FBI Says Foreign Hackers Breached State Election Systems (theguardian.com)

The FBI has uncovered evidence that foreign hackers breached two state election databases in recent weeks, and it has warned election officials across the country to some measures to step up the security of their computer systems. The Guardian reports: The FBI warning did not identify the two states targeted by cyber intruders, but Yahoo News said sources familiar with the document said it referred to Arizona and Illinois, whose voter registration systems were penetrated. Citing a state election board official, Yahoo News said the Illinois voter registration system was shut down for 10 days in late July after hackers downloaded personal data on up to 200,000 voters. The Arizona attack was more limited and involved introducing malicious software into the voter registration system, Yahoo News quoted a state official as saying. No data was removed in that attack, the official said. US intelligence officials have become increasingly worried that hackers sponsored by Russia or other countries may attempt to disrupt the November presidential election.

Comments

A effective attack and defense

[TechyImmigrant]

Attack:
1) Break into registration system
2) Deregister 5% of voters registered to the party you want to lose in close contest states.

Defense:
1) Get rid of registration and let everyone vote.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Bob the Super Hamste]

You think Illinois or Arizona are close states?

Re:A effective attack and defense

[SuricouRaven]

Removing voter registration prevents some attacks, but it makes others much easier.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[climb_no_fear]

Arizona certainly is

http://tucson.com/news/local/new-poll-has-trump-clinton-tied-in-arizona/article_01a67ecc-6e07-11e6-a2c4-6b0510540d4c.html

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Anonymous Coward]

Many people in AZ vote by mail using the permanent early voter registration.

So those ballots, like the one I have right here with me right now, are going to be on paper.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Bob the Super Hamste]

That is somewhat surprising. Being one of those far north states that is very blue I just figured that Arizona was only slightly less red than Texas since that is how they are often represented.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[sycodon]

A Better Defense.

1. Take the fucking registration systems OFF the internet.

You'd think the State IT departments never heard of something called the Intranet.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[rickb928]

You're gonna have to carry it to your pollng place then .

Re: A effective attack and defense

[ArmoredDragon]

You can either mail it in or bring it to a polling station.

I was at first surprised to see Arizona mentioned because our ballot system uses those forms where you use a marker to draw a line to connect your choice. The scanners aren't internet connected and just show a tally that gets reported, with write in candidates being manually counted where indicated.

That said, it somewhat makes sense that no actual damage was done in the Arizona case, though I honestly have no idea how registration data is stored as it is possible to register to vote online at the service Arizona website used by the DMV.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Obfuscant]

Attack: 1) hacker uses a hacksaw to remove padlock on bicycle 2) hacker takes bicycle

Defense: 1) get rid of padlock on bicycles so anyone can take them.

1) Get rid of registration and let everyone vote.

Yeah. Right. That will help remove fraud from the election process.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Anonymous Coward]

It comes with a postage-paid return envelope. I have no idea why anyone would want to walk it over to the poll.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[ArmoredDragon]

You'll have to take it to the polling station if you waited too long to mail it in.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[HornWumpus]

Obviously vulnerable to database stuffing. e.g. All registered Ds get 10 ballots.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Albanach]

There was a GNU project to create free software for online voting. In 2002, Jason Kitcat the project coordinator abandoned development, pointing to this quote from Bruce Schneier: "a secure Internet voting system is theoretically possible, but it would be the first secure networked application ever created in the history of computers."

I don't see anything having changed in the intervening fourteen years, other than perhaps attackers getting more sophisticated. We may not have internet voting, but the idea that voting machines or those used in the tabulation of votes are connected to the internet is madness.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Anonymous Coward]

No data was removed (read: exfiltrated) in that attack, the official said.

Right, no data removed. Is that "govt. speak" for:
      - data was added, but we do not know the imposter records so we will not mention it
      - data was altered, but we cannot tell which records are affected so we will not mention it
      - data was deleted, but we do not know which data was improperly deleted so we will not mention it

Re:A effective attack and defense

[mrchaotica]

As far as I can tell, Arizona's reputation is almost entirely due to this asshat.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[AutodidactLabrat]

It's Arizona.
Much more likely R's get 10 votes in Joe Arpaio country.
Even if he is in prison

Re: A effective attack and defense

[rickb928]

The election is tomorrow. It's doubtful you can mail a ballot today and get it in on time.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[rickb928]

And that AC has...

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Dread_ed]

Well that and the fact that Arizona grew tired of the constant stream of illegal immigrants robbing, raping and killing their constituents. In an obviously misguided attempt to try to enforce immigration laws that our faithful supreme federal government would not they passed their own laws that would allow their local police departments to help control immigration.

The Federal Government sued them and won the right to go on not enforcing federal immigration laws which are currently on the books, thereby rendering Arizona helpless to defend its own borders. If that makes any damn sense at all...
 

Re: A effective attack and defense

[jeff4747]

And you don't get to fill out that form (or it isn't counted if you mailed it) if your voter registration has been removed from the database. Or altered so your address/birth date/whatever are wrong.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[Anonymous Coward]

The names are listed on the outside of the envelope. A member of each party is present to challenge any ballot prior to opening it.

If there's something wrong with it and it's not too late, they'll send you another ballot to do it right. This usually only happens if you forget to sign the envelope.

They can check the addresses the ballots are mailed to. So if one address is getting 500 ballots, well, that's going to make people wonder unless it's a dormatory.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[TechyImmigrant]

It works fine elsewhere. Have a big list of citizens. If you're a citizen, you can go in to vote. If you try to vote an are not, you get prosecuted.

Non citizens have absolutely zero incentive to vote. Why bother taking the risk? This is why the data shows it almost never happens.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[Lennie]

That doesn't stop people from deploying it in real life: https://media.ccc.de/v/31c3_-_... actually very interesting to see what people do/try to do.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Obfuscant]

If you're a citizen, you can go in to vote.

Go in where? I get my ballots by mail.

Non citizens have absolutely zero incentive to vote.

Really? "If I vote for someone who promises to give me free stuff, I might get free stuff." Or "if I vote against someone who wants to enforce the laws that would deport me, maybe I won't be deported." Doesn't sound like zero incentive to me.

Why bother taking the risk?

With half the people in the country denying that it does or could take place, the risk is minimal. And when the person you helped elect takes charge. the risk goes away completely.

This is why the data shows it almost never happens.

Except in Chicago where it is a running joke. And of course, few waste time collecting data on something that they actively deny ever happens.

Re: A effective attack and defense

[HornWumpus]

So everybody registers at 9 friends houses as well as their own.

They figured out how to steal elections with paper ballots and boxes centuries ago. It's so easy, even a democrat can do it.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[TechyImmigrant]

If you're a citizen, you can go in to vote.

Go in where? I get my ballots by mail.

So does my wife. She shouldn't need to register to do so.

Non citizens have absolutely zero incentive to vote.

Really? "If I vote for someone who promises to give me free stuff, I might get free stuff." Or "if I vote against someone who wants to enforce the laws that would deport me, maybe I won't be deported." Doesn't sound like zero incentive to me.

As a non citizen (of the US) I've not noticed anyone offering me such a reward for voting illegally in a US election.

Why bother taking the risk?

With half the people in the country denying that it does or could take place, the risk is minimal. And when the person you helped elect takes charge. the risk goes away completely.

This is why the data shows it almost never happens.

Except in Chicago where it is a running joke. And of course, few waste time collecting data on something that they actively deny ever happens.

That case is the corruption of the voting system by the administrators of the voting system, not the voters.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Obfuscant]

So does my wife. She shouldn't need to register to do so.

Why not? Why should she be mailed a ballot if she's just going to throw it away? If she's not interested enough in voting to register, why bother? Why should YOU even get close to a ballot that you can simply fill out and send in on her behalf when she isn't interested enough to even register?

As a non citizen (of the US) I've not noticed anyone offering me such a reward for voting illegally in a US election.

Oh, please. People don't need someone to walk up to them with a gilt-edged invitation to know that illegal voting can be beneficial to them. You think illegal aliens need someone to tell them that it would be in their best interests were a politician who will not enforce immigration law be elected to the highest office in the land? (As if local political activists aren't already telling them that, too.)

That case is the corruption of the voting system by the administrators of the voting system, not the voters.

Who do you think walks in the door asking for ballot for a dead person, or is bused around the city to different voting places so they can vote? The voter. The election officials turn a blind eye, and then try denying that there is any fraud, but there are people casting those ballots.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[rtb61]

You do not eliminate registration, you allow on site registration on the day of the vote. You are not meant to be so fussed about preventing people from voting more than once, so much as being able to prosecute and penalise them quite severely after the event. So if there is real concern, simply take a photo at the polling station when they check off their name. The whole idea is to get as many eligible people to vote as possible and if not enough do, make it compulsory so they learn at least one of their responsibilities as a citizen of a democratic state, don't vote and you betray your citizenship. Corrupt that democracy and you should be charged with treason and suffer the appropriate penalties.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Maritz]

It works fine elsewhere. Have a big list of citizens. If you're a citizen, you can go in to vote. If you try to vote an are not, you get prosecuted.

Non citizens have absolutely zero incentive to vote. Why bother taking the risk? This is why the data shows it almost never happens.

Mmhmm. If you're going to dial back standards to that level, just have a fucking online poll. It'll be about as secure.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not? Why should she be mailed a ballot if she's just going to throw it away?

That is how it works everywhere else.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[TechyImmigrant]

It works fine elsewhere. Have a big list of citizens. If you're a citizen, you can go in to vote. If you try to vote an are not, you get prosecuted.

Non citizens have absolutely zero incentive to vote. Why bother taking the risk? This is why the data shows it almost never happens.

Mmhmm. If you're going to dial back standards to that level, just have a fucking online poll. It'll be about as secure.

Because online voting is horribly insecure.
Paper voting is effective and reasonably secure as long as you take measures to make it so.

Re:A effective attack and defense

[shutdown -p now]

Where exactly is that "everywhere else"?

Most places outside of US either have voter registration, or they require you to show ID to vote. Sometimes both.

Illinois you say

[Bob the Super Hamste]

So it sounds like things won't change much in Illinois. I believe the saying goes:

I’ve arranged with my executor to be buried in Chicago. Because when I die, I want to still remain active politically.

Re:Illinois you say

[Anonymous Coward]

So it sounds like things won't change much in Illinois. I believe the saying goes:

I’ve arranged with my executor to be buried in Chicago. Because when I die, I want to still remain active politically.

You will know Russia is involved when over 100% of people show up to vote... including dead ones.

Re:Illinois you say

[Thelasko]

Living in Illinois myself, I find it interesting their voter registration system was breached. That's because, to my knowledge, it's not internet facing! Last time I registered to vote, I had to print out the paperwork and send it snail mail.

I guess this means the server that processes voter registrations is internet facing, it just has no user interface. All of the vulnerabilities, none of the convenience!

Re:Illinois you say

[HornWumpus]

Greater than 100% election turnouts are common in St. Louis urban districts. Often after the polls are held open until the Ds know exactly how many more votes they need.

That's been true for decades. But there is no evidence of voter fraud...

Just stop this nonsense

[0dugo0]

Please stop this nonsense and autoregister everyone who is allowed to vote.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe why people arnt auto registered is because its a personal choice. If you register to vote you also get responsibilities like jury duty and selective service.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[PopeRatzo]

If you register to vote you also get responsibilities like jury duty and selective service.

Selective service is not tied to your voter registration in any way.

In some states, there is a connection with drivers license, and with student loans, but in no US state is there any connection between registering to vote and selective service.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[0dugo0]

I can't believe the states still user voter registration records for jury duty selection anno 2016. The again, this is the USA we are talking about here, where you need to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get an ID card.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

The draft has nothing to do with registering to vote. Don't spread nonsense.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet, it's also illegal to fail to register for the selective service.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[0dugo0]

And this is enforced how!? If you know people need to be registered for selective service, why not just register them instead of prosecuting them.. *boggle*

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[cayenne8]

The again, this is the USA we are talking about here, where you need to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get an ID card.

Err...where else would you have people go?

They already are set up and have the equipment for drivers' licenses at the DMV, makes sense to do all IDs of this form there, no?

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Obfuscant]

Please stop this nonsense and autoregister everyone who is allowed to vote.

So you send ballots to everyone, even those who have no desire to vote, and have not bothered to study any of the issues at all because of that. Why should they be voting if they really care so little about the process?

Voter registration is so easy that it is a barrier only to those who really don't care to vote, and I think that not handing them a ballot is a good answer to the question "why should I register to vote when I don't want to?"

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[0dugo0]

Not talking about the card here, but the data. Just have Vital Records keep flags on drive-, vote-, president-, eligibility / jury- selective service duty and what-you-have.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[CanadianMacFan]

In Ontario you used to have to go our version of the DMV for drivers licenses and to another office to get the health card (with picture). I don't know where you went to get the age of majority card if you didn't drive. Now they have places that do just about everything in the one spot (with the big exception being the driving tests) instead of each department having their own service centre.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[PPH]

Selective service is not tied to your voter registration

This. But Slashdot is the Group W bench.

Personally, when I registered for the War of the Sexes, they gave me a 4-F classification.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

And this is enforced how!? If you know people need to be registered for selective service, why not just register them instead of prosecuting them.. *boggle*

Well, it's effectively not enforced. It's been 20 years since any prosecution. In theory, they can cross-check with other participatory actions, to see if you are registered, but a conviction requires a knowing and willful failure, which means all you have to do is say you forgot, or didn't realize you may a mistake.

Participation rates are hard to measure, but given the absence of any actual draft, nobody really cares, any more than they do about mattress tags. Even efforts in Congress are mostly perfunctory.

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

No, auto-register them but they still must come to the polling stations to get a ballot. No need to mail stuff out unless they opted in to it. At least how I would understand it.

Personally, I still prefer making people to actually register for it as that actually works to reduce the influence of peopling trying to rig elections as then they can't go with knowledge of the people they know will never actually vote and vote in their place, especially with the mail in ballots. The current setup has virtually no voter fraud as they don't know who is registered to vote or not and those who are registered has a good chance of actually casting the vote which would alert them to the fraud quickly.

I do NOT support the whole required ID laws as they serve a huge purpose in turning away voters. If they know the identifying information of the voter, that should be enough.

The ONLY way I will support requiring an ID to vote is the day they are issued for FREE from facilities mandated to be open 6 days per week, 12 hours per day and required to have at least 3 in every county in America with the only exceptions being made for the counties that are near empty. Short of those stipulations, it makes the barrier to getting a license too big in some areas, especially for the poor.

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

because one of the political parties in the US really doesn't want everyone to vote

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Obfuscant]

No, auto-register them but they still must come to the polling stations to get a ballot.

What's a "polling station"? Here in Oregon we have nothing like that.

The current setup has virtually no voter fraud

Sure. We know this because? How does someone who didn't vote know that he voted so he can report the fraudlent vote? And what was all that complaining about Florida a few years ago? And how many dead people have to vote in Chicago before it's fraud?

as they don't know who is registered to vote or not

You don't know that voter registration lists are available to the public, do you? That's how the parties know who they should be calling to "get out the vote" and who they shouldn't, for example.

ID laws as they serve a huge purpose in turning away voters.

They turn away people who want to vote but aren't supposed to. That's fine with me.

Another AC:

because one of the political parties in the US really doesn't want everyone to vote

That's correct. One of the political parties wants only those people who are legally authorized to vote to do so. The other party wants everyone to vote, even those who aren't authorized, especially those who are beneficiaries of government largesse.

Re: Just stop this nonsense

[jeff4747]

And this is enforced how!?

Usually by denying other government services. Since we're talking about 18-year-olds, they'd notice by being denied access to student loans and grants, or TANF.

Theoretically it can be prosecuted, and the government has plenty of data to do so - they know your age from your SSN and they know your address (or parent's address if you're a dependent) from taxes. Though without a draft they're not going to bother prosecuting.

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[jeff4747]

So you send ballots to everyone, even those who have no desire to vote, and have not bothered to study any of the issues at all because of that.

It's cute you this makes them less informed than the average voter. 'Cause the people who "care so much" tend to vote for the first candidate on the ballot. http://insight.kellogg.northwe...

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

This is one of the most blatantly stupid posts I've seen on Slashdot, so stupid that you are firmly in the "too politically ill informed to be allowed to vote" territory.

You do realize one party actively stops registrations, don't you? And auto registration is dead fucking easy. Enough with the bullshit and auto register like they do in sane countries.

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Obfuscant]

It's cute you this makes them less informed than the average voter.

Logical fallacy. I said nothing about the 'average voter'. I said that they would be uninformed because they have no interest in the process. It's not cute, it's the truth.

Why do you seem to have a problem with letting people who have no interest in voting remain unregistered to vote?

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[HornWumpus]

They only want citizens to vote, and only once each. Fascists.

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[jeff4747]

I'm afraid the fallacy is on your part. Because inherent in your claim is that the people who do go and register have interest and are better informed.

That is generally not the case.

Re:Just stop this nonsense

[Obfuscant]

Because inherent in your claim is that the people who do go and register have interest and are better informed.

Wrong. I said nothing at all about people who are interested enough in voting enough register. The fact that a registered voter is or is not informed has nothing to do with the people who don't care about voting at all. You are applying a logical fallacy that "A isn't B" must mean "Not A is B". "Uninterested voters are not informed" does not imply that "Interested voters are informed."

That is generally not the case.

That is irrelevant to the discussion about why you don't just send ballots to everyone who is a citizen. It would be an argument for a poll test, but that's not legal.

Re:The fix is in

[barc0001]

These are election databases that were breached, not voting machines. And nowhere is Clinton implicated in that article, in fact the DNC is mentioned as victims of Russian hacking.

But hey, feel free to fling unsubstantiated rumor around.

So Trump is creating jobs...

[Bob_Who]

Its the best new prospect for real computer contract work in Russia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Estonia, etc. in years!

Re:So Trump is creating jobs...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because Trump said something near it doesn't mean it was from his camp. That is the real kicker this election there have been very few horrible things that Trump has said out of ignorance out loud, that I don't think Hillary could do out of malice in the dark if it suited her desires.

Re:So Trump is creating jobs...

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump winning is the LAST thing they want, given his position on immigration, and his repeated flip-flopping on H1B visas.

Clinton, on the other hand, is someone they can influence (i.e. bribe). If they can skew the numbers, they will definitely do so in her favor.

Re:So Trump is creating jobs...

[shutdown -p now]

Russia doesn't give a fuck about H1B visas and immigration. If anything, they are considered harmful, because they provide an avenue for "brain drain".

On the other hand, they would very much like US to get into a trade war with China (which would force Chinese to cooperate with Russia more seriously), and to abandon its NATO allies in Europe.

Step Up.. But Not By Too Much

[Anonymous Coward]

The FBI has uncovered evidence that foreign hackers breached two state election databases in recent weeks, and it has warned election officials across the country to some measures to step up the security of their computer systems.

The FBI later specified to not step it up so much that they cannot break in if need be.

No...just, no.

[daveschroeder]

No one actually has to "hack" anything -- just get the thought out there. No matter who wins, stories like this will be cited by the losing side as "proof" the election was "rigged" or "hacked", and that the winner didn't win legitimately. I can think of few things more damaging to the democratic institution.

See also:

A Powerful Russian Weapon: The Spread of False Stories

Re: No...just, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

Also see blackboxvoting.org, especially look up their archived blogs on the attempt in 96, what States sent their results too in 2000, and 04, and the myriad ways the same has been done since the 06 death of the Republican it man. Interesting story.

Re:No...just, no.

[PopeRatzo]

No one actually has to "hack" anything -- just get the thought out there. No matter who wins, stories like this will be cited by the losing side as "proof" the election was "rigged" or "hacked", and that the winner didn't win legitimately.

One side is already making this argument, and is recruiting an army of armed "observers" to stand around polling places and act menacing.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.vanityfair.com/news...

Re:No...just, no.

[Obfuscant]

One side is already making this argument, and is recruiting an army of armed "observers" to stand around polling places and act menacing.

Citation required. No, neither of your links talks about armed observers, and nothing about acting "menacing".

And you'll have to explain why asking people to keep an eye on the process is worse than the New Black Panther party "keeping an eye on the process" by acting menacing and shouting racial slurs at potential voters.

As for the second link claiming there is no fraud and no fraud could possibly change the result of a "national election". It's interesting that they then list a bunch of voting fraud at the end of the article, admitting the notorious "cemetary voting" in Chicago. And they're politically ignorant for calling the election of the President a "national" election. It's an election held on the same day in all fifty states, resulting in state-by-state winners that are later tallied in the Electoral College.

If no local fraud could swing the results of a national election, then what all the crying about the state of Florida results when Bush was elected over Gore?

Re:No...just, no.

[Hognoxious]

No matter who wins, stories like this will be cited by the losing side as "proof" the election was "rigged" or "hacked"

Exactly the reason why if I worked for the FBI I'd make up a story like this. Then get the popcorn out..

Re:No...just, no.

[PopeRatzo]

Citation required. No, neither of your links talks about armed observers, and nothing about acting "menacing".

No offense, but when you've promoted "Second Amendment solutions" to prevent a president from appointing judges, and you're promoting a civilian "Deportation Force", and you're ginning up the notion that if you lose the election, it's because it was "rigged", what the fuck do you think he's talking about? You can't be that stupid.

And you'll have to explain why asking people to keep an eye on the process is worse than the New Black Panther party

The New Black Panther party was two guys standing outside of a Philadelphia polling place. And they were not responding to a public call for a show of force by candidate Barack Obama. So, you dumb fuck, the "worse" part is that it's Donald Fucking Trump who's the one asking for thugs to stand in front of polling places.

If no local fraud could swing the results of a national election, then what all the crying about the state of Florida results when Bush was elected over Gore?

Jesus wept. It wasn't "local fraud" that caused 2000 to be seen as a crooked election. It was the fact that it was decided by the Supreme Court along partisan lines.

Re:No...just, no.

[Obfuscant]

No offense, but when you've promoted "Second Amendment solutions" to prevent a president from appointing judges, and you're promoting a civilian "Deportation Force", and you're ginning up the notion that if you lose the election, it's because it was "rigged", what the fuck do you think he's talking about? You can't be that stupid.

So no, you are intending offense, and you have no actual quote or citation that shows him calling for "armed observers to act menacing". You're making it up.

As for your fear of "second amendment solutions", what was actually said what that "second amendment people" know how to deal with the political process of infringement of their second amendment rights. It's amazing to me, ten minutes before he made that comment every anti-Trump person on the planet knew all about how much political influence the NRA has (and blames it on bribes and not just having a lot of people as members), but five minutes after he referred to "second amendment people" every one of those anti-Trump people forgot all about the NRA and jumped to the ridiculous conclusion that Trump must be calling for an armed overthrow of the government. An armed overthrow that the "second amendment people" have never resorted to, so to believe that Trump was saying that they had experience in doing that would be ridiculous.

The New Black Panther party was two guys standing outside of a Philadelphia polling place.

Check. Voter intimidation is ok as long as it isn't too much. And we ignore all the other reports of similar things.

And they were not responding to a public call for a show of force by candidate Barack Obama.

And neither did Donald Trump make any call for a show of force.

So, you dumb fuck, the "worse" part is that it's Donald Fucking Trump who's the one asking for thugs to stand in front of polling places.

Citation required. Oh, you've already admitted you have none.

Jesus wept. It wasn't "local fraud" that caused 2000 to be seen as a crooked election.

It was fraud alleged in various counties in the state of Florida. At least, that's where all the court cases were being filed. You can't get any more "local" than the county level when it's the county elections departments who run the elections.

It was the fact that it was decided by the Supreme Court along partisan lines.

No offense, but you are lying. The fact is that the election was decided by the legal process as it was designed and implemented prior to the election, by the legislature of the State of Florida, who is tasked with deciding that process for the electors in the State of Florida. The Supreme Court correctly decided that it was the State of Florida legislature that had that authority and that they acted appropriately.

Re: No...just, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the primary motivation for your dishonesty?

Re:No...just, no.

[No Longer an AC]

As for your fear of "second amendment solutions", what was actually said what that "second amendment people" know how to deal with the political process of infringement of their second amendment rights.

This is just my interpretation of what trump said:

* He didn't literally mean for anyone to assassinate Clinton - or any SCOTUS nominees or to rise up to overthrow the government.

* He did refer to the 2nd Amendment to evoke the "spirit" (if you will) of many of his supporters who talk about "2nd Amendment solutions" and have protested in the past with slogans such as "We came unarmed. This time." and those who love to quote Jefferson about refreshing the tree of liberty "from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

* He said it because he knew is audience would love it and he knew it would be criticized by his opponents. If that was his intent he certainly succeeded.

Re:No...just, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

> It wasn't "local fraud" that caused 2000 to be seen as a crooked election. It was the fact that it was decided by the Supreme Court along partisan lines.

The only thing the Supreme Court decided was that you had to use the rules that were originally in place, you couldn't change them after getting results you didn't like. That's it.

It was certainly along partisan lines. It was probably too close to call with any real confidence. But sure, Bush performed poorly. The war was dumb. I remember thinking quite specifically that it was the dumbest possible move at the time.

Even so, he was fairly elected, so please don't rewrite history on us. They could, should, and did change various things afterwards, like the terribly butterfly ballots, but changing the rules during an election is a bad idea for a whole lot of reasons, not the least of which is that partisan Florida judges deciding the election by changing the rules would have been even worse than partisan Supreme Court justices deciding not to change the rules.

Re:No...just, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing the Supreme Court decided was that you had to use the rules that were originally in place, you couldn't change them after getting results you didn't like.

Wrong, the Supreme Court of the United States decided it knew better than the Florida Supreme Court what the laws of Florida entailed.

That it was partisan was the problem.

Even so, he was fairly elected, so please don't rewrite history on us.

They could, should, and did change various things afterwards, like the terribly butterfly ballots, but changing the rules during an election is a bad idea for a whole lot of reasons, not the least of which is that partisan Florida judges deciding the election by changing the rules would have been even worse than partisan Supreme Court justices deciding not to change the rules.

Ah, but the Supreme Court justices only made their decision BECAUSE that was the one that got their desired outcome, a Bush Presidency. That it overruled a state Supreme Court, that it lead to questions remaining about the integrity of the election, that it basically punted on the issue, made it worse than any number of changes that could have been implemented.

You see something wrong, you change it. You don't stick with a wrong outcome because the rules require it.

Re:No...just, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus wept. It wasn't "local fraud" that caused 2000 to be seen as a crooked election.

It was fraud alleged in various counties in the state of Florida. At least, that's where all the court cases were being filed. You can't get any more "local" than the county level when it's the county elections departments who run the elections.

Actually, no, it wasn't fraud that was the problem. Note how nobody was convicted of voter fraud, electoral fraud, or anything else. At most, you got inadequate systems and inconsistent implementations. But that's not fraud. At most, incompetence. And really, no convictions that I know about resulted, so you can't even argue it was criminal incompetence.

However, the real problem came at the Supreme Court. They made a blatantly partisan decision, that got the person they wanted into office.

It was the fact that it was decided by the Supreme Court along partisan lines.

No offense, but you are lying. The fact is that the election was decided by the legal process as it was designed and implemented prior to the election, by the legislature of the State of Florida, who is tasked with deciding that process for the electors in the State of Florida. The Supreme Court correctly decided that it was the State of Florida legislature that had that authority and that they acted appropriately.

Bush v. Gore's decision is known. It is somewhat complicated, but it was hinged on a 5-4 decision to pick the outcome for Bush winning. You can check their partisan history yourself.

If the Florida Legislature wanted to say anything, they'd have had to get back into session, meanwhile, it's a matter of interpreting what was wanted. In the mean time, it was the Florida Supreme Court that had the say. The US Supreme Court overruled them, which might not be so bad if they hadn't done so in a partisan fashion, but the fact is, they did. They picked the President they wanted. That's a problem.

So no offense, but you really don't grasp what happened. If the Supremes were smart, they'd have passed the problem to Congress, as outside the scope of their jurisdiction, but nope, they ran right into it.

But don't worry, after a few decades, nobody will remember the truth.

Washington State uses this fancy new method

[WillAffleckUW]

We use these things called paper ballots.

So does Oregon.

We all vote by mail, so hack all you want.

We can always rerun the paper ballots again.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[TykeClone]

And select the "right" ones when you do. Or find more in the trunk of someone's car...

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[DaHat]

We use these things called paper ballots.

So does Oregon.

We all vote by mail, so hack all you want.

We have a similar process here in Washington... just one problem, it is horribly insecure.

We can always rerun the paper ballots again.

Because there are no ways to cast any more ballots than you are legally entitled to under the OR or WA system, no way at all.

Right now I'm working on a couple of higher priority personal projects, once they are out of the way I go back to trying to find a lawyer interested in the project as I'm not about to demonstrate it without a permission slip signed by the state's Secretary of State & Attorney General... something I don't see being able to get on my own.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[Anonymous Coward]

Paper ballots seem like a more secure option to irrational and non-technical people scare of dangerous hax0rs.
But when you start actually thinking about it, you'll realize that it's much easier to make paper ballots disappear without leaving a trace.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[WillAffleckUW]

They have this fancy thing called barcodes and numbers to ID them.

And we register you when you get a driver's license, in person, where we take this thing called a picture. Automatically.

Epic Fail, extreme right. We do it, we do it more cheaply, and more people vote.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[laie_techie]

They have this fancy thing called barcodes and numbers to ID them.

And we register you when you get a driver's license, in person, where we take this thing called a picture. Automatically.

Epic Fail, extreme right. We do it, we do it more cheaply, and more people vote.

Except you can't require photo ID of voters because of racism! If I were in charge, I would require ID verification of all voters, but it seems too many minorities can't afford state issued drivers license or id.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[tburkhol]

We all vote by mail, so hack all you want.

Hacking the voter registration system allows you to create fake voters. Fake voters can mail in ballots just as easily as real voters, and no one is likely to notice the identical quinquagintatuplets as unusual if they don't show up in person.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[Anonymous Coward]

Vote by mail is open to other kinds of fraud. With a traditional voting booth I can offer you $10k to vote for my candidate but since you go into a private booth to cast your vote I'll never know if you voted the way I wanted. Thus, bribery doesn't work. But with vote-by-mail I can actually sit there and watch you fill out your ballot and put it in the mail before I hand over the cash.

Similarly, we've already had incidents in Oregon where churches and unions asked their members to bring in their ballots so they could help fill them out. While that's not fraud exactly, there is certainly enough social pressure that one can imagine people voting for what the group wants even if it doesn't match their actual preferences.

I'd prefer a paper ballot filled out in person in a voting booth.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[bigpat]

Paper based forms with optical scanners seems to work out best these days. Then you can get quick results on election night from the optical scanner results and you just need to have real people manually count the ballots later in order to confirm the automated results.

Easier said than done, but it is very important that elections have verifiable results based on the physical ballots and not just a computer spitting out some result.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[WillAffleckUW]

Canada uses paper ballots too, filled out in pencil in the voting booth, and everyone in the entire country is automatically registered to vote.

Works fine.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[DaHat]

They have this fancy thing called barcodes and numbers to ID them.

And we register you when you get a driver's license, in person, where we take this thing called a picture. Automatically.

So what you are saying... is Oregon lacks a secret ballot... as if the ballot itself has 'barcodes and numbers to ID them'... and per your words, you seem to link that to the (racist) photo id... if there is any connection between the two, and you are proud of this?

Epic Fail, extreme left, you just made it possible for trivial voter intimidation. "Well we sent you ballot SN SXFP-CHYK-ONI6-S89U, but according to the counting machine, it seems you didn't vote the right way."

More so... what does this thing called a 'picture' do for the integrity of the voting process when you vote from the privacy of your own home and do not have to show your face or id as part of the process again?

and more people vote.

What is the inherit advantage of 'more' people voting? Are you saying you want masses of uninformed people voting... just so long as they are more easily swayed to your side?

I'd bet good money that the barcodes & IDs on your actual ballot (the part that gets counted) is simply for differentiating different precincts/tax districts/cities/etc from each other at counting time and unrelated to the actual sender. I've verified this up here in WA that mine and my neighbors ballots are identical, several times.

Now when you mail in your ballot, you will often put it in a secrecy envelop which bares few specific info, which is also placed into the actual return envelope which has detailed information on you (so they can count that you voted upon receipt)... then remove the inner contents and separate from the postal envelope for security.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[DaHat]

Similarly, we've already had incidents in Oregon where churches and unions asked their members to bring in their ballots so they could help fill them out. While that's not fraud exactly, there is certainly enough social pressure that one can imagine people voting for what the group wants even if it doesn't match their actual preferences.

That's just a larger scale version of what I imagine happens in many homes. In my own, my wife is rarely inclined to vote, so I could easily just cast her ballot with my choices and no one would know, just as I could stand over her and demand she vote the way I want.

Have a few kids off at college who didn't set up mail forwarding? How likely is it that anyone would know that their very political parent opted not to manually forward the ballots, but instead fill them out and send them back in.

There are laughable security measures in place to prevent this sort of thing, and basically zero way to detect it... which of course means it never ever happens.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[WillAffleckUW]

It is secret.

It's a federal crime to mess with the USPS.

You can go to jail for 10 years.

And they mean it.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[jeff4747]

Doesn't matter if you use paper ballots when your registration was deleted from the database. Your vote won't count no matter how many times it is re-run.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[jeff4747]

It also allows you to remove real voters. DELETE queries work just as well as INSERT.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[DaHat]

It is secret.

Then would you like to carify your comments about photo id's & #'s on the ballots? Not to mention exactly how/why your system is so much more secure than those in other states?

It's a federal crime to mess with the USPS.

It's also a federal crime to do many things... prosecutors are pretty busy dealing with just the cases they know of.

You can go to jail for 10 years.

If they catch you... and they bring charges... and convict you.

And they mean it.

Just like they mean that marijuana is illegal under federal law? I'd go buy some at a near by store just to point out how much they mean it, however I abstane so I don't end up perjuring myself on a form 4473.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[WillAffleckUW]

No, I don't want to carify.

Stop pretending you know anything about actual elections procedures. I've been doing this since before you were in diapers and I was coding IBM System 360 using punch cards.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[kaatochacha]

I've argued this for ages, since ID is essentially required to be a citizen, you make it free for all. No charge to obtain and ID, and reasonable access to offices that issue them.
Because really, if you have to pay for ID and you have to have ID to vote, it's essentially a variant on a poll tax.

That being said, I also think you should have to present ID to vote.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[Anonymous Coward]

So what you are saying... is Oregon lacks a secret ballot... as if the ballot itself has 'barcodes and numbers to ID them'... and per your words, you seem to link that to the (racist) photo id... if there is any connection between the two, and you are proud of this?

Not quite; the ballot signature is on the outer envelope; the inner envelope is blank, and contains the actual ballot. I believe the inner ballot does have a code, but hell, you can't not have some sort of identifier on a ballot just to ensure that somebody isn't printing a bunch and flooding the system with 'em, right? I don't believe there's any tracking of who's mailed which ballot (though I'll admit that's troublesome).

The very best balloting system I've seen is in (wait for it ...) Alabama. Voting was in person, the ballots were unbelievably clear, and they went into a box that, if I'm correct, scanned them on the way in. A complete count at the end of the day, and a paper trail for verification.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[DaHat]

No, I don't want to carify.

Don't want to... or can't?

Stop pretending you know anything about actual elections procedures.

Unlike you, I'm limiting my assumptions as to what I think you know.

Unlike you, I do know what research I've done into the WA system, how it can be exploited and even tested multiple parts in legal ways, all that remains is getting some permission and a full end to end demonstration of say... 10,000 ballots being cast to prove the problem.

I've been doing this

This? What is 'this'? You've not said anything specific as to what you've done as far as I can tell here.

since before you were in diapers and I was coding IBM System 360 using punch cards.

And? You were born in 1960... so what? Simply being older does not mean one is more knowledgeable about specific things, only that they've been around for longer, it all depends on how/what they've spent their time & attention.

Would you like to compare notes as to the vulnerabilities in the WA system? Tell you what, when I finally publish my research, I'll drop you a copy via the post to your the condo you've owned since 1999, sound good?

Note, I'm not saying what I am above in an attempt to intimidate, only to hint (I could say much more, but don't want to leave too much of your PII here) at the degree of what I have found to be wrong in the system here, which is part of the problem in this state.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[Anonymous Coward]

Intimidation accomplished.

Re:Washington State uses this fancy new method

[shutdown -p now]

You can require photo IDs all you want. But if you do, you have to ensure that everyone eligible to vote can get one without hurdles. This means not charging for them, not reducing the number of places that can issue them in areas where you don't like the way people vote, and not demanding ridiculous supporting documentation that few people would readily have to issue one.

200,000 voters how meny are dead?

[Joe_Dragon]

200,000 voters how meany are dead? but still are on the rolls?

Re: 200,000 voters how meny are dead?

[Anonymous Coward]

How MANY misspellings and bad grammar can you put into a single post?

Re:The fix is in

[HornWumpus]

Unsubstantiated rumors like the ruskies having anything to do with it?

THATS IT!

[WolfgangVL]

Voting is no longer safe, we are obviously going to have to suspend elections until we are 100% sure the computers are trustworthy!

Re:THATS IT!

[Dasher42]

There's no reason we can't have a transparent, well-monitored paper ballot. With all the issues that have surfaced, I think that's our best option. The average poll-worker does not have the technical expertise to maintain security on a computerized system, and the real experts have demonstrated so many flaws in widely-used voting machines that they should be scuttled.

Re:THATS IT!

[bigpat]

Voting is no longer safe, we are obviously going to have to suspend elections until we are 100% sure the computers are trustworthy!

Really though, people should suspend the secret ballot if there are legitimate widespread issues with vote tampering. The secret ballot is less important than the ability to maintain the integrity of the election itself. Sure that opens some people up to voter intimidation, but you have to trust that enough people are going to vote in their best interests to overwhelm any voter intimidation.

If you are trying to boot strap a civil society using democratically elected institutions then you have a chicken and egg problem of having a representative trustworthy government to manage a free and fair election in an ethical way in the first place. The answer is to ditch the secret ballot.

Re:THATS IT!

[Areyoukiddingme]

Voting is no longer safe, we are obviously going to have to suspend elections until we are 100% sure the computers are trustworthy!

Thanks Obama!

Re:THATS IT!

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama our first black president, and our last president.

Re:The fix is in

[MightyMartian]

How the hell can a completely unevidenced and completely concocted claim be modded up? If that's the case, then I'v ehears SuperKendall is in fact the secret love child of Pablo Escobar and a young Guatemalan fruit picker, and he has been methodically destroying Venezuela's economy because he loves grits.

So if it happens when then?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what do we do if 5 states vote 100% for Trump according to the official election results. Not entirely impossible because that would be like Crimea. Not even Trump supporters would believe it, but no "proof" of hacking.

Re:So if it happens when then?

[PopeRatzo]

Not even Trump supporters would believe it

I don't think we want to test the extremes of what Trump supporters would believe. From all appearances, they are a rather credulous lot when it comes to their Dear Leader.

http://www.mediaite.com/online...

"69% of Trump voters believe that if their candidate loses, it will be because the election was rigged. A mere 16% of Trump supporters think that a Clinton victory would come about because she won more votes.

Perhaps even odder, 40% of Trump voters believe that the long-extinct ACORN will be responsible for the election fraud. ACORN has not existed since 2010. "

Re:So if it happens when then?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not even Trump supporters would believe it,

Trump supporters will believe anything Trump says.

If he tells them this November that 108% of voters voted for him, 5% voted for Mitt Romney, and -32% (negative 32%) voted for Hillary Clinton, they will believe that and cheer thunderously. And complain bitterly about "bias" when any of the media dare to report differently.

Re:So if it happens when then?

[JustNiz]

The same thing as when 105% of voters voted for Obama. Nothing.

Re:So if it happens when then?

[guruevi]

I don't think Trump has the political clout to make it happen. He doesn't have the support of any Republican old-timers. Regardless of whether he wins the popular vote, he's losing because the game has already been decided in favor of Clinton at this point.

Re:So if it happens when then?

[Anonymous Coward]

excluding a couple of states with differing electoral vote distribution rules, if five states voted 100% for trump would be no different than if they voted 51% trump to 49%.

the states to "hack" the election in are the ones that are already considered closely contested 'battleground' states. turn them to your favor, win the election. make subtle-enough of changes in vote counts, go absolutely undetected... win by 2-3 percentage points at most which is high enough to not trigger automatic recounts.

nobody would bat an eye over flordia or ohio or pennsylvania going red or blue by such a seemingly small amount because who carries them changes.. unlike something like minnesota which has gone red exactly one time since 1960 (even mcgovern was a little too far 'out there' for them).

Re:The fix is in

[SuperKendall]

Better be careful there or I'll call daddy. I do NOT like grits.

mebbe we should have done something about the

[Presto Vivace]

voting machines back in 2004.

Re:The fix is in

[Anonymous Coward]

Your daily completely concocted and non-evidenced propaganda shit gets modded up. Why are your panties suddenly in a bunch? Oh wait... because deep down, you're afraid it's true.

Vote On Paper

[Anonymous Coward]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Re:Vote On Paper

[jeff4747]

Voting on paper doesn't help when your registration was deleted from the database.

Re:The fix is in

[Anonymous Coward]

The russians hacking the servers is an insane conspiracy theory provided by the Alt-Left.

Foreign?

[JustNiz]

Call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist but wouldn't this be more likely to be at least sponsored domestically?

Re:Foreign?

[sir-gold]

Why would the rich and powerful in the US, who have already "bought" their politicians, need to rig the election any further?

In other words: only an outside entity (who doesn't benefit from Citizens United and unlimited campaign contributions) would need to rig an election using "alternate" methods

Re:Foreign?

[jeff4747]

Because the peons don't always vote like they're supposed to.

Ancient Socialist from Vermont got 46% of the vote in the primary. This will not do.

Re:Foreign?

[JustNiz]

The thing about the big corporates is they will always waste a disproportionately large amount of money on risk mitigation.

Re:Foreign?

[sir-gold]

It was the "russian" hacks that exposed the DNCs attempts to block Sanders though. Why would the "establishment" block Sanders, and then hack itself to expose the manipulation?

Re:Foreign?

[BlueStrat]

Call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist but wouldn't this be more likely to be at least sponsored domestically?

Foreign hackers could be hired by domestic US political interests. Just because the actual attack originated outside the US does not preclude the attack having been funded and ordered by some person/group in the US.

Maybe that's why Hillary Clinton has been so determined to scrub her email history from her stint as SoS. She would have been in the perfect position and had the perfect opportunity to make the necessary foreign contacts and arrangements to set something like this up.

Maybe this is part of what Julian Assange has promised for Wikileaks' "October surprise" data release.

Strat

Re:Foreign?

[JustNiz]

I didn't think of the Assange angle (interesting thought) but the "Foreign hackers hired by Hillary" thing was pretty much exactly what I was getting at.

Re:Foreign?

[jeff4747]

They didn't hack themselves. Again, the peons don't always do what they are supposed to.

But one might as well take advantage of an opportunity. So time for some old-fashioned red-baiting.

Re:Foreign?

[zedaroca]

Strange, I posted something like this and it disappeared... anyway...

Because some rich and powerful will lose the election if they don't hack it.

Both foreigners and locals buy American politicians (there are reports from both R and D). But now that hacking is allowed, that might not be enough, for anyone.
Why would the people that are used to rigging elections in the traditional way steer from the "alternate" method now that it exists and is available for anyone?

In other words: anyone seriously interested in rigging the election one way or another needs to get in the "alternate" method. That includes the people that usually do the rigging in the US by traditional means (i.e. mostly locals), and does not exclude foreigners.

Simple question

[ThatsNotPudding]

Why does ANY of this information need to be on networks with Internet access?

I'm betting the real reason is so that both parties can more easily harvest that data for electoral gain. Public Servants, my copious backside.

Re:Simple question

[0dugo0]

Why not? Your vital records and sex offender registration are a matter of public record already anyway, so who cares?

Re:Simple question

[stinerman]

Yes, that's exactly why.

In Ohio you can download the registered voter file any time you want. It's all public record. No hacking needed. It includes name, DOB, address, party registration (if applicable), and which elections you voted in back to about 2004.

Re:Simple question

[DaHat]

And this assumes the systems were directly connected to the internet... and that some staffer's desktop didn't get hijacked due to a bit of spear-phishing which allowed the bad guys to hop into the non-publicly facing systems.

"Another county in, Brit"

[swschrad]

"... And we predict Arizona presidential voters have picked... Vladimir Putin? Karl, who were you working for this time?"

Elections for sale

[Anonymous Coward]

Just hire a hacker indirectly through one of your supporters and you too can win by 51%.

They need paper trails.

Doesn't take Foreign Hackers to change elections

[Trax3001BBS]

I used to subscribe to comp.risk (usenet), article after article was about the vulnerability of electronic voting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It's real situation that is only going to get worse.

who da bogeyman now?

[Anonymous Coward]

"...US intelligence officials have become increasingly worried that hackers sponsored by Russia or other countries may attempt to disrupt the November presidential election."

__

Gimme a effing break. Russia is the new bogeyman. SICK SICK SICK!!!

Re:The fix is in

[MightyMartian]

I'm no more afraid it is true than I'm afraid you're a son of Zeus. It's an idiotic claim without a shred of evidence.

Re:The fix is in

[Tablizer]

Clinton...No rigging too small

Dude, take off your orange foil hat

In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

...water is wet.

I'm surprised that no one has published a voting booth based on Raspberry Pi platform. With a TFT screen, it shouldn't be difficult to come up with one and doubtless more secure than the systems used in Texas that I've seen. (I'm being very careful not to name a particular device. Some systems vendors are very active in suing people for commenting on their systems.)

Stupid subject line is stupid

[Rob_Bryerton]

FBI Says Foreign Hackers Breached State Election Systems

So anyone who believes ANYTHING the FBI says, at this point in time especially, is a complete moron. Instead, let's apply the "FBI Says" headline filter to the text, and observe the results.

FBI Lackeys Breached State Election Systems. Blames Foreign Hackers

Now, that's much more believable, right? Sorry FBI, you have absolutely ZERO credibility. Anyone with more than a few functional neurons KNOWS that the likelihood of anything you say being an outright fabrication or lie approaches 100%.

Re: The fix is in

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it is possable and likley that the foreign hackers received money originating from the US....

Re:The fix is in

[jeff4747]

So you breach the voter registration database, and remove/alter registrations before election day.

And it's not like that caused problems....oh wait...http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-04-25/poll-worker-voters-given-wrong-ballots-in-arizona-primary

A poll worker who was on duty during the election testified the computer system checking in voters would not allow her to give the correct ballots to 36 Democratic voters.

"By the third time I said 'Oh no, this is a problem,'" said Dianne Post, who also counted about 20 other voters that were listed in the wrong party.

Seen elsewhere on the planet

[DrYak]

So you send ballots to everyone, even those who have no desire to vote, and have not bothered to study any of the issues at all because of that. Why should they be voting if they really care so little about the process?

Surprisingly, that's exactly how things work in some democracies, specially in direct democracies where population is always voting on everything (e.g.: Switzerland).

People un-interested in voting generally throw away the ballot.
(Though probably there are few trying to find way around the - relatively simple - voter identification, and try to cast illegally an extra vote)

But such widespread diffusion of ballots is necessary in a country which votes every couple of months instead of every couple of year.

Read Again

[SuperKendall]

I didn't say anything about voting machines. A really good way to rid elections is to know who all the voters are and lots of info about them, then to vote as a lot of them...

Or if you think about it, if you have access to voting system why not insert thousands of new voters so there's no possible conflict with real voters?

found the trump klansman.

[publiclurker]

nt

Re:found the trump klansman.

[Dread_ed]

If you think I am a Trump supporter or a racist you obviously didn't read my post history, but that's not really a concern.

That you would use those terms with such abandon is telling. It is really indicative of the level of intelligence involved in the mud-slinging meta attacks that the younger generation tries to pass off as intellectual discourse (not to be left out, there are some older generation people that have learned to do this. Its even more pathetic when they do it as they should have learned better by now.) Namely, just call someone a racist and associate them with a public figure that is held in contempt by the majority of people in the particular forum you are speaking in and you don't even have to have a cogent argument. Which is for the best I guess, because I have a hard time believing that someone who resorts to this kind of behavior can get past their own stunted emotional responses to rationally consider their own opinions, much less those of someone else.

I implore you, learn to focus on the issues at hand instead of carrying around the equivalent of a sharpened stick to poke people with. You might learn that what you accuse people of, and are convinced they are a party to, is so far from the truth that you would be utterly embarrassed that you had made that accusation when you learn the facts.

Re:found the trump klansman.

[publiclurker]

don't insult your betters. Your entire post is nothing but a racist spew of ignorance. That you think that you can justify that only goes to show how badly bigots like yourself are when it comes to pretending to be respectable human beings. If you don't like the company you keep then I suggest you take a hard look at yourself and figure out where you managed to fail so seriously in life., but don't expect ethical people to pretend that you have a reason to hold your head up among respectable people.

Re:found the trump klansman.

[Dread_ed]

Way too funny! I just deconstructed your completely fraudulent method of argumentation and accusation, and what do you do? You double down and do it again, this time with gusto! Sure you turned it on its head by grouping yourself with "respectable human beings/people" instead of associating me with someone you think is deserving of ridicule, but its the same thing, bro.

Based on what you have written I am convinced that you need some serious mental health attention. "If you don't like the company you keep..." is a prime example. I made zero reference to the company I keep and my feelings about them. You invented that from your own bias, hatred and awkwardly misplaced self righteousness. It looks like you are so hungry to have someone to hate that you have no problem adding content from your own poisoned internal dialogue to what people actually say. That is a dangerous place to come from. To others it is indistinguishable from insanity.

CTRL+F proxy

[Anonymous Coward]

Back in '02 it was very common for a proxy chain to be used for source obfuscation. How can they be sure there are "foreign hackers"? Seems equally plausible to have domestic terrorists utilizing foreign resources. Also possible to have government contractors involved.

Government reduces its liability and increases risk to infrastructure with "sweetheart deals". 5th amendment for life!

Just so you are not surprised

[Anonymous Coward]

When later this year a list of SSNs is produced with all the multiple states they are recorded as having voted in for the election.

Good, the sooner the US crumbles the better

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a proud American. I want out, I want independence for my adopted state of New Hampshire (for those who want freedom & liberty), but I would love to see the socialists get independence for Vermont, the right wing nut jobs get independence for Texas, and so on. I'm sure there are probably other states and political position who would like to succeed as well. Nothing says you have to stop the free flow of goods and people. That was the original idea for the United States. However it has turned into a federal government rules the world scenario (not even just states in the US) where no one is happy.

I moved for freedom and liberty and now reside in Keene, New Hampshire. We have NHExit protests going on here now. It's a long term migration movement that has reached 10% of its goal of 20,000 movers in a fairly short time period. People were suppose to start moving in March. Well, there are already a lot of people here. Doesn't matter what town or city you move to you will find large groups of people to interact with to fight government back. For now it's mostly at the state-level, but don't imagine the feds aren't targeting us. They are finding threats and intimidation don't work so they're making it look like some of our most active activists are paedophiles (zero evidence, but that doesn't stop them raiding, multiple times, over petty stuff, and then stuff that clearly didn't happen, but it's an effort that is meant to undermine rather than they actually be able to get a conviction over).

www.freestateproject.org (initial movement, but many different groups now promoting the general goal that don't support the hypocritical FSP because of cooperation with the state over baseless CP allegation which divide and undermine former other groups they worked with)
www.freekeene.com (liberty oriented news for new hampshire, more of these as well)
www.freetalklive.com (liberty oriented talk radio, of which other shows on every topic exist as well, tech, anarchist, etc)

Sure Hillary

[Anonymous Coward]

You corrupt Marxists will stuff the ballot and then blame it on the Evildoer Rooskies !

But yeah, a criminal nation like yours deserves politicos like you.

Yes Communist

[Anonymous Coward]

What you really want to say is that you feel your ideology must succeed and a little bit of ballot stuffing is morally acceptable to make your holier-than-you ideology succeed. It worked so nicely in Russia 1917-1990 !

hahahaha

[Anonymous Coward]

Here are some small facts, boy:

A) Georgia was emboldened by U.S. advisers to attack a neighbour. Russia kicked them merely in the balls to go back where they came from. NYT lies boldly.
B) NYT works for the Banksters and their covert army, the communists (Marxism was invented in London)
C) An NYT journalist called for the assassination of Trump. No legal consequences happened. The Center Of Finance demonstrated its power, I assume.
D) NYT certainly works for NY International, who would like to control each square meter of this planet. NY is pi$$ed that their relative in Kiev did not succeed 100% with their criminal takeover of Ukraine. Now they shed croco tears that Putin plays the same tactics as they do. Where did he get a license for such reaction ???

In the Criminal States Of Murrica

[Anonymous Coward]

...they can tell everybody that Iraq is armed to the teeth with dangerous weapons. They must make war and destroy this nation. All the Mainstream Liar Media (MLM) parrot the lie.

Do you seriously claim such a Nation of Liars could not stuff the ballot box ?

Sure it can and it will.

Really ?

[Anonymous Coward]

You Communists and Banksters already know the outcome of the election ? How ?

Did you already pay for a certain outcome ?

All your agents in place ?

Re:Really ?

[JustNiz]

Because we're not living under the illusion that the sheeple have any actual power or even independent thought.

hacking

[Anonymous Coward]

hi, am Anderson, i had my friend help me hack my ex's email, facebook, whatsapp,and his phone cause i suspected he was cheating. all he asked for was a his phone number. he's email is (cyberlord7714@gmail.com)..IF u need help tell him Anderson referred you to him and he'll help. Am sure his going to help you do it, good luck