Slashdot Mirror
Voting Machines Can Be Easily Compromised, Symantec Demonstrates (cbsnews.com)
An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes a report from CBS News:
For the hackers at Symantec Security Response, Election Day results could be manipulated by an affordable device you can find online. "I can insert it, and then it resets the card, and now I'm able to vote again," said Brian Varner, a principle researcher at Symantec, demonstrating the device...
Symantec Security Response director Kevin Haley said elections can also be hacked by breaking into the machines after the votes are collected. "The results go from that machine into a piece of electronics that takes it to the central counting place," Haley said. "That data is not encrypted and that's vulnerable for manipulation."
40 states are using a voting technology that's at least 10 years old, according to the article. And while one of America's national election official argues that "there are paper trails everywhere," CBS reports that only 60% of states conduct routine audits of their paper trails, while "not all states even have paper records, like in some parts of swing states Virginia and Pennsylvania, which experts say could be devastating."
Symantec Security Response director Kevin Haley said elections can also be hacked by breaking into the machines after the votes are collected. "The results go from that machine into a piece of electronics that takes it to the central counting place," Haley said. "That data is not encrypted and that's vulnerable for manipulation."
40 states are using a voting technology that's at least 10 years old, according to the article. And while one of America's national election official argues that "there are paper trails everywhere," CBS reports that only 60% of states conduct routine audits of their paper trails, while "not all states even have paper records, like in some parts of swing states Virginia and Pennsylvania, which experts say could be devastating."
otherwise they would have to make voting illegal; it's useful to keep the populace feeling they have some control.
The left isn't trying to eliminate voter registration laws and you know it. They're just trying to stop the right from making the process more difficult to qualify for than a driver's license. Remember, we actually want more people to vote, not less, to have more certainty of a fair voting outcome. Or is that the part you're opposed to, the part where you're forced to allow everyone to vote even if they have brown skin and don't go to your church?
No, its when he says its impossible for him to lose the election thats the outrage.
I want the entire presidential race to be voted on paper myself, and Im for Hilary, not Trump.
Its really a shame that he has no clue about how to present his ideas without getting distracted, or why the way he presents them turns most of the electorate off.
Perhaps thats why he wont be the next president
e vê se dá logo tua bundinha que daí passa tua vontade de me matar, sua esquizofrênica traumatizada filha da puta. porque eu não tenho medo de troll não, sua manca-da-cabeça.
I hope Trump does get elected. Then I hope he sends you to Guantanamo to get raped and murdered by your "warfighters."
Nothing needs a blockchain more than electronic voting, seriously.
Uncorruptable open ledgers are the 21st century paper trail.
Voting doesn't matter. Voting is for the 99% to make them feel better, and think they have some control.
It doesn't matter who the POTUS is, who the FLOTUS is, or even who the SCROTUS is.
Lobbying controls everything.
Lobbyists write the bills, all the POTUS, and HOROTUS and SCROTUS do are sign them and collect their fee.
Want to effect positive change? Don't vote, lobby!
Join a lobbyist group, form a lobbyist group, or contribute to a lobbyist group.
The only little slips of paper that mater in the US are green.
... is compromised in and of itself. Nothing to see here.
“If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.” --Mark Twain
...to provide Trump with an excuse when he doesn't get elected?
There was a story that looked a democrat primary voting. States WITH a paper trail voted 51-49 in favor of bernie sanders, States WITHOUT paper trail voted 65-35 in favor of clinton. Pretty massive gap considering if you ask anyone with common sense, but then add to fact states they can review and verify results vs states you can't.
You remember the 2012 election?
When Mitt Romney changed his position, it was a flip-flop.
When Obama changed his position, it was a "personal evolution".
Rol!!
Ha, no. What Trump has suggested is that the *only* way he could lose is due to voter fraud (a problem that is statistically nonexistent). That's dangerous rhetoric at best; it delegitimizes the process (but only if he loses). It's not as if Trump has any actual information on planned fraud or evidence t support his assertions. He's merely covering his ass, because in his mind he *can't* legitimately lose. And yes, the process of voting should be easy and painless for everyone entitled to vote. That's the basis of a functional democracy.
Even if they us the exact same words, context matter. Trump is pointing fingers at his opponents. Symantec simply saying it is technically possible.
I swear, some people have the memory of mayflies. The voting machine debacle has been with us for almost 20 years now. They've been proven to be trivially hackable, poorly documented, and lacking significant paper trails in MANY different jurisdictions for ages, now. Suddenly Trump mentions it, and it's this partisan issue? How many people here are so young that they don't remember the blatant corruption surrounding Diebold?
Remember, we actually want more people to vote, not less, to have more certainty of a fair voting outcome.
I've eliminated your strawman from the quote so I can focus on your unsupported premise. Why do you believe that more people voting increases the certainty of a fair voting outcome? Donald Trump's supporters set new records for Republican Primary turnout in many states that he won. Do you consider this to be desirable?
The unfortunate reality of democracy is it works best when the least informed voters with the least invested in the success of our country don't bother showing up to vote. I've personally debased myself by participating in elections where commoners were allowed input in decisions which impacted them. After losing that election, I went off and started a benevolent dictatorship where my charity wasn't wasted on ignorant peasants. I was significantly more successful in the latter venue and humiliated my prior compatriots while earning the admiration and love of my peers within my new organization which was significantly less democratic.
Democracy is an instrument sold to plebians by cynical bandits to obfuscate their own graft.
Implying someone is a racist simply because they hold an opposing view comes across as an opinion you made because you've been programmed to think that is a valid argument for wanting reassurance that the individual voting is actually they person they say they are. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a bigot.
How is asking for ANY type of picture ID harder than getting a driver's license?
Now you have a bunch of activist judges making legal leaps and declaring Voter ID illegal not because it's against the Constitution, but because it "unfairly affects minorities". Minorities are apparently more poor and more incompetent than the average citizen, so it's unfair of them to have to prove their identity. This is the Liberal argument.
Trump's statements are meant to undermine your democracy by priming an angry electorate to believe - note the word "believe" - that all polls in favour of Clinton are dishonest. Stop and think about the conspiracy required to falsify all polls. He doesn't appear to care about the consequences to the country. If can't win, let it burn, appears to be the philosophy of that campaign.
How do you know the problem is nonexistent if nobody has to show any ID? After every national election there are reports of counties that lost votes, others that banned one party from watching the counting, and others that have more votes than they do citizens. Showing ID is one way to have more fair elections, and anyone against it obviously has the agenda that NOT showing IDs will benefit their party.
EVERY type of government-issued picture ID is easier to get than a driver's license. You obviously don't have a driver's license, idiot.
I didn't imply it, I flat out accused you of it. Then you proved me right by spending your sockpuppet mod points on me then quickly replied 4 times anonymously with equally absurd attempts to distract from the fact I just caught you in your own logical trap, bigot.
If fraud is a real problem, then the default assumption is that it's equally likely from either side. However, given the polls, I would suggest the projected loser is more inclined to cheat.
How do you know the problem is nonexistent if nobody has to show any ID?
The problem very clearly exists. This guy voted 7 times in one election! It's no wonder the GOP is so afraid of election fraud, they know from experience how easy it is.
"If there was a gay Afro-Puertorican Linux distribution, I'd give it a try" ~lucm
The red team complains about voter fraud and the blue team complains about voter suppression. They're both rigging the election as far as I'm concerned and that just has to balance itself out. Don't whine about losing before you lose though, I don't know what that's supposed to accomplish.
How do you know the problem is nonexistent if nobody has to show any ID? After every national election there are reports of counties that lost votes, others that banned one party from watching the counting, and others that have more votes than they do citizens.
Well, you see, one thing that would happen is that people would show up at the ballot box, and ask for a ballot, based on their name, and sooner or later, somebody would create a conflict. Right? And no, your reports are grossly mistaken.
Besides, you're suggesting a very inefficient method of corrupting an election. That would involve a lot more people. Why would anyone do that, when they could just corrupt the elections officials? You know the ones you complain about losing votes.
Showing ID is one way to have more fair elections, and anyone against it obviously has the agenda that NOT showing IDs will benefit their party.
Or requiring ID is obviously part of an agenda that will benefit their party, and who cares about it being fair?
There's a reason why gun licenses are ok, but college ID wasn't. It wasn't to make elections more fair.
You've been misinformed by the media or are intentionally misstating the candidate. Trump's statement was only about certain areas in Pennsylvania. His call to have neutral observers at poll locations, a thing the DNC and the UN has itself suggested during BOTH of Obama's elections in the same areas, is now being met with threats to arrest those observers.
The US has such large voting problems the UN AND the DNC has called for observers and those observers are now being threatened with arrest.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Why, for heavens sake, don't you just switch back to paper ballots? There's a reason most other democracies use them: simple, secure, auditable.
It's getting pretty bad. My karma has taken a beating. Simply put, Slashdot is the Donald Trump Forum, and if you're not advocating for him to be president and demanding imprisonment for Clinton, you're going to pay. I'm going to be honest, after being here since 2003, I'm just about ready to leave simply because mod points are being handed out to some of the most regressive people around, the very same kind of people that endlessly whine about how they're being censored for their views.
In fact, I'm not even sure why I'm here now. This place sucks, and not because of new owners or advertising, but simply because it has become a den of libertarian reactionaries who hate everything and everyone.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
from 10 years ago.
If you need a picture ID to vote it should be your voter registration card given to you free of charge at the time you register to vote.
When Pennsylvania tried to enact a voter ID law the people who voted for it (all Republicans) openly stated they could not point to a single act of voter fraud. The best they could say was, "the number of voter fraud cases that are prosecuted are only a sliver of the fraud taking place because there is no system in place to detect fraud."
Which is a great work of circular reasoning. One can't show voting fraud has taken place but that's only because there isn't any way to detect it. If one can't detect voter fraud, how do you know it's taking place?
One of the biggest issues with PA's attempt was the person who did not have a driver's license had to travel to only a select few locations during certain hours and do this twice. Once to prove who they were then come back a second time to get their state-issued ID. All during regular business hours.
If you're on the bottom rung of life you need to work as much as you can and can't afford to take off work to prove who you are, twice, and if you're a senior citizen you may be dependent upon someone else to take you around because not everyone has a bus stop in front of their house.
PA's law was nothing but a blatant attempt to suppress voting.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
We covered this back in the 2000s decade... non-driver ID cards with everything else are being handed out to everybody who doesn't drive.
tl;dr: I don't like the guy who won, therefore democracy is horrible idea.
In the 2012 primaries, a voting machine was lost at a sweet old ladies house. She was like "oh I didn't even know it was here, I forgot about it". Then the voting was the infamous 51% for Mitt Romney.
Here is Trump in a nutshell.
I can say whatever I want and when it's received negatively, I was just joking.
When I don't get my way, someone else is cheating.
He's a joke of a human being. He represents the worst of the US.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
That's also a way of saying the states that moved their primaries earlier did a better review of election law... Clinton was a late surge in the polls outside of the ballots too.
its the same story for the last 16 years, gee I wonder why, your hiring some flunky lowest bidder to do a serious job
nothing to see here move along
People who don't vote get trampled in most places... if parents don't teach how to vote, then the parents get control of the the government and get to ruin their children.
This is why Election Day should be a school-closed holiday every year.
I gather you didn't even read my post. I'm not complaining about opposing view points, I'm complaining about Trump supporters who attack opposing view points by using mod points to silence criticism.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
As in many other cases, Drumpf is a raging hypocrite. In the real world, vote fraud is a republican thing. And they're not even subtle about it. One of their operatives, the CEO of Diebold, manufacturer of many of the voting machines in the US, went so far as to openly state his intention to divert votes to the republicans:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11...
Imagine all the people...
And when Trump says the same thing, it's a national outrage. It's not a coincidence the Left is trying to eliminate voter registration laws, and switch everything to electronic voting.
Voting fraud by actual voters is negligible. There are very few cases of it. The right does focus on reducing actual voting by a variety of methods which tend to statistically favor their party, including limiting voting areas, striking people from voting rolls with similar names, reducing early voting, blocking efforts at same day registration, etc, etc. The left correctly points out that the actions the right is doing are more about disenfranchising eligible voters that might be more likely to vote democratic than actual voter fraud. From the Washington Post a comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast.
The left was also extremely concerned about the electronic voting machines, and their potential to be tampered with in various ways. That doesn't mean electronic can't be secure, but without a paper trail, any hack could effectively tip an election in ways that cannot be proven to have occurred. In short typical voting machines have probably less security than Hillary's email server. Voting security is not an easy thing. I encourage both parties to support regulations that require a paper trail. There is literally no downside.
As far as Trump's crazy crap of the day, well one of his plans is to setup watchers, which sound a bit like an intimidation force. Still, if he wants to send one low key person to each polling place that quietly and unobtrusively watches, I say go for it. The other party can do the same. As to his allegations of people voting 5 times, well, no. Who voted is tracked. If you try to vote twice you will be noticed and you must vote where you are registered.
I am a poll worker in Virginia. From the very scant details on this particular hack, the apparent claim is that you can vote more than once by "resetting" the machine while in the booth and not touching any equipment. Well, if it is even technically possible to pull this off, within an hour we'd know that the votes in that precinct were off, because we do an hourly audit of the of the number of people who check in to vote vs. the number of votes that are cast. When we are off by even a count of 1 it is a major event, and triggers an immediate investigation. Any kind of mass attempt to defraud the count would be caught immediately. And, nearly 2 million people are eligible to vote in Virginia, so you'd have to pull off an enormous hack across multiple precincts. You'd most certainly wind up canceling the election, not swaying it.
Virginia does not use direct-recording voting machines any more, we use machine-counted paper ballots. We decertified all our direct-recording machines two elections ago when it was discovered that in a couple of precincts the wireless local area network between machines were running with default administrative passwords. The scanning equipment we use is not networkable, and it is sealed with numbered seals. I do not believe it is possible to even do the hack suggested by the article any more.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
We need to install "Norton Antivirus Bloat Suite" on all the machines, and have it constantly scanning.
I started reading slashdot since as far back as 1999 or 2000 or so. The quality of the comments has remained relatively static. If its not systemd, trump or hillary, its because Red Hat shipped a minor version of GCC that people didn't like, etc. Relax.
"So you are saying you've grown 6 inches, gained 200 lbs, changed your hair & eye colors as well as your sex... that's the reason you don't look anything like your photo from 20 years ago? Ok... here is your ballot."
Little different than the ID-less system we have today, just mention a name on a street and get offered a ballot: http://projectveritas.com/2016...
Hopefully it is just an opinion piece but Symantec is no longer a "U.S." Company. It is all but majority owned by a tech company that is based/owned/run by China. As always YMMV and nothing could go wrong when an enemy-state knows attack vectors that could skew an election.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei_Symantec
There was a story that looked a democrat primary voting. States WITH a paper trail voted 51-49 in favor of bernie sanders, States WITHOUT paper trail voted 65-35 in favor of clinton. Pretty massive gap considering if you ask anyone with common sense, but then add to fact states they can review and verify results vs states you can't.
Related link.
In the end Hillary and Bernie were not that close, but either way, I'm a democrat, and I fully agree we need paper trails. I'm not going to argue and say no hacking occurred. I can no more prove that than I can prove, that the system I'm typing on isn't hacked... Anyone who says that voting machines, particularly without paper trails, are perfectly secure is either uninformed, an idiot, or deliberately lying to you. They are where an election can be flipped and are by far a much greater risk than voters voting multiple times.
Always fun hearing from the lazy as to how hard something is. I bet you run out of breath watching the summer Olympics from the couch as well?
Step 1: Rent a bus.
Step 2: Acquire copy of local/state registered voter list (slightly easier than getting bus).
Step 3: Run basic analysis on voter rolls to determine which persons are least likely to vote in person during the next election (based on previous voting history or infirmity (recent death also works)).
Step 4: Recruit group of persons who are willing to accept cash and keep their mouths shut to get driven around all day and be told who to vote for.
Step 5: At each stop, send in the group, each with a different name & address of a targeted person in to vote.
Step 5a: In order to reduce chance of person note voting the way you want, recruit the elderly or otherwise limited who you can have a more dedicated person accompany into the voting booth to 'assist' them with casting their ballot.
Your average school bus holds 75 people, lets say you can only acquire 35 and it takes 1 hour for you to drive to a location, issue voting requirements, send them in to vote and then get them back on the bus... during just an 8 hour window (most polling stations are open longer) you've just cast 280 illegal votes... from one operation.
"But that's nothing!" That's not enough to swing a race.
Oh really? There have been plenty of international races which were won via smaller margins... and most of those for bigger offices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Want to make sure your friend gets elected Mayor? Chances are the margin will be low.
Want to make sure your person gets that Senate seat? Best look at a dozen buses.
And when Trump says the same thing, it's a national outrage.
Who says it's not equally laughable when Symantec does it? Personally I'm looking around for their offer to "secure" the systems, as I only consider them slightly above the outright malicious virus warning outfits. I only consider them not entirely willfully malicious.
These stories are a dime a dozen, the problem with Trump and others in that situation, is that they're trying to stigmatize an election that they're going to lose, rather than correct a problem. Really, haven't you noticed that aspect of Trump's character? He's never at fault, it's ALWAYS something else.
It's not a coincidence the Left is trying to eliminate voter registration laws, and switch everything to electronic voting.
Oh, and this is based on? Nothing. You just made up shit. Or you're confusing opposition to Republican efforts to eliminate voting opportunities with some random garbling of ideas, in which case I suggest you try being less accusatory and resentful.
Well, I see we found the Trump supporter, as evidenced by the general dickishness and the inability to do the most basic arithmetic.
It's because he's an idiot like Bush was and he doesn't have the support the approved candidates have. He also has to support the RNC official platform in order to be an RNC candidate and thus a lot of his platform (the Mexican wall stuff and taxes) isn't actually his.
Everything that Clinton says (if she even says it) has gone through a team of lawyers and media personnel. The problem is the media and the powers that be got surprised by Trump. Now they're broadening everything he says and make it sound worse. When he says "We should get observers in certain portions of PA" the narrative becomes "Trump says we should have thugs intimidating voters at all the voting places" and when he says the media is a liar, all they can do is take quotes out of context.
Now I won't vote for either, Trump should've packed his things and gone independent months ago when the RNC was stacking against him, perhaps he would've had a chance to be an honest candidate.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
LMFTFY:
It's no wonder... the Democrats think that if suddenly everyone is required to go through a background check, gun violence will simply disappear... it is inconceivable to them that some people may opt to break the law to buy a gun illegally or cast an extra vote or two.
One tends to turn up rather obvious dead bodies, the other is rather difficult to detect unless you have the correct safeguards... which no state truly does IMO.
Just go compulsory voting. If you are on the register you must vote. If you want to argue that you should have the right to not vote then turn up, get your name crossed off and draw a giant dick and balls on the ballot sheet.
If you want to have electronic voting have an option that says "I do not wish to vote, so register my vote as informal, this means my vote will not count" and make them hit through 5 are you sures.
If everyone has to vote it makes impersonating someone else really really hard as those people have to vote as well. As soon as the same person gets marked off you have problems.
In my state we have vote by mail and I don't get sent a ballot unless I'm registered under my correct address. My ID is my signature on the outside of the ballot envelope which gets compared to my signature on my registration. It a system that works well.
Where I come from ID is mandatory... you cannot exist here w/o it. (Sweden) You get a personal identity number when you are born. Which makes voting simple. Voting also always takes place on Sundays, when working people are free, and we don't have electronic voting systems because that would be really bad...
1) You should have an ID, and it should be super easy to get it.
2) You should have to prove your identity when voting
3) You should not have to take a day of in order to vote.
4) Electronic voting should never be allowed, since it can always be hacked. Voting over internet is even worse, since then people can buy votes, or coerce others to vote against their will.
From an outside perspective the voting system in the US is insane.
The GW Bush administration made voter fraud a point of emphasis with the US attorneys in the early 2000s and they didn't find squat.
Everyone, left, right, up, or down, was switching to electronic voting after the hanging chad embarrasment. It's not a partisan issue, and if you think only the left is stealing votes then you're blind to the people on the other side stealing them too.
The left does not want ID at the polls because they get their votes from the lest common denominator in society. Illegals, people that vote to get "free" stuff, and the great welfare class. ID means that illegals can't vote, and that fraud stops. The _majority_ are not welfare classes.
That sounds an awful lot like compelled speech... doubly so introducing a sort of poll tax of being required to show up, despite potential costs... both of which US courts have generally ruled against.
It's not the voter ID that's against the Constitution, dumbshit. It's the "unfairly affects minorities" part.
http://www.politico.com/story/...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontl...
You will notice that states that enacted these strict voter ID laws still allow absentee ballots. The Federal courts might not have decided against these states if Republican officials in those states didn't come out and flat admit that they were passing these laws to keep minorities from voting
http://billmoyers.com/2014/10/...
http://nymag.com/daily/intelli...
But I'm sure the new excuse for these statements is that they were being "sarcastic". That's what Republicans say now when they get their tongues caught in a zipper.
Simply put, Slashdot is the Donald Trump Forum, and if you're not advocating for him to be president and demanding imprisonment for Clinton, you're going to pay. I'm going to be honest, after being here since 2003, I'm just about ready to leave simply because mod points are being handed out to some of the most regressive people around, the very same kind of people that endlessly whine about how they're being censored for their views.
I actually keep track of the sentiment on Slashdot, both from the responses to my posts and general mood for certain topics. One topic I keep track of is the Clinton/Trump thing.
Firstly, don't feel like you need to leave because of the Trump/Clinton thing. In prior presidential election years, Slashdot goes to hell starting about 6 weeks before the election, and becomes unbearably dumb about 2 weeks before. Partisan sock puppets from both camps do nothing but carp and snipe and insult anyone who tries to post a political view.
It's happened before, and it's happening right now as well.
It's worse this year, probably a combination of a) this particular election is especially contentious, b) a lot of people are hurting and want to see change(*), and c) internet attendance is higher now than it was 4 or 8 years ago (and will probably be even higher 4 years from now).
Whiplash asked for suggestions when he took over, and I mentioned this specific point in a response.
Secondly, I monitor my own style and set goals for my posts. I'm currently working controversial posts, and this fits in well with my support of Trump.
What I've found is that all of the posts on either side are simple blind insults. Clinton is dirty and corrupt, Trump is a racist and bigot, there's not much else to see here. I've even called out the readership, asking for any *rational* reason to vote for Clinton over Trump (my particular choice - it would work as well the other way). No one has ever put forth a reasonable and rational reason for one candidate over the other(**).
Thirdly, it's easy to get around the mod point system simply by posting actual content. Make an insightful post--a way of looking at things that make sense and that someone else may have missed--and back it up with some links.
I've found that there are enough people here who still appreciate an interesting point, than there are partisans who will automatically down-vote something they don't like. I know this because my own posts get voted up *and* down (yes, I monitor my posts over time), and the up votes always win out eventually. It sometimes takes a couple of hours, but it almost always happens.
I believe that there are more intelligent and mature people reading this forum than there are partisan hacks, but these same people aren't interested in getting involved(***), or are too busy with life, or don't like getting insulted.
Lastly, note that Trump has the support of a fair slice of American voters right now. You can claim that he doesn't have enough support to win, but that's not the point: if 30% of the electorate is pro Trump, you'll see a lot of support here. Just like there was for Sanders, just like there was for Romney.
Take the trouble to think through your opinion (it helps if you come to your own opinion, rather than use someone else's (****)), post links to support your position, and don't insult and snipe people.
When you do this, the mature and honest readers will support you.
(*) In prior elections, both D and R were still "more of the same".
(**) One anonymous exception, I tried to encourage them to get an account and continue, and haven't heard from them since.
(***) I want to improve my public writing skills, and I use Slashdot as my practice range.
(****) Years ago I saw a clip of Christopher Hitchens, who comes to his own views on things, and it really stuck with me.
You will also notice that the Republican who perpetrated this voter fraud got caught.
That's why there's virtually zero voter fraud. Because it's a crime with no direct benefit and really sucks to get caught. To commit voter fraud, you'd have to be monumentally stupid (or, in this case, a Republican).]
Anyone who says that voting machines, particularly without paper trails, are perfectly secure is either uninformed, an idiot, or deliberately lying to you.
Yet, please consider: someone who can reasonably be expected to know that they are not informed about a given subject, but insists on taking a position on it and making arguments about it. I submit that such behavior is a foundational mark of idiocy and a key reason why stupidity resists correction and contact with facts.
Therefore, your last two conditions are one in the same. That means liars and idiots are the only people who would say such a thing, explicitly suggest such a thing, or by omission imply such a thing.
http://www.npr.org/2016/08/13/489889496/trump-calls-to-stake-out-polling-places
According to stories like this, it seems that the RNC in enjoined from engaging in certain conduct due to a consent decree arising out of past misconduct of its own.
And given the tone and tenor of some of Trump's comments, as well as his supporters, it isn't beyond belief to be concerned about a difference between neutral poll observers and intimidation.
Besides, there were objections to the UN observers as well.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/10/texas-iowa-arrest-election-observers
So meh, whatever. Trump runs his mouth. That's a given.
They are, in ten states at least. When I moved out of Illinois, I was shocked to learn that it's not a holiday everywhere.
Better would be to have voting over a weekend, or even over the course of a week. The lower you are on the economic totem pole, the harder it is to actually take a couple of hours off work to go stand in line at the polling place. Yes, there are laws that say your employer has to give you time off. Just like there are laws that your employer has to let you take a day off if you're sick. No, it often doesn't work out that way.
This is why politicians in Republican states are severely curtailing early voting. Because it allow people to vote who might not be their constituents.
"Step 4: Recruit group of persons who are willing to accept cash and keep their mouths shut to get driven around all day and be told who to vote for."
HAH! Unlikely!
"Three people may keep a secret if two are dead" - Benny Franklin.
People talk. They love to talk and tell stories. They hate being told to shut up, even for money. It usually has to be a lot of money for them to shut up, especially when it comes to a federal crime and they are spotted. They will roll over on you and your scheme to stay out of jail.
$SUFFICIENTBRIBE == At least minimum wage for 24/7 behind bars for a year or two, plus extra for damage to reputation and future earning loss. And you have to /trust/ every last one of these people to keep their word.
Suddenly your "bus full of voter fraud" becomes very expensive, and you're better off just hiring more canvassers.
Voter fraud doesn't happen because it's too much work for the results and the penalty for being caught at it is too high for the risk. Electoral fraud, however, is fucking rampant. Various idiots like to conflate voter fraud with electoral fraud, most likely because "their side" is the side that does the electoral fraud and project on the other side voter fraud.
Why the public just goes along with electronic voting with no paper trail? I don't fucking know. It's not like this hasn't been talked about for the last 20 years, since the introduction of electronic voting machines.
--
BMO
And the apk malware host package (tm)
Always fun hearing from the lazy as to how hard something is. I bet you run out of breath watching the summer Olympics from the couch as well?
Is it laziness to recognize the method that gets the most results for your efforts? Olympic runners don't shift lanes on the running track to make it a longer distance. Except maybe if there's a wind, or something with the marathoners, I suppose. But usually the fastest way is the shortest way.
As Scrooge McDuck said, work smarter, not harder.
Skip the first two, they're not illegal in themselves.
Step 3: Run basic analysis on voter rolls to determine which persons are least likely to vote in person during the next election (based on previous voting history or infirmity (recent death also works)).
Step 4: Recruit group of persons who are willing to accept cash and keep their mouths shut to get driven around all day and be told who to vote for.
These are where your biggest problems will happen. You're expecting to recruit a group of people, and you're sure they will keep their mouths shut?
And that nobody will notice? Not the odds I'd take.
Step 5: At each stop, send in the group, each with a different name & address of a targeted person in to vote.
Step 5a: In order to reduce chance of person note voting the way you want, recruit the elderly or otherwise limited who you can have a more dedicated person accompany into the voting booth to 'assist' them with casting their ballot.
Your average school bus holds 75 people, lets say you can only acquire 35 and it takes 1 hour for you to drive to a location, issue voting requirements, send them in to vote and then get them back on the bus... during just an 8 hour window (most polling stations are open longer) you've just cast 280 illegal votes... from one operation.
"But that's nothing!" That's not enough to swing a race.
Oh really? There have been plenty of international races which were won via smaller margins... and most of those for bigger offices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Want to make sure your friend gets elected Mayor? Chances are the margin will be low.
Want to make sure your person gets that Senate seat? Best look at a dozen buses.
Stop putting words in my mouth, you're not even getting close to what my real arguments would, though you do admit that you would have to spend more for a larger race. Which means you're relying on a lot of effort, that may or may not swing a given race, and you're expecting what? Compliments of your diabolical plan that calls for you to waste thousands of dollars on an easily compromised effort that may not even work?
Man, you're expecting to do things the stupid way. Besides, for the same amount of effort, you could get dozens of LEGAL voters instead. It's not a crime to get people to the polls.
If you're going to be corrupt, you would corrupt the elections office, not waste your time busing people around in an uncertain way.
Please, if you're going to get me to worry about problems in elections, don't belabor me with your tiresome insults and insane plans. Or at least, try to show some comprehension of what I did complain about, which is compromises in the electoral office itself.
Why bother recruiting dozens of people, when you can recruit a few for the same, or better results? Tell me that. Convince me of it.
But then, if that's the case, you can't trust the current elected officials, so you have to get them out of office.
Good luck.
Trump 2016
Paper and pencil. Mark an X and put it in a ballot box. Use a scanner to speed up counting at the end of the night.
No source code to worry about. No computers to hack into. Works if the Internet goes down. No chads. Works the same in every city/province/state/country.
LMFTFY:
It's no wonder... the Democrats think that if suddenly everyone is required to go through a background check, gun violence will simply disappear... it is inconceivable to them that some people may opt to break the law to buy a gun illegally or cast an extra vote or two.
One tends to turn up rather obvious dead bodies, the other is rather difficult to detect unless you have the correct safeguards... which no state truly does IMO.
As far as the background check/gun violence argument goes, well, yes, if you did require the same background check for all purchases you will see some level of reduction in some gun crimes. In a country with so many guns the reduction may be very small, but it should be there. The difference between voting fraud and gun crimes is a very small delta in votes usually doesn't determine an outcome, while only one bullet and one gun is required to kill one person. (Yes, there are exceptions.) That being said, in an election like this one, where passions are potentially extremely high, even if some of them are based on outright lies, well the potential for election fraud is probably higher than normal, though there is certainly no reason to believe that voting fraud would favor Hillary. Given how many dog whistles Trump sends, I'd be totally unsurprising to find some from his supporters who felt they had no choice, since they had to cancel out the fraud Trump was telling them about.
Still, I don't think there is an actual significant problem. The voting machines are a much bigger fish to fry and are way too hackable. That being said, I'd be fine with a hand stamp or something similar or you could do same day registration, so if there is any problems they can be fixed right then and there. It just needs to be easy enough where people can come and get it done without a lot of hassle, or needing to visit additional agencies beforehand. You should also be automatically registered when you get a drivers license, at least if you bring proof of your citizenship, or such proof can be trivially looked up.
Basically, I have no problem with any form of reasonable check, provided it doesn't disenfranchise legitimate voters, such as selective purges of voting rolls close to an election. If I had to pick though, I'd rather have some form of ranked voting and paper trails first... (Note that ranked voting would likely have resulted in Trump not winning the primary, since he would have been, effectively, voted off the island.)
The parent comment is posted on every single story where Trump is mentioned. This is what paying six million to CTR gets you.
There is plenty of sound and valid content to see. Either you are willfully blind, outright incompetent at reading, or prone to hyperbole.
I personally doubt you can look at your own conduct rationally, let alone politicians who you will likely never meet.
Not when you continue to conduct yourself with such lack of examination of your own words.
Whoosh!
You think he's calling for "neutral" observers?
http://www.politico.com/story/...
Note that the form to become one of these Trump observers takes you directly to a Trump fundraising site.
A court in Atlanta Georgia hearing a case gave them 9 months to get examples of people who couldn't vote because of voter ID. They wanted to see that it actually was an issue and how bad it was. After 9 months, how many examples were brought to the court?
None, not a single one.
In fact, once voter ID laws were put into place in Georgia, minorities voted MORE OFTEN.
Story explaining turnout after voter id laws.
So, while the liberals are SCREAMING voter id laws prevent minorities from voting, actual reality shows the opposite. After such overwhelming evidence of the opposite, I have to question why is it liberals don't want minorities to vote? It has become the position of the DNC to keep laws off that books that have proven to increase minority participation in voting.
Yet, pointing this out will likely get me labeled a racist. Just like being a Republican, the party ending slavery and getting civil rights passed for blacks, gets you labeled a racist by them.
AKA a national ID card. Good luck getting that made federal law.
He recognized that Trump is a joke, so he's not that dumb.
You're upset because you're used to frequenting the news networks owned by the globalist oligarchs who want Hillary to be president so that she can be a good little puppet for them and further their covetous goals. Those networks program their viewers into thinking Trump=bad, Hillary=good. They suppress negative news about Hillary while telling half-truths and outright lies about Trump. You're used to having your views reassured and validated by these news outlets and you've come to think that those views are in the majority.
However, outside of the sphere of Clintonfluence, you're shocked by the fact that people don't believe the BS they're being fed, and are audacious enough to present a viewpoint that conflicts with your own. It's equally devastating that such people back up their opinions with "facts" and "logic" instead of appealing to emotion and name calling.
You need to face facts that there is a large percentage of the public that is completely fed up with this bizarre agenda of hate and shame that the radical-left is trying so hard to ram down everyone's throats. The backlash is growing, and you will seemingly never understand that it's because of your own actions that this happens.
Yes, I know that, obviously. It comes up again and again. You should have replied to the parent statement with this. It will do him more good than me.
I can only imagine, that if you're not astro-turfing here, you've simply forgotten that not everyone can afford to actually study for a driver's license, let alone needs one or can even get their hands on a car to use one, or to take the written test. Yes, some states require you own a car to be able to take the initial driving test. This is obviously a higher burden than state-issued "I'm 18 years old" ID's that only poor kids get because rich kids who don't need them already had parentally-funded drivers education classes and DMV tests.
No I'm upset because Trump and Sanders supporters use the moderation system on Slashdot to attack anyone who doesn't agree with them.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
It is fantasy that anyone compares signatures. They just toss aside ballots without signatures.
Now, should there be a contested local election, ballots may be validated in really close recounts using signatures.
On another note, how do you know they even count your ballot? Ohh, it is River Rat's ballot, he(she/it) always votes straight along party lines, toss his in the unsigned pile (accidentally of course).
You don't have the history of racism that the USA does. Voter ID programs are racist, period. We're all glad you have an Orwellian system where everyone requires an ID card from birth.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
A court in Atlanta Georgia hearing a case gave them 9 months to get examples of people who couldn't vote because of voter ID. They wanted to see that it actually was an issue and how bad it was. After 9 months, how many examples were brought to the court?
None, not a single one.
Story after story has been presented about the impediments to getting ID, from former House Speaker Jim Wright to various other elderly who have voted for years,but now have problems.
Even the stories about Georgia indicate about 2,000 people had to vote with a provisional ballot but never came back.
Who knows how many never bothered to try that much?
In fact, once voter ID laws were put into place in Georgia, minorities voted MORE OFTEN.
Story explaining turnout after voter id laws.
In fact, the story is more complicated:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-richie/voter-id-proponents-muddy_b_4044326.html
So, while the liberals are SCREAMING voter id laws prevent minorities from voting, actual reality shows the opposite. After such overwhelming evidence of the opposite, I have to question why is it liberals don't want minorities to vote? It has become the position of the DNC to keep laws off that books that have proven to increase minority participation in voting.
Wait,now you're trying to get us to believe there is a connection of cause and effect? Even if nobody questioned your assertions about the numbers, that is a leap of logic.
Cogito ergo sum is a fallacy,not a process of reasoning.
Yet, pointing this out will likely get me labeled a racist. Just like being a Republican, the party ending slavery and getting civil rights passed for blacks, gets you labeled a racist by them.
Abe Lincoln and the rest of the Radical Republicans would be run out of the GOP of today. Can you not tell the difference between the past and present? It has been more than a century since the Civil War. Not that it took very long, Hayes bailed on Civil Rights by the election of 1876.
Besides, you know what was proven in court? That North Carolina's laws were racially biased along with their electoral districts.
Maybe Georgia is next.
Hurry someone hide the original post before Hilary's assassins find him!
Every state offers a Non-Driver's photo ID.
In addition, every state that has a voter ID law also offers the ID either for free or for a very minor fee.
International observers occasional show up in the US for elections, and they are astounded by how weak and untrustworthy our elections are. No ID required? No marking of hands or fingers? Ballots left alone, but still counted?
It's embarrassing when the Somali elections were more robust than the US ones.
If swing states can mean a ten point gap between the parties, I guess.
If you're looking for a state with a closer margin, where the vote total could more easily be swung from one party to another, try Arizona, or North Carolina. PA and VA are safe blue this cycle.
There's been 31 voting irregularities in the last 4 years... out of 1 billion. That's about the same odds of getting shitty ads on regular sites.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/
But oh, the right-wing wants to restrict voting because they're scared that some brown people might vote. Just like people who claim blocking ads makes them safer, they would rather deny the website revenue than risk that they might see some crappy ads. They want you to think that every site is 4chan, full of the scum of the internet, likewise "voters might vote for the wrong guy because we let them through the doors of the voting place"
"So you are saying you've grown 6 inches, gained 200 lbs, changed your hair & eye colors as well as your sex... that's the reason you don't look anything like your photo from 20 years ago? Ok... here is your ballot."
Little different than the ID-less system we have today, just mention a name on a street and get offered a ballot: http://projectveritas.com/2016...
Project Veritas is by James Okeef who is anything but trustworthy and honest, but then neither was your argument. Same day register registration with a reasonable level of verification is certainly doable. A drivers license would work. Failing that, just require the same things required to get a drivers license, or any reasonable preponderance of similar evidence. Also, if your getting a new ID your picture would be taken making fraud that much harder to commit.
In short, while I don't agree this fraud is a real issue, since there is so little proof it is actually concurring in significant numbers, you could easily limit the possibility to an arbitrarily small number. Sure, OKeef is a talented con man, and he apparently managed it, but widespread, I just don't buy it. Conspiracies that wide do not remain secret. Either way, I'm fine with reasonable ID requests, or at least requesting the little card, but if you require ID, you have to make it free and easy to get.
More importantly, I'd focus on these problems:
1) End first pass the vote voting with something better. Multiple rounds. Ranked voting/Instant run off/something. (This system makes it very difficult for third parties to remain viable, and encourages extreme candidates.)
2) Similarly end partisan redistricting. Find an algorithm that draws districts simply with no political bias and use it.
3) Require a voting machine paper trail and also require good security on the systems.
4) Somehow we need to get politics back to the issues and have honest discussions. Having an accurate summary of choices and candidates on a ballot would help. Perhaps we could have something like Jury Duty to assemble them? That way lies might be less effective.
They wouldn't necessarily even have to be current, if it was say a senior citizen who was not currently driving. Ultimately any form of ID has to be based on public record data, so any form of id that can be generated should be possible to be generated same day. It is not as if visiting three different public offices increases security. Beyond that you would have to have multiple people testify to who you are or do actual genetic testing which is infeasible.
Really, I pointed out how you contradicted yourself, if you aren't going to own up to your own hyperbole, why should you get to look down at others?
Face it, you burned yourself.
Nobody cares what you think, and you're not very good at it.
when I vote you need show id, not that it matters...
Get up!
The signature is not on my ballot but on the outside of the envelope containing my ballot. Once the signature is validated the ballot is separated from the envelope. I watched the process once so I'm confident the comparisons are being done. If they can't validate your signature they send you a notification and you have a few days to come down and verify that it is correct.
Read more carefully. Losing the election was great for me, so I'm not bitter.
It was simply an eye-opener for me at how inadequate democracy is as a tool for decision-making. It is indisputable in hindsight that I was the superior candidate. They voted against their own interests. I'm a total cunt and they chose the more likable individual instead of the person who could get the job done. TLDR: voters make shitty choices for stupid reasons.
I dunno. I grew up with compulsory voting. It is made extremely easy, huge number of polling stations, postal voting, declaratory voting in other electorates. Ring the AEC and they will send someone to your house to help you vote, or if you are in a nursing home they come to you so you can vote. We also don't disenfranchise prisoners so they get the votes counted in prison too.
Because it is the entire electoral role every time there is never any shocks due to higher than expected turn out. I think 10 minutes is the absolute longest I've ever had to queue.
Here's a little challenge for you, try going through one week without using a photo ID for something. Not driving, obviously, because a driver's license is clearly a rich man's indulgence to you.
Try buying cigarettes. Try to buy a beer at a store. Go in to a bar or a club. Write a check. Apply for government assistance. Apply for a bank account. Try to get an apartment. Try to get a loan for a home. Try getting a job. Try taking a plane flight.
I'm sure you get the picture.
Anyone trying to live in our society will be required to provide a photo ID at some point, it's just a fact.
The notion that asking for photo ID before exercising your voting franchise will bar anyone other than those that simply forgot their ID at home is absurd.
"I can insert it, and then it resets the card, and now I'm able to vote again,"
Didn't he just overwrite his previous vote? "Vote again" is not necessarily the same as "cast two votes".
Not to say there aren't problems, there certainly are, but there is a lot of lame in this article. Not helpful.
Story after story has been presented about the impediments to getting ID
Then fix the damn impediments.
Voter authentication is a no-brainer.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Just go compulsory voting. If you are on the register you must vote. If you want to argue that you should have the right to not vote then turn up, get your name crossed off and draw a giant dick and balls on the ballot sheet.
If you want to have electronic voting have an option that says "I do not wish to vote, so register my vote as informal, this means my vote will not count" and make them hit through 5 are you sures.
If everyone has to vote it makes impersonating someone else really really hard as those people have to vote as well. As soon as the same person gets marked off you have problems.
And free transport to the polling station for the compulsory voting is provided, right?
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
So they both suck. Sounds like you should vote third party.
Their affection for the electric chair and more recently poison injection executions over the old, and more reliable means of execution, hanging, are further examples of this. The result is that their democratic process IS at risk.
The handbook is free in most states. It costs nothing but time to study it. Hell, most of the time you can get it online as a pdf.
Sorry, but as a reasoned explanation for a position, that was pretty weaksauce.
No I'm upset because anyone with an axe to grind uses the moderation system on Slashdot to attack anyone who doesn't agree with them.
FTFY. The idea that Trump and Sanders supporters are in any way unique in their moderation tactics is spurious at best.
A driver's license gives you the priviledge to drive. It is voluntary, no one can be forced to get one. I didn't have a driver's license until the age of 27, because it wasn't necessary. But not exercising a priviledge shall never lead to the forfeiture of a right, which is not even connected to the priviledge. People are allowed to drive in the U.S. who are not allowed to vote (any non-citizen with a driver's license), and there are people allowed to vote which don't have a driver's license.
Those pesky activist judges always tell you that simple fact, but you continue to ignore it. Might it be because the judges are right and supported by the constitution, while your ideas are not?
His call to have neutral observers at poll locations
Yeah, if only. You need to re-check whatever information you have consumed so far. Those observers would be anything but neutral. Yes, really. Go check for yourself.
Simply put, Slashdot is the Donald Trump Forum
The poll results disagree with you: Slashdot users have a significant preference for Clinton (33%), with Trump in second place (21%) leading slightly over Johnson (15%).
If a forum in which Trump supporters constitute a significant minority seems to you to be "the Donald Trump Forum", perhaps the issue may be your own perception? Are you sheltered from opposing political viewpoints in your day-to-day life?
"40 states are using a voting technology that's at least 10 years old"
I assume that would include paper ballots that are, unlike electronic voting machines, independently auditable should there be questions about the integrity of the voting process. Why, exactly, is that something that needs to be fixed with a probably flawed modern technology?
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
I think you are missing the point of a "right." People have a right to vote. Any requirement that gets in the way of this requires the government to prove that it will actually solve a real problem. The key is that voter fraud has been shown to be a non-issue, even without ID laws. So, in the balance between the individual's right to vote and the government's interest in a fair election, the individual right comes out on top because it was observed that there is little (absolutely zero) evidence to support the government's claim that the restrictions were necessary to ensure a fair election.
Note that none of the things that you listed are a "right." Voting is a right.
(And as an aside, outside of the fact that my jobs was not conveniently located near public transit, I could have gone 3 years without neededing ID, and the only reason that is not 8 years is because I chose to work outside the US, which required a passport.)
You post an AWFUL lot for someone who can't stand Slashdot. But I guess Correct the Record pays per post, so...
There's also the issue that the "nominal fee" for the ID used to be called a poll tax. That's unconstitutional, also.
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
and to complain loudly that the other side cheats.
Since the guy you cited voted multiple times under his own name, how would ID have helped?
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
Right, because when Trump claimed Obama founded ISIS, the media took this literally and not metaphorically to mean that it was Obama's policies that allowed ISIS to flourish, and when Trump was given the opportunity to explicitly confirm the misinterpretation, he -- oh, wait -- actively refuted the metaphorical interpretation and confirmed that he meant that Obama literally founded ISIS.
Clearly this is a problem with the media misinterpreting Trump.
Military intervention in Libya, START arms control treaty with Russia, renewing diplomatic ties with Myanmar and setting in the motion talks that culminated in the Iran nuclear deal. Ok. Now list Trump's accomplishments. Or just be a jerk and attack these genuine ones.
Sorry, but history proves otherwise. Democracy sucks, it is utter shit. But the other options are worse.
You may not believe it but over the long run a crowd of random people come up with better solutions than one genius.
Wow. Plenty of accomplishments. Yes, it was delivered by Bill Clinton - a raving liar if YOU ever saw one I'm sure - but his description of her history of good works in the US gives something like 20-30 examples of great accomplishments of hers throughout her career. And they are all verifiable. None of this "I give millions to charities" which turns out to be completely false.
Instead of repeating your own narrative to yourself, how about you do a little research into the people you hate so much. If you had a little knowledge, maybe your hate wouldn't be so strong.
The media took it literally because Trump said he meant it literally, multiple times, before backing down.
REMEMBER THE MURDER OF IAN MURDOCH, creator of Debian Linux and leading member of the Free Software community, killed Christmas 2015 by the notoriously corrupt San Francisco police department.
If the polls dont require voter ID....
Rick B.
Make a ID card that only citizens can have and make it free of charge. The idea of voter ID isn't some mystical form of tyranny baked up by the GOP, its a fact of life in a good chunk of the world's democracy. My fiancee was flabbergasted when she didn't have to present ID to vote, apparently they do in India and Australia.
The handbook is free in most states. It costs nothing but time to study it. Hell, most of the time you can get it online as a pdf.
Sorry, but as a reasoned explanation for a position, that was pretty weaksauce. chung cu kim van kim lu toa b
[Quote The Asshole]The left isn't trying to eliminate voter registration laws and you know it. They're just trying to stop the right from making the process more difficult to qualify for than a driver's license. Remember, we actually want more people to vote, not less, to have more certainty of a fair voting outcome. Or is that the part you're opposed to, the part where you're forced to allow everyone to vote even if they have brown skin and don't go to your church?[/Quote - The Asshole]
What a crock of shit.
can we do something to change the process before November? I am sure S Hillary is counting on manipulating the machines.
wasserman-shultz was just Too Confident when she said about Sanders, "what difference does it make? he will not win"
Only if Trump and the people scared of Trump get loud.. Paper ballot? how else is there a Paper-Trail?
I want PROOF my Vote went for the person I Chose! not that they Took it and Morphed it into what They Want!
then I have to refuse to let them by declining to participate in a corrupt system.
there is no other choice as I see it.
Lots of us care what Anonymous Coward thinks.
And we agree with them.
Face it - Anonymous is legion, you are self-contradictory and lacking personal insight.
Did you click it? It goes to the article with the actual quote from waldo o'dell stating his intention to deliver votes to the bush campaign.
It ain't trollin' when it's true.
Lots of things are rights. Pursuit of happiness for one, that covers much of what you dismiss.
US Constitution does not grant rights, nor does it enumerate all of them. It simply lists a few key ones as examples. A FEW. We have many, many more rights not specifically listed.
Most people don't understand this or ignore it when convenient to their political desires or pet issues.
Because the community doesn't support your choice for president, Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, you're threatening to leave? Gag me. Please do leave.
Mod this idiot down.
Is it an outrage? Did he say something besides if he doesn't win it's because the system is rigged? I must have missed the "outrage" on that one. Maybe on some left-wing blog it's an "outrage", but Trump, in my opinion, just looks silly saying that. Some of his supporters will no doubt be outraged when he loses. I believe he's pre-making excuses for it.
Heads I win. Tails, you cheated.
And it seems to resonate well with you since you're already complaining that people are saying it's an outrage when I have seen no evidence of that.
People were outraged by his 2nd Amendment comment. People were rightly outraged by his comments about the Khans. People were outraged by his comments about Russia and Clinton's emails. People were outraged by his idea to use religion as a litmus test for entering the country.
I have yet to see any outrage over this remark.
This is just pure propaganda from FBI Slashdot.
Diebold and hanging chads are not an issue this year. The issue is how can the public continue to be fooled that their money was stolen by themselves and not government employees. How can the public be fooled into cooperating with government employee treason.
No such thing as a multi-national nation. The FBI are multi-national, as are the CIA.
M-O-L-E-S
nailed it.
Something on your mind FBI?
I love these "sky is falling" videos. Kind of reminds me when Microsoft was bashing Linux.
I hope emperor Trump takes care of this with his death squads. No more voting!
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
You forgot the most important.
Not being Donald Trump whose tendency to run off the rails has made him his own worst enemy.
Being a pompous blowhard might work as a TV entertainer, but it isn't selling to most of the American people, and those buying it would take anything over Hillary Clinton anyway.
"you know it"
Ad hominem, strawman or appealing to the stone? I'm genuinely no sure which fallacy this is but I know it is one; could someone please clue me in?
You seem to fit in nicely with the hating everyone demographic that you hate so much...
> Get criticised for criticising people
> Get mad about being criticised
> Spit the dummy and rant about how much this place sucks
A fair summation based on your posts I think.
Voting is a right though, and is in the Constitution now, and the responsibility for it is described in numerous other documents to fall on the state.
It is also far less nebulous than the pursuit of happiness.
I
Indeed,it isn't magic. It is good old-fashioned bureaucratic red tape.
The GOP has an agenda to push. They made deliberate choices to do what they wanted.
It has nothing to do with Donald Trump, and everything to do with Clinton being corrupt as fuck. Most Slashdot users are intelligent to know the difference between an email account , an email server and why you would run your own email server. Trump isn't going to put a for sale sign on the white house lawn like Clinton did to the State Department.
Why do brown people want to live in white people's countries, when THEY GET TO KEEP THEIR OWN COUNTRIES AS WELL?
https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/sweden-2015-muslim-flood-costs-14x-the-defence-budget/
Story after story has been presented about the impediments to getting ID
Then fix the damn impediments.
Voter authentication is a no-brainer.
Yeah, without voter ID, they'll just hand out ballots without asking for your name or address, right?
C'mon, there were sufficient authentication methods, but suddenly, somebody started insisting that we needed photo ID, or the elections would be totally corrupt!
Now it'd be one thing if you made it so the ID was a burden on the state, and that it had to be provided by them. At their bother and expense.
Ah, but the GOP doesn't want to do that, they'd much rather castigate the people who have problems getting ID, or even better, accuse the folks bringing up the issue of being the racists, after all, if you think it's too much work to get ID, well, it must be because you think people are dumb.
So yeah, good luck getting a fix out there.
Wait, so everyone is a Pro Trump, libertarian? I didt think those 2 things went together.
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
It's getting pretty bad. My karma has taken a beating. Simply put, Slashdot is the Donald Trump Forum, and if you're not advocating for him to be president and demanding imprisonment for Clinton, you're going to pay. I'm going to be honest, after being here since 2003, I'm just about ready to leave simply because mod points are being handed out to some of the most regressive people around, the very same kind of people that endlessly whine about how they're being censored for their views.
In fact, I'm not even sure why I'm here now. This place sucks, and not because of new owners or advertising, but simply because it has become a den of libertarian reactionaries who hate everything and everyone.
I don't think it's as much as a Trump forum as it's a fuck the establishment forum. Hilary, that counter culture - they're the man now. All of those crazy leftist ideas. Where has it got us? Men in the ladies room? What was up is down, what was down is up. Mass shootings and they only happen like this during Democratic administrations. Anti-police. The DNC had anti-police people, even illegal aliens on the stage. The left is always wrong. Everyplace they've ever tried it they fail. Look at Brazil, the fucking mess Hugo Chavez left behind, Greece, lots of examples.
How can you support the Democrats. They're for destroying the United States and they aren't even trying to hide it anymore. Hilary is above the law. She's giving you, me, everyone the finger and you don't even realize it. She's a despot.
Trump last I knew was still a registered Democrat. He's just there to make sure Hilary makes it. Well let's screw him and make him President. I'd like there to be a third choice, however there is none.
Hang on BTW Slashdot can be a bit vicious. After all there is a screen to hide behind.
1) The Soviets demanding to see papers to travel made Americans highly skeptical of government required ID.
2) All audits of US elections have shown voter fraud to be nearly non-existent.
3) There is no day of the year when nobody works. Putting it on Sunday screws people who work weekends.
4) Electronic voting can be carefully audited to confirm no extra votes were registered, no strange patterns exist, and the results can be compared to exit polls. Like #2, despite a lot of fear mongering, there's no evidence of vote fraud/tampering after several years. Some states require paper print outs so discrepancies can be investigated and recounts can be performed.
Internet voting doesn't provide greater risk of voter intimidation than mail-in absentee ballots, which have been uncontroversial for many years.
But I appreciate the example of an "ugly" European, who has no knowledge or perspective, telling others how they're doing everything wrong.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Regarding whether my ballot is accepted or not I can and have gone on line to check that.
Yes. They will come and pick you up and take you to a polling station. Or if you are unable to travel for health or other reasons they will come to you.
You can also request a postal vote which is delivered to you and comes in a reply paid envelope.
Mobile polling
AEC mobile polling teams visit many electors who are not able to get to a polling place. Mobile polling facilities are set up in some hospitals, nursing homes, prisons and remote areas of Australia. Mobile polling is carried out around Australia prior to election day and on election day.
Just a comment from another Swede:
It is not mandatory with an ID card, not even to vote, see: http://www.val.se/det_svenska_...
Google translation of the second paragraph (yeah, I'm lazy):
Do I have to show identification when I vote?
You must prove your identity to vote. You can prove your identity in three ways:
1. Be known by the voice receiver
2. Show ID document
3. Any other person can vouch for your identity. Then the one who vouches show his ID. The social security number of the person who vouches written down in the electoral roll.
I don't have one
What's wrong with the 2155 year old technology known as a paper ballot?
Wait, isn't requiring a specific picture id more difficult than requiring any picture id?
Totally agree. Now, how do I know that you are a citizen of the United States if I can't check your ID? Sure, we checked that you were a citizen when you registered, but how do I know that you are who you claim to be? See: US Attorney General Eric Holder's Ballot to Vote Offered to Total Stranger
Totally agree. This is why states that passed voter ID laws also changed their laws to allow citizens to get free IDs. A cursory google search reveals the process for getting free ID's from Alabama, Wisconsin, and North Carolina.
We keep telling those pesky activist judges that simple fact, but they continue to ignore it.
I'm sure Mr Soros already knew and had them designed that way.
You can also request a postal vote which is delivered to you and comes in a reply paid envelope.
Oh thats ok then. No possible opportunities for coerced voting there at all. Nope.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Yes. They will come and pick you up and take you to a polling station. Or if you are unable to travel for health or other reasons they will come to you.
If they did that in the US you can bet the Republicans would ensure this skipped black and hispanic areas!
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
The AEC, Australian Electoral Commission, is held at arms length from the ruling party government. It requires an act of parliament to change any of the rules and given the make-up of the Australian government it would be very difficult for one party to pass rules that favour them over the other.
In addition there is a 3 person body which consists of either a current or retired federal judge, a statistician and the current head of the AEC. They are charged with the management of the process and oversight of the AEC to ensure accuracy of the election.
It's worth noting though that there is a huge difference in attitude between Australia and the US at election time. Australia doesn't have the rallies or the level of energy that the US has around an election. I just can't imagine people trying to block others from voting here.
The AEC, Australian Electoral Commission, is held at arms length from the ruling party government. It requires an act of parliament to change any of the rules and given the make-up of the Australian government it would be very difficult for one party to pass rules that favour them over the other.
In addition there is a 3 person body which consists of either a current or retired federal judge, a statistician and the current head of the AEC. They are charged with the management of the process and oversight of the AEC to ensure accuracy of the election.
It's worth noting though that there is a huge difference in attitude between Australia and the US at election time. Australia doesn't have the rallies or the level of energy that the US has around an election. I just can't imagine people trying to block others from voting here.
Yeah sorry, you put all that work into your response but I wasn't thinking about how its done in Aussie, rather how it might be implemented in the USA.
I don't think there is a Republican party in Aus who might want to stop blacks and hispanics from voting
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
It's only in the short run that they fuck it up monstrously ;)
This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
Leave it to a dumbassed AC drop a straw man to perfectly prove GP's point. Nobody said anything about disliking opposing viewpoints. GP was talking about how the kiddie table at /. has taken over the whole damn room, to the point where the signal:noise ratio is making the site more or less unusable. I used to come to /. for the insightful discussion and took it as a given that the editing would suck. Now the editing sucks and the discussion devolves to reactionary neckbeards whining about SJWs and trolls whining about how their third-grade level trolls aren't appreciated enough.
Go ahead. Tell us all about how you're being oppressed. Help! Help! I'm being oppressed! Violence inherent in the system! Violence inherent in the system!
This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
No I understood where you were coming from. In my head I was thinking about how hard it would be to implement in the US because so much of what politics appears to be, from the outside looking in, is getting people to vote rather than convincing them to vote a certain way.
You would have to convince both parties that 95% voter turn out wouldn't skew the results in favour of one over the other. Which is basically impossible.
I thought you might be interested in the structure though and how it can be possible to build something where people have faith in the voting system, even if they aren't always happy with the choices. Voting here actually has the feel of a bit of a relaxed get together. Sure people whinge about having to go and do it and how they would rather sit on the couch, but you go out and everyone is happy. After you voted there is always the sausage sizzle, which has become such a thing it is nicknamed the democracy sausage, and the CWA selling cakes.
I don't know what happened in the US that split people so clearly along the democrat / republican lines and to split them so far. It's not a good place to be.
Purely if you're interested - http://democracysausage.org/