Slashdot Mirror


Top Voting Machine Vendor Admits It Installed Remote-Access Software on Systems Sold to States (vice.com)

Kim Zetter, reporting for Motherboard: The nation's top voting machine maker has admitted in a letter to a federal lawmaker that the company installed remote-access software on election-management systems it sold over a period of six years, raising questions about the security of those systems and the integrity of elections that were conducted with them. In a letter sent to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) in April and obtained recently by Motherboard, Election Systems and Software acknowledged that it had "provided pcAnywhere remote connection software ... to a small number of customers between 2000 and 2006," which was installed on the election-management system ES&S sold them.

The statement contradicts what the company told me and fact checkers for a story I wrote for the New York Times in February. At that time, a spokesperson said ES&S had never installed pcAnywhere on any election system it sold. "None of the employees -- including long-tenured employees, has any knowledge that our voting systems have ever been sold with remote-access software," the spokesperson said. ES&S did not respond on Monday to questions from Motherboard, and it's not clear why the company changed its response between February and April. Lawmakers, however, have subpoena powers that can compel a company to hand over documents or provide sworn testimony on a matter lawmakers are investigating, and a statement made to lawmakers that is later proven false can have greater consequence for a company than one made to reporters.

39 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. Not a big deal by Train0987 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's plausible that an admin or tech installed it for convenience at certain trouble customers and current execs just weren't aware. It doesn't mean they lied. This was 15-20 years ago. Pretty common practice.

    1. Re:Not a big deal by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even more of a reason to dump those voting machines.

      People pretty much have to trust paper and pencil. It's something everyone understands and trying to spin some conspiracy of how someone "stole" the election is pretty hard that way.

      That gets way easier with a tool that few people understand, even fewer can audit and only a handful actually get anywhere close to actually auditing it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Garbage systems. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If your electronic voting booth runs a commercial operating system then you have already failed to secure your systems.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Garbage systems. by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

      Meh - security-by-obscurity isn't quite the answer. A properly stripped, hardened and configured *nix kernel could secure things more than well enough, and require a lot less effort, money, time, etc. At least, as long as you keep up on patches, but that would be the case on any properly-maintained uber-proprietary OS.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Garbage systems. by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      You could use Minix 3. The kernel itself is tiny; and each part is isolated, so auditable individually. High-level certification is fairly doable; more to the point, you can audit the outside-controllable path and strip out things you don't need.

      For a touch screen voting machine, you'll need graphical display, touch screen input, and disk access. That means file systems. It means the capacity to run and schedule processes. It means the capacity to manage memory.

      It doesn't mean BFQ and anticipatory scheduling; it means direct scheduling, simple prioritization. It doesn't mean fancy coalescing and defragmenting memory management; you pop that out and put in a naive memory allocator.

      You may have to make some concessions. Compressed RAM? No. High-end memory protections? Yes, you'll want to augment your VM page memory management module with a policy-driven memory management module that prevents the creation of writable, executable memory. You might want some sort of file system access control system, or a capabilities-based security system--complex code that adds mitigations.

      These bare-minimum systems are core. They either tend to not change or they tend to have a naive implementation that we can audit over the long term. The base kernel in something like Minix tends to not change much; the VM manager tends to stay as-is; the process schedulers also stay untouched. That code may be 5 or 10 years old, and becomes of particular importance when it becomes the subset for high-security embedded systems.

      Your risk falls greatly through those simple virtues.

    3. Re:Garbage systems. by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are talking about software engineering approaches to securing the system. Those are important, but the overall system design has to be secure, otherwise it doesn't matter how secure the operating system is.

      A better approach would be to have the system print out human readable, machine readable paper ballots, which the voter carries from the voting booth to a secure ballot box. This wouldn't prevent the machine from mismarking ballots, but there would be a high probability of someone detecting an effort large enough to swing an election.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  3. The big heist by paiute · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Man finally figured out that stealing money is for chumps. The best crime is to steal the whole country.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:The big heist by hey! · · Score: 2

      The Man finally figured out that stealing money is for chumps. The best crime is to steal the whole country.

      That trains has left the station, because of lobbying.

      If you as a voter sell your vote, that's a crime. If the person you vote for sells his votes in Congress, that's constituent services.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  4. Admin credentials written on the side, too? by Voyager529 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "provided pcAnywhere remote connection software ... to a small number of customers between 2000 and 2006,"

    The same PCAnywhere that was so egregiously exploitable that Symantec - Symantec of all companies, gave out free copies of version 12 to users who owned literally any prior version no matter how old it was? THAT is the product that was being utilized on voting machines?!

    It has become abundantly clear that any company selling technology-based solutions to the government which can successfully win a bid should under no circumstances be allowed to do the job.

    1. Re:Admin credentials written on the side, too? by Voyager529 · · Score: 2

      by Opportunist ( 166417 )

      Now where is the kickback in that?

      Username checks out.

    2. Re:Admin credentials written on the side, too? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      I'm pushing for voting systems that are stable and democratic--systems like Schulze and Ranked Pairs. Providing software and systems to handle the votes and give the public a means of validation has a political impact.

      My state got rid of its voting machines and went to paper ballots. Each ballot went into a machine for scanning. Even with a recount by hand, I question if the human election staff ever misread a vote due to fatigue and routine. Do they miscount? County Executive went to Johnny Olszewski by 9 votes; after a recount, it was 17. Voting machines, on the other hand, give me a touch screen upon which they display the entered, recorded vote, so I know the software has correct input--and computers don't miscount.

      Now imagine if the State gave each regional location machines with their own digital encryption keys. A hardware token, like a FIDO U2F device with PGP on-chip. There's only one per key, and it's not revealed, so the particular election judge's hardware token is known when reporting in--and we take physical steps to ensure the reports come at the end of the voting period, without time to tamper.

      Each regional machine can now report to the State office with a signed block of votes. The individual machines could even perform the signing (using the hardware device), placing the data on a removable drive for upload through an Internet-connected machine. Thus the ballots are recorded and given an integrity signature before they're on any machine with network access.

      That upload to the regional machine gets tallied, and that plus the individual vote packs get sent off to the State. Each step can also provide to a registered third-party, and the State and Regional central systems allow anyone to query and download the full set. Thus independent validation of untampered ballot packs (when signed, by whom, what content) becomes possible.

      We can observe this process as well. During "counting", each machine displays how many votes and vote-total statistics. The election judge announces them before pulling data. The public can come to watch; the public can write down statistics; the public can publish them; and any group or individual who wants to pull down the State's data can validate the totals.

      The software to compute each race uses a known, published algorithm--and code. You want to see how the Schulze winner came about? Same software, or a third-party software, reads in all the votes, shows you how any given ballot reads pairwise winners and losers, shows you the final tallies, generates the graph, highlights the strongest paths, shows the comparisons, and then shows the potential winner selection and the final winner. You can visually understand the process we're using (yep, it's complex!). The entire set of statistics and analysis can appear below, however you like.

      The State can publish those same statistics. Everyone can verify them. People can write their own software to run verification, instead of using the published code.

      That potential--the capacity to not only have third-parties report that, yes, their own tallies and their own monitoring and the crowd-published observation of the voting process matches the outcome, but also for the outcome to be explained in any level of detail from the simple winner to the complete performance of the counting process--allows us to implement systems which elect whomever the largest majority most approves, rather than a candidate who gets the most simple votes.

      I've been trying to extend this to Internet voting, but there's some complication: Internet voting opens up vote-buying and voter pressuring. Controlled polling locations are inconvenient and disenfranchise many voters who do not have the time nor the transit capability to reach them; yet they provide privacy and anonymity so the voter can vote as they care. Internet voting allows a third party to bribe or threaten a voter, requiring them to vote privately with the third-party's observation. Any technical security against software attack only prevents direct, detectable tampering; private coercion escapes any firewall, any source code audit, and any form of unbreakable encryption. I've designed countermeasures, and still find them inadequate.

  5. Re: wow digging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "But removing dead people from the voter roles is racist! Somehow. According to liberals."

    WTF are you babbling on about magasnowflake? The list of things that republicans terrified of brown or poor people do to suppress the vote is long and well documented.

    "No other nation in the world lets you go in, say "oh yeah, I'm a registered voter" and then just trusts you on that. But we do."

    Citation please, mister expert on every voting process in the world...

    Should we worry that this company thinks it is ok to routinely tell blatant lies about their security related practice?

  6. Re: wow digging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But removing dead people from the voter roles is racist! Somehow. According to liberals.

    No whats racist is that they seem to only remove "dead" people that are black, with no notification, 6 months before the election, and then oops turns out those people were still alive but it's too late for you to re-register because election day is today.

    And all of this pales to the fact that we don't even bother checking if the people voting are who they claim they are! No other nation in the world lets you go in, say "oh yeah, I'm a registered voter" and then just trusts you on that. But we do.

    You've never actually voted in the USA have you? They generally do verify your identity at the poles when you go to vote.

  7. Re:wow digging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and yet after spending millions of dollars on dozens of investigations, no one has found any significant voter fraud in recent memory.

    but the right has demonstrably suppressed minority and democratic likely voting through stacks of well documented dirty tricks including bogus voter purges ( based on matching first and last names alone, as if those never are shared ), removing polling places, reducing machines in those voting places, etc... not to mention gerrymandering voting districts past any semblance of rationality.

  8. Primal scream by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Informative

    I TOLD YOU SO GOD DAMN IT.

    Why would you assume they wouldn't install a backdoor? WHY??? Changing election totals gave them trillions of dollars in tax cuts and complete power.
    Don't talk about open-source replacements. Any solution with electrons will be hacked and controlled. Go back to paper, the way Canada does, or did before the Tories rammed e-voting in. I wonder why, I wonder.

    1. Re:Primal scream by Gilgaron · · Score: 2, Funny

      In their defense, they thought the backdoor was secure because it only took Cyrillic characters for input.

    2. Re:Primal scream by pz · · Score: 2

      Mechanical voting machines. That's the answer. Incredibly difficult to hack on a widespread basis. Essentially impossible to hack remotely.

      Can't fix the old ones? Bunk. Re-tooling is not just eminently possible, 3d printing makes it nearly trivial.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    3. Re:Primal scream by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Paper ballots with machine tallying combines the most of the best features of both systems and is cheap, logistically simple, and auditable. It also scales with license or technical limitations. I live in a state which uses that system and if turnout is heavy at the polling place they just set up another row of cheap pop-up voting booths, doubling the polling place's throughput for less than a price of a single voting machine.

      Of course one man's bug is sometimes another man's feature.

      I'm convinced that the reason these machines are so popular despite their cost, insecurity, and logistical burden is that they enable political parties to manipulate election results, not by hacking, but simply using the bottleneck they represent to generate long lines in precincts unfavorable to them.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  9. Re:wow digging by layabout · · Score: 3, Informative

    Personally, I would be more concerned about a properly bribed election official or two losing votes in a voting machine or even worse, a voting machine with remote access https://www.newsweek.com/elect....

    This article from Vox highlights one of vote-by-mail strengths which is that it is very distributed and hard to tamper with at large scale. It's second strength is that is a fair process making voting accessible to anyone who is registered to vote. No need for polling places or special times and days, only a voting deadline of when your vote must be in an order to be counted. https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

    of course, if you want to steal an election, here's your how to: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018...

  10. Re: wow digging by Train0987 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "No whats racist is that they seem to only remove "dead" people that are black, with no notification, 6 months before the election, and then oops turns out those people were still alive but it's too late for you to re-register because election day is today."

    Except that never happens, it's just agit-prop for people who won't bother to check it out. Voter roles are culled based on specific criteria, usually based on voter inactivity. There are exactly zero verifiable instances of just black people being removed from the voter roles. Those stories are aimed at very stupid people with confirmation bias.

    Also, provisional ballots exist for folks who show up to vote and discover their names aren't on the list (for whatever reason). They are given provisional ballots to use and then their eligibility is determined after the fact.

    What's really racist is the idea that minorities are just incapable of getting an ID.

  11. 43 states had machines older than 2006 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Reading up on verified paper voting trails. (=My personal wishlist item for verifiable elections) reveals some disturbing stuff from 2016's election:

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/paperless-pennsylvania-can-swing-state-verify-2016-vote-n660266

    "Even benign breakdowns of aging equipment — 43 states have machines that are more than a decade old ", i.e. states with voting machines from before 2006, the new standards didn't come in until 2007 and ESS only removed this software on machines made AFTER 2007.

    You claimed it was 15-20 years ago, but the article says 2007 was the time they removed them and then only for new voting machines sold.

    "when Pennsylvanians go to the polls to elect a new president in a month, more than 80 percent of them will be using machines that don't have a paper-backed audit."

    Let me guess, Pennsylvania was polling strongly for Clinton yet elected Trump by a slim and plausible margin.
    "Hillary Clinton leading by up to 12 points in Pennsylvania..."
    (From Wikipedia after the article)
    Trump wins Pennsylvania by 48.18% to 47.46%...

    I'm guessing that this is odd.
    2012, strong Obama, 2008 strong Obama, 2004 kerry, 2000 Al Gore....

    Yeh right, and now you can't even verify it because you didn't have a paper trail to verify against.

    FFS,

  12. We no longer have representation in government. by AmazingRuss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We are subjects, and we have no control.... if we ever did.

  13. Re: wow digging by Jesus+H+Rolle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's really racist is the idea that minorities are just incapable of getting an ID.

    I support voter ID, but a California driver license costs $35. A California ID card (drinker's license) is $30. At the very bottom of the socioeconomic ladder are those for whom this is too much of an expense. Demanding payment in exchange for the privilege of voting is an illegal poll tax. Either change the Constitution or offer free IDs.

  14. Re: wow digging by jeff4747 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's not just the ID itself, but the supporting documentation.

    A new copy of my birth certificate costs $50, or I have the option of traveling 2000 miles to get a free copy at the county's offices.

  15. Re:Not a big deal my ass by GrumpySteen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Voting machines decide who gets a huge amount of power in our government. Backdoor access via a software package whose source code had been leaked and exploited, leading to the manufacturer recommending that it be removed, is huge goddamn deal.

  16. Re: wow digging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's a well known open secret that liberals routinely bus "voters" around on election day thanks to the fact that all you need to vote is know the registered voter list.

    What you describe is illegal. I must assume that at least a small percentage of these frauds are caught, so of course you can provide some documentation of convictions for this, right?

    I should note that one of the first things DJT did after he became president is to start a committee to investigate voter fraud. It has been disbanded recently, and I am not aware of any reports from this committy. Why? I think I can make a pretty good guess.

  17. Re: wow digging by jeff4747 · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, they don't. They verify that the name you gave them is a registered voter. And that's all they do

    Actually, they verify name and address, and that you have not voted yet.

    Btw, think voter ID is gonna fix it? Guess what you need to produce a fake id? Name and address.

    It's a well known open secret that liberals routinely bus "voters" around on election day

    If this was actually happening at a large scale, it would be easy to catch and result in a lot of convictions. Yet there have been 0 people caught transporting false voters.

    In-person voter fraud is extremely rare. Those that do it and are caught are not all members of one political party. In fact, there's been slightly more Republicans caught doing it in the last few years, largely because of false claims like the one you make here.

  18. Re: wow digging by Bruinwar · · Score: 3, Informative

    What's really racist is the idea that minorities are just incapable of getting an ID.

    My step son turned 18 & never got an I.D. He didn't drive (or fucking work) so he never bothered. He wanted to vote. Getting all the documents together & getting him to the office to get a state I.D. was quite challenging. His dad had no idea where his birth certificate was so we had to get a copy. Without a car & financial resources, we would not have been able to do it.

    When we needed a marriage license I had no birth certificate. I had to go quite a long way to pay for a copy of it. I had a valid license, a passport, but no, they had to have the birth certificate. No public transportation would get me there & there was no way to get it for free.

    So it does not matter if your a minority or the color of you skin. What matters is the resources or the lack thereof. Voter I.D. laws & voter registration purges absolutely & veritably suppress the vote. That & lack of funding in poor areas helps a ton to keep the poor from voting. 2 hour waits only to find you're no longer registered. Florida 2000.

    --
    SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
  19. Re: wow digging by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

    but a very small number of votes have swung local elections.

    Very small numbers of votes have swung elections at all levels. But again, it is extremely rare that the election is actually that close and you won't know it is that close ahead of time.

    So you assemble a very large army of conspirators, and get caught because the more people, the more leaks.
    Or you assemble a very small number of conspirators, over and over again until the election is that close. But doing it over and over again makes it far more likely that you will get caught.
    Or you assemble a very small number of conspirators and affect one election....and don't change the result because 99% of the time the result isn't narrow enough.

    Or you take the money you would use to assemble your conspiracy, and donate it to the politicians. Thus getting the actual policy results you want no matter the election results. As and added bonus, it's legal.

  20. Re:wow digging by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Informative

    Or how about "discovering" hundreds of ballots, 6 weeks after the election, in an election decided by 261 total votes?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  21. Re: wow digging by Rob+Y. · · Score: 4, Informative

    Also, even if it weren't overly hard to get the documentation (and I'm not saying it isn't), the voter ID folks are playing the margins. If they can prevent a small number of Democrats from voting in a few states in a close election, they can pull off an upset victory like Trump's.

    That's why the Russians targeted black voters with fake "Black Lives Matter" groups either misdirecting potential black voters or telling them not to bother voting. And it worked in places like Michigan and Winsconsin. Along with voter ID laws that similarly suppressed the black vote enough to tip the balance.

    The Electoral College allocation of extra votes to small population states is a problem too. But that's in the Constitution and hard to change. Voter suppression enjoys no such protection, and needs to be fought if you believe in one-person, one-vote.

    --
    Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
  22. Re: wow digging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Bullshit. If you're incapable of getting a couple hundred together for an id, you don't have your shit together enough that you should be voting.

    That's not what US law says. Everyone has the right to vote.

    There's no systemic oppression keeping people down.

    Some of the people implementing this voter suppression have been pretty open about it, especially when they were among friends and didn't realize what they said would be public. But their actions speak louder than words.

    If you're legitimately discriminated against, it means a big payday. People who claim discrimination and oppression, or such on others behalf, do so out of ignorant sentimentality, or rationalization of poor life decisions.

    If you honestly think that all discrimination in the USA leads to a 'big payday' you are sorely deluded. Possibly terminally deluded if you were a minority.

  23. Careful, you won't like what you find by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Careful, you might not like what you find!

    If we start really looking at these voting machines, we'll soon uncover the Diebold CEO's comments promising to deliver the 2004 election to George W. Bush (specifically Ohio, which they did, and which deviated from exit poles with huge sample bases- by a whopping 6% -- a wide enough margin to trigger new elections in other countries like the Ukraine, but mysteriously not in Ohio). It is likely we'll find many state and local elections have been "stolen," and probably one or two federal and even presidential elections (2004, 2016) where the results may well have been changed (but we'll never know--except by noting abnormal deviations from exit poles like in '04--since there's no audit trail. About the only results we can trust is where the margin of victory was sufficiently large to make such shenanigans impractical (2008, 2012).

    Republicans not liking democratic outcomes date back to at least the 1990s when they impeached Clinton, and certainly include 2000, when they stopped a recount they would have lost (as was widely reported outside of the United States when the recount eventually happened, but strangely the US media was either quiet, or buried the story on page 12). 2016 isn't an aberration, it's part of a wider pattern, the only difference is this time they accepted help from a foreign adversary to achieve their goals, so desperate were they to stack the supreme court with their own ideologues for another generation.

  24. Re: wow digging by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

    I don't have time to look up the name

    Translation: My google showed that he was transporting legal voters to the polls, so I need to keep it vague and sinister-sounding.

    is they know about the voter fraud yet even the Republican establishment works to hide Democratic voter fraud

    You realize that this statement is slightly less plausible than all the "crisis actor" claims anytime there is a shooting, right?

    Republicans are literally changing laws to manipulate the ballot in North Carolina to favor their Supreme Court candidates, but they'd totally pass at an incredibly easy opportunity to annihilate the Democratic party.

    You're getting played.

  25. Re: Is that goverment ID free?? by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm in the center, and I am seeing BOTH sides being ridiculously incalcitrant here. Democrats bitch that any voter ID proposal is bad before even looking at it, and Republicans complain that voter fraud is rampant despite the total lack of evidence. Never mind both sides being hypocritical and creating gerrymandered districts.

    I think we should let everyone eligible be able to vote. If they don't have an ID or someone to vouch for them, then create a provisional ballot. It may slow down the counting, but I'd rather it take months to decide the winner than to disenfranchise someone. I also think college students should vote if they're living 2/3rds of the year in the county, and I think that ex convicts should vote also if they've served their time, and I think armed forces serving over time should be allowed to vote.

    Voting is every citizens right and duty and no one should stand in the way of it. That's the top priority, and I don't have issues with voter ID if it doesn't get in the way of anyone of any political persuasion from voting.

  26. Re: wow digging by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 2

    It is well known that there are perfectly legal get out the vote efforts that certain people complain about because the voters are black. This is especially true in the rural South, of course.

    Guess what? In the rural South, the voting booth is probably placed in a small rural town. But the voters who vote in that voting booth may be miles away down dirt roads. A black church takes it minvan and makes some trips, picking up 8-10 voters, often elderly who cannot drive themselves.

    The local who lives in town sees this minivan filled with bona fide legal voters filing into the voting center and panics because "Oh, no, those people are not my neighbors. Why are they voting here?"

    Well, they are neighbors. But people who are too racist to ever stroll down the road to mingle with people who have darker skin have trouble considering the question in a rational way.

    The "busloads of illegal darkies voting" meme is never going away until we have many fewer racist whites in the this country. The actual facts are easy enough to establish. But when the conclusion was built on a foundation of irrational racist hatred, facts and logic are not going to persuade.

  27. Re: wow digging by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 2

    You were born yesterday. WBush DoJ pushed this issue. They found maybe a dozen instances in the entire US of A.

    The are lots of red states with perfectly capable right-wing Attorney Generals that would love to find examples, because evidence would be valuable in the courtroom when justifying stringent voter ID laws. The reason the ACLU wins so many lawsuits is actual evidence is conspicuously lacking.

    Fraudulent voting happens about as often as people die from lightning strikes. If that were not the case, then Republican AGs are surely the most incompetent attorneys who ever lived, all of them, for some reason. Is it more likely being a Republican causes actual serious brain damage? Or that the voter fraud is rare?

  28. Re: wow digging by Darinbob · · Score: 2

    Mostly voter ID seems to be a hot button issue for those who assume that there is rampant piecemeal voter fraud. Of which there is no substantive evidence of this happening. Wholesale voter fraud should be a much more serious concern.

    Note that the arrival of busses is not evidence of voting fraud, it is a common occurence to bus in valid registered voters who don't drive and who otherwise wouldn't bother showing up. So a part of "get out the vote" by both parties includes offers to shuttle people over for free. Ie, church buses, vans, etc. Now I'm sure that seeing a stream of black of hispanic voters filing off of a bus frightens some people, but it's not evidence of fraud.

  29. Re: wow digging by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can't claim voter fraud is not rare when lacking a shred of evidence. It is simply dishonest. It is not my job to prove how rare unicorns are, but the person who says unicorns are everywhere. AGs have looked and looked and they cannot find more than a rare isolated example here and there.

    For example, there is a consistent complaint that surely dead people are voting. Gee, it is the twentyeffinfirst century and it would be easy to detect that with computer technology if it were non-rare. No body looks into that because everyone with a brain knows the truth.

    If you could figure out how to prove there was significant amount of voter fraud, there is a rightwing PAC out there who will write you a seven figure check for the evidence, I guarantee it. Put you money where you mouth is, and quick your day job for a year to serve American democracy. And get rich, too.