You mean, like this trash?
Posted on 08/17/2016 10:34:31 AM PDT by Blue Turtle
Now, we’re talking. Now, it’s a party.
Is it just me, or has Trump turned up the intensity level. That speech he gave in Wisconsin was amazing.
The only real way to stop election fraud is to have paper punch ballots that are read by multiple machines, one run by the county/state, one run by the Feds, and one each for the political parties. One ballot but multiple recordings that can be cross-tallied. When the ballots are run through each machine there should be a space reserved where the machine in question can stamp it with an encrypted signature in the form of a bar code to prove it was run in all machines.
Also the paper punch ballots actually be two pieces of paper, one over the other, that can be separated, that must be preserved in two separate and secure facilities managed by the state and the Feds for 7 years via private companies that are severely fined for losing ballots.
Additionally the digital tally of all machines have to agree within an acceptable margin of error and a fixed percentage of random electronic votes in the tally must be verified against both halves of the paper ballots in each secure location.
Hopefully there will be some sort of a tech team involved - how that would work, I can only pray team Trump know.
More importantly, hopefully he knows exactly which areas to target.
You mean, like this trash?
Is that actually true?
Not disputing what you say, I have heard that since 2012 - but if so, how on earth can that have been allowed to happen?
As pointed out, its a statistical impossibility.
“Trump should be calling for the non-use / removal of ALL electronic voting and vote counting machines immediately.”
I agree. It’s ridiculous that there are electronic voting machines without any paper trail some other analog format (i.e. meters, etc)
What’s hilarious (in a sick, sad way) is that it isn’t hard to make a safe, secure machine that frigging tallies votes. Why it can’t output a safe, secure paper ballot is beyond me. The machines could be used for an initial vote count ... but the formal vote cast is a printed paper ballot that the voter reviews before submitting in a box. The formal vote count is then tallied by people and reported.
Of course, the machine isn’t needed in that case ... voting machines are simply another example of government incompetence and corruption.
If precinct size is an issue, just make more precincts. Cap the size at something like 10,000 voters. A board of 3 to 5 people can count 10,000 ballots w/o much of an issue. Funding can be taken from the various waste at the Federal level.
Also poster all areas with the amount of jail time for voter fraud. Add, that there will be volunteers watching for voter fraud and documenting it.
...paper punch...really??? you don’t remember the “Chad” count with Bush/Gore????
You help where you can help.
By counting voters and filming democrat operatives at multiple polling places.
There were precincts in Philly and Pitt that were at 105-115% of registered dem voters. It happens all the time.
We don’t, but every little bit of help can work.
/Those were in booklets which were ridiculous. Years ago I voted on a card like an old IBM key punch card. Each card was about 3 by 10 inches. You put them one at a time into a slot after which you pulled a lever down to punch a hole next to each of your choices. You could not pull the lever if the card was not seated properly. You could also see clearly that your hole was punched through. It was a very inexpensive way to vote and had a card that could be rechecked.
I guess election judges could vote many cards without people actually being in the precinct to vote. I think that this actually happens in 100% democratic precincts where all the election officials are Democrats, even the ones who sign in the Republican columns since no Republicans will go there. They could just reuse the electronic cards over and over. If Trump can get poll watchers, or better yet, election officials to go into those precincts, much voter fraud might be eliminated.
Good observation skills combined with technical knowledge would help spot it.
I think in most places the voter rolls are public information, although in some districts it’s easier to get ahold of than others.
The old-fashioned methods of vote fraud probably work best. No computer technology is required.
You might also notice that "absentee ballots" and "early ballots" provide plenty of opportunities to make the votes come out right. There is no way to know who really cast them - the signature verification procedures are a farce.
I am convinced that this is how we get 105% turnouts for entire counties in this State. They always vote for Democrats by some odd coincidence.
The Clinton/Obama “machine” literally owns the electronic voting machines, because whoever is in office has that control..... the collusion involves not only the MSM but all of the “reliable” pollsters.
That said....the only counter to this is people voting in droves sufficient to counter that.
It took some time for people to count the votes, but I don't remember all this crap of a ‘fixed and fraudulent’ voting that we have now since the Bushes and Clintons brought it to the game, and I'm not sure it didn't happen with that idiot from Texas LBJ...sometimes I wonder what happened to Texas with the Presidents they send from there, we just got one of the out of this campaign, thank goodness!!!
Yes I do and it was done in the open and ultimately the fraud was prevented. I would not mind seeing that happen over and over again. With paper at least there is a chance for and auditable recount.
I work in IT and have a Master’s in Management Information Systems and I want a physical record to keep the ghost bits and bytes honest and audit-able. You can perpetrate fraud six ways to Sunday in software and electronics.
Do you think that there are not groups around the world and in the US who are working on a STUXNET type virus for voting? Do you want Russian/Iranian/German/British/Chinese hackers to be able to remotely manipulate critical elections?
What about the Soros Secretary of State Project (SoSP) established in 2006 as an independent “527” to elect subversives into the States’ Secratary of State offices to swing close elections? Do you think they would not attempt electronic voting fraud?
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=7487
And don’t get me started on the dirty Dutch!
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.