I know how to write a program that could do that; you have to provide the full vote for Trump, but a tiny fraction for Biden. You then have to track that, and whenever it reaches “1” you have to also increment the “total ballot count”. You can also add a fraction for each full Biden vote, with the same caveat.
If you know the election might be close, it is easier to just give Trump a count fractionally less than 1, and a Biden vote fractionally greater than 1, then if they were about 50/50, the deletions and additions match, and you don’t have to mess very much with the “total count”.
Because there is also the poll book count of how many paper ballots were handed to people, and that number is matched to the machine numbers, and if they do not match, it is a red flag. They can then count the paper ballots that went through the machines, and if they are not the same, they can manually count the paper ballots.
Personally, I think that our elections should include a random counting of ballots that went through one machine in each precinct. That would preclude most cheating, as if you infect every machine, the hand count will catch you, and you have no idea which machine will be randomly selected to be hand-counted, so you don’t know which machine to NOT tamper with. It could happen the day after the election.
But we’ve done hand recounts in Virginia for some close races, and the final results are remarkably similar, to the point where we mostly know that a hand recount will not change anything here. Our system seems to work well, and I wish we hadn’t adopted the more liberal absentee ballot rules because those are harder to verify.
I have been using early/absentee voting more lately, the VA website says I did so 4 times in the past 3 years (I actually did absentee for the primary this year just to see how it worked, but I went to the early voting place for my general election vote).
People don’t realize that programming a computer to do something that you want it to do is really a lot easier than getting a two-year old to do the same thing.
We use the term ‘algorithm’ and that puts an aura of mystery into their minds and unless they have a background that is math based, it just goes right over peoples heads, not realizing that an ‘algorithm’ is simply a set of instructions, or even simpler, a formula like 1+1 = 2.
Only this set of instructions / formula would look something like this:
READ BALLOT
IF TRUMP COUNT = 1 THEN BIDEN COUNT = 1.1
UPDATE COUNT
GOTO NEXT BALLOT
And it’s that easy, folks.
Now, here’s the rub:
If they use the same machines to do a recount of the paper ballots, the machines will run this program AGAIN on the recounted ballots and will show an even HIGHER NUMBER than they started with, which would be very suspicious to everybody.
SO
The machines must be REPROGRAMMED or ERASED and RESET so that the counts will be accurate, and so then if the NEW COUNT is roughly equal to the original count, few hundred difference, more or less, people will not be suspicious and their minds satisfied that the election was legit............................