This video explains why electronic voting is a bad idea. To summarize the video, basically electronic voting opens up a lot of potential avenues to election fraud that are not obvious, and massive election fraud is easier to carry out with electronic voting than it is with conventional physical voting. In my personal opinion, the most optimal voting system would probably involve a combination of both electronic voting and physical voting, where there is actual physical evidence. Ideally, I think the physical votes should be the ones that are counted, but the electronic records could be used as supplementary evidence to help verify that physical votes were not tampered with in smaller scale situations.
I pretty much agree. I think the scanned paper ballots are about the ideal. They can be either read by a scanner or by hand.
How Hard is it to Hack a Voting Machine? He Bought a Voting Machine Online … Then Hacked It, Father Frank Pavone, Nov 23, 2020
The voting machines are not interconnected so no online access for tampering. The only means of communicating is via a USB port that requires admin password to connect. The machines print out a copy of the voter's choices, it only takes one voter to catch if the vote on his/her paper is different than they chose. That slip is then saved for any canvasing or recount. The machines keep a running tally that eventually gets uploaded to a flash drive. Any canvas of the machine will show if the paper printouts do not match the machine. So unless you can figure out a way for someone to hack into a machine without outside access and then get it to print ballots with the person's correct votes and then magically change their votes in the machine AND on the printout you can't commit fraud via the machine.
Machine servers were witnessed to be connected to the internet. One screen warned the pc was being hacked. The chain of possession was not followed for usb drives. The software has the ability to weigh votes and why they are saved as doubles instead of integers. Counters can change votes on screen. All of the election ‘glitches’ happened in states with these machines. Texas refused to purchase these machines and had no problems.
Well that's amazing since they have no network capabilities. No ports and no wifi. Osmosis? Texas? Trump won Texas so no one is working on conspiracy theories there.
Its as if the conspiracy theorists dont know of the workings of the election infrastructure and the emphasis on security it has focused on. Dunning Kruger reigns supreme with these people. Its not like the information is not READLY available.
I don't see why there can't be a simplified voting machine in each city hall and public library, dedicated to a single government server that records the vote. A single machine, much like an ATM, where you slide in your drivers license, the machine reads it, shows you your information, you choose your votes, and thats it. The machine is always there, in a locked and secured room. Honestly. I don't see why we cant vote online. There's a much better chance of secure votes online, than there is by paper!
Its far more easily said than done. And its not the server in a locked room, its the communications infrastructure that would need to be secured and unhackable. How do you create a fool proof audit trail if its only digital? Almost all electronic voting machines now produce a paper ballot audit trail and the few remaining will be replaced within the year as part of the massive investment in the election infrastructure and security that prompted the declaration that it was the most secure election in history. Then there is the issue of a verifiable digital ID? On the internet, nobody knows you are a dog. The issue of election infrastructure, and the security and integrity of the process and results had been a government/industry cooperative focus for quite some time. Trump's bullshit Big Lie did untold damage to this bedrock of bi-partisan american democracy, convincing his MAGA minions they wuz robbed. The dust settled and lo and behold, the election wasn't rigged, there was no massive voter fraud or wild arsed deep state conspiracy to get Donnie Peachs - it was all just his narcissistic sociopathic butt hurt refusal to acept a good ol' fashion whuppin'.
I'd say there's a lot more security in electronic voting without paper, than there is mail in votes. And there was plenty of voter fraud. There were plenty of people arrested and jailed for it. There is video evidence, and there are plenty of people that came forward when they found out their dead relatives "voted". This isn't the first time this happened. There was another big stink just like this back in the late 80's or early 90's. The Democrats were even stated back then as saying that paper ballots are not reliable. The Dems know paper ballots are easily forged and faked, thats why they interjected this at the last minute. Nobody, and I mean nobody gets 70 million votes overnight! I don't care who they are. Democracy in the USA has been dead since WW2 has been over (as far as gov't goes anyway). People just haven't realized it until recent years. As far as verifiable digital ID, thats why I stated you have to insert your drivers licence. It automatically loads all of your information onto your vote (name, birthdate, address, DL number, and your finger/thumbprint). The mainframe program would kick out and red flag all multiple votes and place a hold on votes with voters birthdays over 90 years old for secondary verification (such as a certified official present at the voting machine). The banking industry and the government already have dedicated electronic devices that have been in use for decades now. It wouldn't be such a stretch to have a dedicated voting machine. The machine really wouldn't have to be wired outside itself anyway, it could be a self contained unit with a removable computer hub, that is constantly monitored, and removed by the military to take to the local federal building. There are all sorts of variations for this. But basically, there are better and safer methods of voting. I think it's ignorant to have electronic machines print out a piece of paper to feed into another electronic machine. That's a waste of resources and just plain ignorant.
Electronic only voting is safer than a physical ballot? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculously untrue. Each is susceptible to fraud but one is all but invisible and without a clean audit trail and the other requires the perps to leave ton of physical evidence behind. You really should familiarize yourself with your voting system and its processes. You claim all kinds of massive fraud without knowing that many of these claims are outrageously ignorant. Yes there are ALWAYS be instances of voter fraud. Dead people voting in georgia? Turns out the 5,000 accusation was in fact 2 people and those were trump votes. As for plenty of people arrested for voting fraud, out of the 155 Million voters how many is plenty? 20 people, if that? And this argument that nobody could get 70 million votes overnight, I suppose its a challenge for some to figure out that given many states do not count mail in ballots until AFTER all the in person votes have been tabulated and given the time it takes to tabulate each of those groups of votes EVERYONE anticipated (until Donnie Peachs went into his tantrum when the massive mail in vote turned his world upside down) that the early returns were subject to change. the implications of this appear to be completely lost on trumpians but is foundational to the Big Lie. As for having a physical audit trail being a waste of resources and ignorant, I suggest you google GAAP, generally accepted accounting principles, and see what they say about audit trails. Maybe ask your accountant about the importance of audit trails (often called paper trails to the uninitiated). Fraud prevention is inherent in all certifiable transaction processing applications, and voting is one helluva transaction processing challenge.
