banned "in California".
But even that falls flat. As the article points out: the handful of electronic voting machines used in Wisconsin would also be legal in California, because they generate a paper ballot.
nope.
every state picks its own voting machines. every machine type used by wi, is a valid machine.
getting things right never matters to liberals.
According to this website, WI uses all paper ballots. Scanning machines are used to read the paper ballots, but voters don’t actually interact with the machines.
https://ballotpedia.org/Voting_methods_and_equipment_by_state
Jill simply proves the adage that liberalism is a mental disorder. In her case, she also is proving to be just one more corrupt tool of the Clinton cartel.
At least the other minor party campaigner, Gary Johnson, so far has had the brains to not stir the pot.
So you are saying the type of machines Wisconsin uses are legal in Wisconsin, but illegal in California, which only means they are illegal in California. Sounds like it’s coming down to eliminating state rights and the electoral college in favor of a ruling class one country rules all rather then states have right and it is each states votes that count not the tally of all the states votes that count. Imagine all one size fits all rules for every state in the union, wouldn’t work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.