Slashdot Mirror
Senate Rejects New Money For Election Security (apnews.com)
The Republican-controlled Senate has defeated a push by Democrats to set aside an additional $250 million for states to upgrade their voting systems to protect against hacking and other cyberattacks. From a report: An amendment offered by Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy received 50 yes votes, 10 short of the 60 needed for approval. Leahy said securing U.S. elections and "safeguarding our democracy" is not a partisan issue. He said the Senate "must send a clear message to Russia and other foreign adversaries that tampering in our elections will not be tolerated. The president will not act. This duty has fallen to us." A similar effort was also rejected in the House.
This problem can be addressed at the state level with it being major talking point at federal level for the elections. Great opportunity to find where lawmakers stand, and yes some Democrats are dirtbags on the issue too, despite what comes out of their mouths.
There is a much bigger threat to our elections that they refuse to do anything about. Gerrymandering. It's legal election fixing.
Do mainstream Democrats actually believe that the election was somehow stolen from them by the Russians either buying some ads on Facebook or hacking into voting machines? Genuinely curious as there is so much shit flying in this storm that the true features of the landscape are obscured. If so then wow, cognitive dissonance is a real bitch.
Vote early and often!!
Seems like the Republicans know there is something with the existing machines, maybe they are counting on it to help in November polls?
Funny how Democrats wail like babies when facing real election security in the form of photo voter IDs.
Why are they such damn racists in assuming black people aren't smart enough to get IDs?
"But there isn't much voter fraud!" ORLY? HOW can you possibly know that if you don't ID everyone who votes?
Funny how that also aligns with Democrats wailing against real border security.
It's almost as if Democrats WANT illegal aliens voting for them...
This pretty much guarantees that Russia will hack the election, again.
The Republicans are very happy with the situation now. Easy for Vlad to help out keeping them in power. Why risk upsetting the gravy train?
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Fear the Reaper
... "outside influence", rather than election fraud, then fixing the voting machines is not addressing the problem.
According to many people who are fighting efforts to stop efforts like requiring picture ID to vote, there is no election fraud going on. So what is the $250M supposed to fix, other than contracts for people who sell insecure voting equipment?
Slips of paper and human counters are pretty damn hard to hack - Since we cant seem to get open source hardware and software platforms for voting, the only option is slips of paper and manual counting.
This problem can be addressed at the state level
Oh please, do you really think Georgia, Louisiana, etc. are going to get on this? They will most certainly beg poverty and do nothing as they always do.
yes some Democrats are dirtbags on the issue too
every Democrat who was able to vote for this, did so. What ARE you talking about?
The Republicans are very happy with the situation now. Easy for Vlad to help out keeping them in power. Why risk upsetting the gravy train?
I thought that no voting machines were hacked, and no vote tallys were changed. Is that no longer true?
I'm having trouble keeping up with the narrative here.
Can you help me out? Do you have a link to a recent article or something?
The assertion that Democrats care about election integrity is laughably absurd. Paper ballots and mandatory voter ID are how you safeguard election integrity; good luck getting them on board with that.
that's all this was, and all it was ever intended to be.
Nobody seems to want actually secured voting systems, because that would mean:
1) a federal standard for voter identification (yes, that means you need to be a citizen, and alive to vote, and it all needs to be verifiable)
2) a federal standard for how elections are held, and who can use the state owned equipment ( aka private entities such as political parties should not be allowed to commander state equipment, personnel and resources to handle what amounts to an internal, private election.)
3) a move away from unpatched, editable, un-auditable electronic systems in favor of more robust physical ballots (which means someones not getting that sweet diebold or smartmatic kickback money anymore)
4) actual repercussions (i.e. jail time and invalidated elections) when elections workers and elections boards doing dumb things like destroying ballots, wiping machines, turning away valid voters, etc
Putin is conducting and he don't want no stinkin badges in his way.
TRUMP Powa!
You claim this is a partisan issue yet you sit uncomfortably and stare off in the distance any time someone wants to institute any kind of real voter ID (you know, the kind everywhere in Europe does already)....
Why pay to update failing electronic systems?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Regarding going back to paper ballots, the current interpretation of the Constitution is that each state can implement the mechanics of voting as they see fit. It would be difficult to dictate paper ballots on a Federal level.
Table-ized A.I.
Paper ballots can be "hacked" too. Remember the 2000 election with butteryfly ballots and hanging chads and cancelled recounts all ultimately decided by a Republican-controlled supreme court? The sad truth is that Democrats have to win by a wide margin because the Republicans will always find a way to "hack" any election that is close.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Just like the border wall, liberals would love to vote for anything that looks like they are doing something as long as that 'something' doesn't actually prevent voter fraud or keep illegal aliens out.
At first glance I read that, then I read again and it was written "Republican".
Elections are managed by the states.
Not everything is the Federal government's job to fix or manage. God knows they've screwed up enough things already.
Those benefiting from election fraud would of course be opposed to eliminating election fraud.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
That's mostly a moot question: other nations tried, and we should not give them a shot at changing the outcome in the future either way. Many Presidential elections have been close.
Table-ized A.I.
I don't see why we ever moved away from paper ballots? They are cheap, easily counted, and by definition create a reliable paper trail.
moox. for a new generation.
Russia isn't corrupting democracy in the US.
Hillary Clinton and the DNC RIGGED their primary in 2016. Yes, we have proof from Donna Brazile, the head of the DNC at the time, that they rigged the primary against Sanders.
Until I hear a SINGLE DNC supporter upset about this, I am going to call BS on all your Russia complaints. You don't actually care about rigged election, you have proven it.
Would be a wall
250 million? Who was going to get the money? What was the money going to be used for? Just that fact that one side supported it 100% and the other was against it 100% means it was just fodder for ideological hacks to use to attack their opponents.
;)
As for the US Senate, with out 60 votes almost nothing passes in the Senate. To say the Republicans control all 3 branches of government means nothing. And is just political misdirection used for propaganda reasons since most Americans are ignorant about how the Senate works.
If the party in power does not control 60 votes in the Senate very little gets done in Washington.
The last time that happened President Obama was in office and the Democrats had 60 votes in the Senate and controlled the House. And they for the most part completely wasted the power and oppotunities they held for 18 Months (I think it was 18 months?)
Just my 2 cents
pushed by Dems but not 100% supported by them. If you look at the bill and not the fluff you'll see that this isn't about money but power and control. More political BS from the Democrap Communist party.
wasn't there a line about the best way to win elections to be the one that counts the votes.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
was stuff like telling voters they couldn't vote or had to vote on a Wednesday or any one of a number of common voter suppression techniques that work great during a close election. The $250 would go to counter that misinformation campaign and help states get out the vote.
Of course the people who voted this down don't want that because they don't want the 'wrong' people voting.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I laugh at article like this because we all know dems/repubs poison bills with other garbage. Its not just a security bill it probably contains money for fart machines if ya get my point. so the dems say the repubs don't care about your security or the repubs say the dems dont care about your security for a bill they poison. FN circle jerk in Washington SSDD.
Jack of all trades,master of none
So? Why do old slave states still get to count 3/5 of their slave populations? Why does one brown person get to affect election stats not but not a different brown person? That's simply racist.
You know what else sounds different? An old Republican talking point, recast into this situation:
Republicans are soft on crime. And that's what this is. A crime that Republicans benefitted from.
Trump doing anything and claiming national security when it doesn't apply - /. loves it
Any Democrat or left wing individual - screw that
You people are despicable
I wouldn't rule that out, yet. You're probably the first person to report that a lib told you that voter fraud got Trump elected. Most likely, you didn't understand whatever the lib was really saying. That doesn't mean you're a fuckwit; the lib might have been the fuckwit, unable to describe a problem. (And let's face it: people who can't describe problems totally suck and are bad people and should be tortured. We all agree on that, right?) But yeah, the indicators lean toward you being dumb.
So let's see...Congress doesn't recycle money back to the states to prevent fraud and the progressives say that's how we get Trump. States try to enact voter ID laws to prevent fraud and the progressives say it's a dog-whistle that doesn't exist. Weird.
Enact VoterID.
We already need identification for all sorts of things in society: buying alcohol, tobacco, registering a car, getting a job... Proving who you are to vote is not difficult at all.
In a growing number of states, Real ID standards are mandated. Without a RealID-compliant license, for example, one cannot do something as routine as getting through airport security.
For certain political parties to claim it is "racist" to require ID to vote because certain minorities cannot get an ID is, in itself, racist.
The problems VoterID would solve would far surpass the crap ideas floated by the Democrats in the Senate.
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
What's really needed is for most of the electronics to be trashed and a law enacted requiring machines' hardware and software to be publicly documented. No proprietary crap, elections are too important.
If you are just going to allow illegals to vote anyway. Stupid is as stupid does.
Caution: Contents under pressure
I guess the trillion plus debt California has is a sign of the economic genius of Democrats over the past 30+ years
If states do an inadequate job holding an election (by being hackable, by gerrymandering, by voter suppression fraud, ...) just don't accept their representatives until they win an election. They'll figure out how to print out and count ballots like everyone else, or they won't. No need for money.
MAGA = Moscow Agent Governing America
Table-ized A.I.
How are any Democrat party corporate tools going to win if they're prevented from doing election fraud?
Everybody knows that only reason Hillary Clinton "won" the popular vote was widespread election fraud.
Clinton's good friends / fellow Chinese intelligence assets at Diebold made sure there were plenty of vulnerabilities in the voting machine software, and made sure the Democrat party knew about them. Chinese hackers took care of the rest.
The vendors should be implementing secure voting systems to begin with. You can't just throw millions of dollars at a problem if you don't understand its origin. The thing is that they could spend less money and be more secure (eg using Linux and open source, encrypted and verifiable voting systems)
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Is it really such a stretch of the imagination for you that a country that looks to see their favored US presidential candidate elected through social media influence and hacking for dirt wouldn't be happy about lax voting security?
Or maybe you're just being willfully naive?
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Why are we building up the military if the Republicans allow foreign entities to hack the USA? We need better politicians, vote for Independent party this November. Oh! If that fails, then vote for Democrats this November......................
Both parties have neglected the issue, but for different reasons. Democrats tend to ignore it because illegals are more likely to give birth to future Democrat voters.
And GOP has ignored it because business likes the cheap labor illegals bring, and business funds GOP campaigns.
Sorry, but the Orange Guy is doing it wrong. Rather than obsessing on a wall, focus on hiring more border guards, and auditing business hiring practices. He seems reluctant to do the second because he's a "pro business" politician, and doesn't want Mar-a-Lago etc. audited.
Democrats once offered a bill to hire more border guards, but GOP turned it down, in part over alleged debt concerns.
Table-ized A.I.
I'll as you the same question:
If I care about immigration reform, which party is more likely to get me there? The one that wants no reform and blanket amnesty, or the one somewhat divided on the issue? Which party is calling for the abolition of ICE? Which party creates "sanctuary" cities/states? Which party runs cities that won't even convict a cold-blooded killer of manslaughter?
GOP is not "divided" on the issue: they've had at least 2 chances for reform and border guard increases, and flaked both times. They only give it lip service because GOP voters want to hear it, but flake because their biz funders DONT want it. Legalized bribery works.
(You are spinning the Kate Steinle story. It's more nuanced.)
Table-ized A.I.
they've had at least 2 chances for reform and border guard increases, and flaked both times
Are you saying Democrats were going to allow an end to chain migration and enact a merit-based system in exchange for amnesty? No, you're not. What you mean is Democrats were offering the same shit deal Reagan pushed through. No real change except for another block of Democrat voters.
(You are spinning the Kate Steinle story. It's more nuanced.)
Oh, really? Please explain then. Also see how you didn't touch the abolition issue.
The gun handler claimed it was an accident. Just because you don't like the Jury's decision does not make the reason related to amnesty. Did you dissect the jurors' neurons or something?
Table-ized A.I.
The gun handler claimed it was an accident.
His story was inconsistent. Regardless, at the minimum it should have been manslaughter. If you pick up a gun that doesn't belong to you, and you "accidentally" shoot it, and kill somebody, that qualifies as manslaughter.
Did you dissect the jurors' neurons or something?
Considering that San Francisco is the capital of Libtardia, it's a reasonable assumption that his immigration status had something to do with it.
And I'll note again you still have nothing to say about the abolition of ICE.
So, you have NO real evidence, you are just guessing out of your FoxHole. I wasted my time debating you.
Table-ized A.I.
You have no explanation for why it wasn't at least manslaughter. I applied Occam's Razor. What did you do except bury your head in the sand? Why did you, again, ignore the abolition of ICE demands? Democrats have become the party of illegal immigrants.
You cannot accuse a jury of being biased for a specific motivation based on Occam's Razor. You were not on the jury and were not privy to the discussion. You have no specific details to suggest the jury "did it wrong". They too should be considered innocent until proven guilty.
If you use Occam's Razor to form an internal personal guess, that's fine, but you implied it was definitive conclusion. Don't open your trap unless you have reasonably solid evidence, NOT personal guesses using very indirect means. This is Slashdot; we expect more logic and details, not stream of conscientiousness chatter. If we wanted the latter, we'd tune into the President.
And to me, Occam's Razor says there are too many alternative possibilities to select a specific one as a solid or most-likely guess. In other words, Occam's Razor produces no answer in this case because there's too many possibilities and insufficient information to select among them for a top guess(es).
Man up and admit you made a mistake.
Table-ized A.I.
You cannot accuse a jury of being biased for a specific motivation based on Occam's Razor.
Yes I can. The facts of the case were public.
If you use Occam's Razor to form an internal personal guess, that's fine, but you implied it was definitive conclusion.
It fits a pattern of libshit cities like San Francisco. He shouldn't have even been in the country, but San Francisco, being a "sanctuary" city, let him go from jail.
Man up and admit you made a mistake.
Why do you refuse to talk about the abolition of ICE? Why do you hold the Democrats and Republicans equally accountable for immigration policies, when the Democrats support "sanctuary" city/states, created the "DACA" amnesty, want a "clean" DACA amnesty, and oppose all immigration reform, including an end to chain migration, the "diversity" lottery, and national e-verify?
Go on, man up. Address the issues.
But the reasoning of the jury is not. QED.
I could play the same game and say most red-state Fox/Rush media consumers are brainwashed such that they automatically assume that a vast majority of San Franciscans are heavily biased toward pro-illegal-immigration such that the jurors cannot make fair jury decisions.
Using this brainwash assumption, I could state that your automatic bias makes you unfit to apply Occam's Razor. QED2.
If you had statistical evidence that X do Y at Z% of the time, you may have a case. But "Hannity said so" is not statistical evidence.
After you admit you screwed up the first topic. Finish your plate before get you desert, young lady.
Your logic sucks eggs.
Table-ized A.I.
After you admit you screwed up the first topic.
Oh, so you're allowed to flail around and ignore my arguments, while you fixate on the most inconsequential and debatable of mine? How convenient for you.
I just find it better to focus on one topic at a time if it looks like it will be a long, drawn-out discussion. Otherwise, one is dealing with 2+ long drawn-out interweaving discussions.
Table-ized A.I.
You chose to fixate on this minor topic after flailing at the major ones. It's a tactic of weakness by somebody arguing from a losing position, because they are arguing against reality itself:
Democrats are the party of illegal immigration. They own the "sanctuary" city/states, they call for the abolition of ICE, they are the ones against immigration reform. It was their "sanctuary" city policy that resulted in the death of Kate Steinle. They are the ones living in tent cities full of shit. It was their libshit Capital that couldn't even muster a manslaughter murder. And here you are, defending them.
May I see your Mind-Reader Certificate, please?
Again, both parties are, based on their history. I will agree that GOP's voting base is less likely to support it, but GOP politicians support it and ignore voters because business pays them Yuuuge bucks to allow illegals in. GOP can pull this off because they give it lip service while they are ignoring voters.
Table-ized A.I.
May I see your Mind-Reader Certificate, please?
I don't need to mind read. It's in the post history. Do you have another explanation for your hypocrisy?
Again, both parties are, based on their history.
False equivalence. Republicans don't run "sanctuary" cities/states. Republicans don't call for the abolition of ice. Obama created DACA amnesty out of thin air. Democrats accept no immigration reform. If there is any hope for immigration reform, it has to come from Republicans. The Democrats have jumped on the open borders train, and there's no turning back.
You mean your hallucinations. Take some courses in debate and logic, Your mind works improperly.
After dropping the ball 7 times they'll finally get it?
Table-ized A.I.
You mean your hallucinations.
I didn't hallucinate you flailing around, failing to address my arguments, and then deciding to single-focus like a laser on the most minor and debatable of my arguments. When pushed, you reverted back to your "both parties" line, ignoring the facts on the ground.
After dropping the ball 7 times they'll finally get it?
Any reform in a positive direction is coming from Republicans. But maybe you're cool with "sanctuary" cities/states, calls for the abolition of ICE, and calls for open borders.
Your biggest sin is accusing the jury AND me of various motivations using very poor evidence, that comes across as "your type always does/thinks X, therefore you are probably doing/thinking X here."
I not going to continue to debate somebody who fails at the basics. I shouldn't have let it get this far. I prefer logical rational people with clear lines of evidence. You are NOT one.
Most people who claim to be good at guessing motivations out loud are usually bozos.
By the way, the main purpose of "sanctuary cities" is so that illegal immigrants corporate with local law enforcement. If cops rat them out, they have no incentive to cooperate, and crime goes up. You should know that. You've probably heard that argument, but will say something like, "That's just an excuse to hide their REAL motivation of kissing up to illegals." Am I right?
Table-ized A.I.