Slashdot Mirror


Secret Service, DHS Scramble To Secure America's Election (yahoo.com)

Secret service agents rushed Donald Trump off a stage in Nevada Saturday night, CNN reports. "A scuffle could be seen breaking out in the audience, but it was not immediately clear what happened... Secret Service and police tactical units rushed in to detain a man [who] was then rushed by a throng of police officers, Secret Service agents and SWAT officers armed with assault rifles to a side room... A law enforcement official told CNN no weapon was discovered. The GOP nominee was apparently unharmed and returned to the stage minutes later to finish his speech." Meanwhile, an anonymous reader writes: "All but two U.S. states have accepted help from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to probe and scan voter registration and election systems for vulnerabilities, a department official told Reuters." Ohio is relying on the National Guard's cyber protection unit, while Arizona says they've held discussions with the FBI, DHS and state-level agents on cyber security. But in addition, "U.S. military hackers have penetrated Russia's electric grid, telecommunications networks and the Kremlin's command systems, making them vulnerable to attack by secret American cyber weapons should the U.S. deem it necessary, according to a senior intelligence official and top-secret documents reviewed by NBC News."

American officials believe Russian hacking efforts will continue through 2018, according to the Wall Street Journal. "By hacking and dumping emails, Russia is trying 'to denigrate the American electoral system, to make it look chaotic, make it look manipulable, make it look subject to intrusion, cheating and vulnerable so you can't trust it...to make us look no better than the Russian electoral system,'" said one senior White House official. Russia is also expected to extend their efforts toward elections in Europe.

19 of 360 comments (clear)

  1. Obviously, a failed time travel mission by BenJeremy · · Score: 4, Funny

    So close...

    1. Re:Obviously, a failed time travel mission by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 3, Funny

      He's got a 34.2% chance according to 538. That's not small. That's why we need everybody to get there and vote for Hillary. Twice.

    2. Re: Obviously, a failed time travel mission by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's not the most direct path to victory for Trump.

      Most polls show Trump with a small lead in Ohio, though still within the margin of error. It's more likely than not that Trump will win Ohio.

      Georgia, Iowa, and Arizona are also considered toss-ups, but most polls show Trump with small leads in those states. For each of those states, it's more likely than not that Trump wins. They're within the margin of error, but Trump seems to be the likely winner in each.

      Let's assume that Trump wins Ohio, Arizona, Georgia, and Iowa. If he also carries Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, and Nevada, he would have 269 electoral votes. This assumes, of course, that nothing crazy happens in Utah. In this instance, the election would go to the House of Representatives, with Trump being the likely winner.

      Maine has four electoral votes, two going to the statewide winner, and one for the winner of each congressional district. There's a larger margin of error in predicting individual districts, but there are indications that Trump is slightly ahead in the second congressional district of Maine. If he carries that along with each of the aforementioned states, that would give him 270 electoral votes.

      Recent polls show Trump with a small lead in Nevada, though early voting there probably favors Clinton. Nonetheless, RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight show Trump as having a small edge in Nevada.

      RCP shows Trump as having a small edge in recent polls in New Hampshire. However, 538 projects Clinton as being slightly more likely to win there than Trump.

      RCP shows Trump with a tiny edge in North Carolina, though well within the margin of error. He is also given justly slightly better than a 50-50 chance of winning there by 538.

      RCP shows Clinton with a small lead in recent polls of North Carolina, though well within the margin of error. However, 538 projects Trump with slightly better than also 50-50 chance of winning there.

      The most likely path to victory for Trump is to win Arizona, Iowa, Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, and the second district of Maine. None of these would be particularly crazy, considering the current polls and projections.

      Beyond that, Colorado may be the next best chance for Trump. Next on the list would be Pennsylvania. However, Clinton is projected to have slightly larger leads in those states. Michigan, New Mexico, and the two statewide electoral votes from Maine are still within the margin of error, but seem still less likely to go to Trump. If Michigan were to go to Trump, it's very possible that Wisconsin might follow, too. If the polls were really off that much, Virginia might also be in play. But all of this is getting quite unlikely.

      It's more likely than not that Clinton wins, but I think 538's projections of roughly 65%-35% are about right. I don't think Trump must get Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes to win, and I'm not sure that's the most likely scenario. That said, if Trump loses Florida, he'd probably have to win Pennsylvania and Colorado to have a chance. He'd need Pennsylvania if he loses North Carolina. And Colorado would suffice if he loses either New Hampshire or Nevada. If he lost New Hampshire and Nevada but carried Colorado and the second district of Maine, it would probably end up a tie.

  2. It was a guy with a sign ... by thrillseeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... that said "Republicans Against Trump", and then some unidentified asshole yelled "gun!" and the crowd went wild - hope they find the asshole that yelled "Fire in a crowded theater" just for the hell of it, and hang his ass.

  3. I wonder how they will target europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since at least in the Netherlands (and presumably in the rest of Europe) we don't use electronic voting and we require voter ID.

  4. And that's how it is done by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All but two U.S. states have accepted help from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security

    I would much rather have someone that I trust helping than the D.H.S.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  5. not in N.C. by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Funny

    In N.C. the feds struck down our law to require ID because it discriminated against those wanting to commit voter fraud.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:not in N.C. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      In N.C. the feds struck down our law to require ID because it discriminated against those wanting to commit voter fraud.

      It was a bit more complicated than that. NC Republicans hired consultants and statisticians to analyse voting patterns, and then legislated restrictions on early voting, closed polling places in minority neighborhoods, and yes, instituted voter ID requirements. All of this was carefully planned and scientifically designed to suppress minority voting. Basically, NC Republicans Moneyballed racism.

    2. Re:not in N.C. by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Informative

      Voter fraud is extremely rare, and the courts are enforcing federal law that makes sure people like you can't use it for cover to disenfranchise minorities.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:not in N.C. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Obama is encouraging illegals to vote in our election. I love the part about voter fraud being extremely rare. What a laugh. Ever been to Chicago?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:not in N.C. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You links are all innuendo and speculation. Not one links to an actual investigation showing proof that fraud took place. That's because...

      Voter fraud really isn't a big problem. 31 probable cases out of over 1 billion votes cast.

      The precision with which they target African American voters is pretty shocking. For example, they researched various types of ID and then banned the ones most common with African Americans, only allowing the types that white people are more likely to have. They blocked early voting because African Americans were often motivated to vote by their church on a Sunday.

      These laws are not about stopping largely imaginary and totally insignificant fraud. Stop believing Trump, he doesn't have any evidence that its rigged against him or he would have requested a formal investigation. They are about stopping Democrats voting, by targeting certain groups, often by race.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re: not in N.C. by Bartles · · Score: 3, Informative

      Lots of people are saying black people lack the ability to get identification. It's one of the glaring instances of racism perpetrated by Democrats.

  6. Does anyone else think this is insane? by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But in addition, "U.S. military hackers have penetrated Russia's electric grid, telecommunications networks and the Kremlin's command systems, making them vulnerable to attack by secret American cyber weapons should the U.S. deem it necessary, according to a senior intelligence official and top-secret documents reviewed by NBC News."

    Is it just me, or does anyone else think that this is insane?

    Assange never gives out details about who his leakers are, but even he took the time to state categorically that the Podesta leakers are did not come from the Russian government.

    Clearly he feels that there is some danger here for him to take this extraordinary step.

    Instead of setting up a hair-trigger response shouldn't we first have an investigation, and then approach this through diplomatic channels?

    Ye gods, Putin has to keep the appearance of strength in his country. What do you think he'll do if we start messing with their electrical grid?

    And in other news, we have Obama encouraging illegals to vote, which would appear at first glance to be Obama committing a felony on camera.

    What the fuck is happening to this country?

    1. Re:Does anyone else think this is insane? by quantaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Assange never gives out details about who his leakers are, but even he took the time to state categorically that the Podesta leakers are did not come from the Russian government.

      Clearly he feels that there is some danger here for him to take this extraordinary step.

      Or his source has never clearly identified itself as the Russia government and he's trying to maintain plausible deniability as to not destroy Wikileaks' credibility.

      And in other news, we have Obama encouraging illegals to vote, which would appear at first glance to be Obama committing a felony on camera.

      Which is why you should take a second glance. Did you notice how her question doesn't actually make sense? That's because someone cut off the first part of it and I'm very suspicious of what they left out. What seems to be the general question and answer is the following:

      Interviewer: American citizens who are the children of illegal immigrants are scared to vote because they they'll draw scrutiny and cause their families to be deported.

      Obama: That will not happen.

      What the fuck is happening to this country?

      People are lying to you about the state of the world, and you believe them.

      --
      I stole this Sig
  7. Someone isn't very tech savvy by wasted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "By hacking and dumping emails, Russia is trying 'to denigrate the American electoral system, to make it look chaotic, make it look manipulable, make it look subject to intrusion, cheating and vulnerable so you can't trust it...to make us look no better than the Russian electoral system,'" said one senior White House official.

    "Hacking and dumping" emails is not the same as changing vote counts or forcing people to vote a certain way. The exposure of the content of emails was likely embarrassing to the Democratic Party and HRC, but it isn't election tampering.

  8. Paper Ballots Counted At The Precinct Level by TheNarrator · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You want to prevent all hacking? Just use paper ballots counted at the precinct level. India has a billion people and it works just fine. Our election is important enough that it's foolish to trust it to unauditable, easily hacked voting machines when the alternative of hand counting is not that hard.

  9. Got any reality to go with your hallucinations? by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 3, Informative

    Massage is done. After this election stunt, even if Ecuador let's him stay, he's brought Wikileaks disrepute that the press will ignore him. Snowden had taken his mantle.

    Everything you've said is completely and totally bogus.

    1) "Ecuador lets him stay": Ecuador has repeatedly reaffirmed their intention to let him stay, even after cutting his internet access.

    2) "Disrepute": Wikileaks recently published the DKIM proofs for the Podesta E-mails, putting the lie to any claims of tampering. For example, Donna Brazile claimed that E-mails showing her giving debate questions to Clinton were tampered, but they were vetted using Google's gmail.com DKIM signature.

    3) "Massage": Learn Engrish.

    4) "Stunt": He's been publishing pretty-much continuously for 10 years, and you think "stunt" describes his actions?

    5) "Press will ignore": Uh... yeah. Right. You think this is what will happen?

    6) "Snowden": Snowden took his mantle... without being in the news or having done anything of recent significance?

    In general, everything you said is simple sock-puppetry intended to sway uninformed people. It's intellectually dishonest, and it doesn't even promote the mainstream view.

    I mean, really. Absolutely *no one* in the media is making any of your claims.

    I'd ask for links, but in this case I don't think that's possible.

  10. Re:hardly losing by flargleblarg · · Score: 4

    because come Wednesday morning, we'll have a woman in the white house.

    I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I believe we won't have a woman in the White House (serving as President) until January 20, 2017.

  11. incompetence by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Russia is trying 'to denigrate the American electoral system, to make it look chaotic, make it look manipulable, make it look subject to intrusion, cheating and vulnerable so you can't trust it...

    No need to do anything on that front. All of Europe has been laughing about the US voting process for decades. You've got the most complicated, error-prone, untrustworthy election system I personally have ever seen or heard about. The fact that you're incapable of fixing it is the best proof that the whole system is broken beyond repair.

    I'm not just talking voting machines, I also mean Gerrymandering, the fact that you vote on a working day (seriously?) or that there are hour-long queues. You are holding elections the way 3rd world countries hold their first election in history, and it's just absolutely pathetic.

    What could Russia possibly do to discredit this abomination? If I were the russian general in charge, I'd tell my hackers to stay out of this, lest they accidentally fix something and make it better.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org