I scoff at the "weighting" scheme. The votes are whole numbers (I know those can be weighted, bear with me), and the sender and receiver both see each other's use of the whole number, ergo, risk of UNCAUGHT transmission error is or can be low.
The receiver doesn't know the number transmitted is accurate or not, it's just a number. The sender/precinct doesn't control addition by the receiver, but checking addition is a simple process, and one the campaigns undertake.
If the person doing the vote tally is applying weights to the precinct counts, the totals will be off and all hell would break loose.
> “... and the sender and receiver both see each other’s use of the whole number, ergo, risk of UNCAUGHT transmission error is or can be low.”
At the local and lower levels, you are correct. It’s the mixing in the sums that is hard to unravel.
For Candidate A:
County X has 43 votes
County Y has 26 votes
County Z has 31 votes
100 = 43+26+31 raw total
Counties X,Y,Z have 103 votes for Candidate B. Candidate B wins the raw vote 103 to 100.
Altered total for Candidate A
103 = 43+26+34 or
103 = 46+26+31 or
103 = 43+26+34 or other combinations.
103 vote total for Candidate B is downweighted by 3 to 100.
Candidate A wins the altered SUM total.
Each county confirms their vote count as true but they can’t verify the SUM totals of all counties because they don’t see the raw data of other counties.
This happened and was revealed in an investigation of GEMS = Global Election Management System which software configuration is controlled by Soros Quantum Group in Cayman.
But the investigators were funded by some democrat citizens to study the 2000 Bush-Gore standoff. The investigation went silent ostensibly because the weighting scheme was a tool by democrats to steal elections.
I think that what generally is trying to describe is similar to a voting scheme that was programmed into the Gems system, called fractional voting. It’s not exactly weighted average, and it was uncovered in investigation of election fraud in Tennessee.
In concept, the machines had a feature that allowed programming of the % of the vote that would be assigned to the categories. This was all in the machine, but not seen by the whole numbers that the poll workers would see.
Bev Harris wrote a book about it. She’s a Dem but she has said that she suspects that Hillary stole at least 5 or 6 states in this election. However, without access to those areas can’t tell for sure.
The chatter that I heard was that in the Northern Blue States that flipped Red, the Pubbies had a campaign GOTV that told the voters to use paper ballots, and not the machines to avoid fraud. I have no idea if this is true.
Here’s a link to some detailed information on how the scam works:
http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-1/
SUMMARY OF THE INFORMATION
This report summarizes the results of our review of the GEMS election management system, which counts approximately 25 percent of all votes in the United States.
The results of this study demonstrate that a fractional vote feature is embedded in each GEMS application which can be used to invisibly, yet radically, alter election outcomes by pre-setting desired vote percentages to redistribute votes.
This tampering is not visible to election observers, even if they are standing in the room and watching the computer. Use of the decimalized vote feature is unlikely to be detected by auditing or canvass procedures, and can be applied across large jurisdictions in less than 60 seconds.