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.
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?
The more illegal aliens a state has, the higher the chances are that they will get more representatives after the next census.
... "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.
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?
If you were running a nation state hacking the US election and want the person you put in power to stay in power you:
Attempt to hack and change millions of votes so your unpopular person can win a 'majority vote'?
Or
Use the existing loopholes to get him into power with only minor vote tampering (thousands of votes)?
Liberal here. Willing to agree to voter ID laws under 3 conditions:
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. Same day registration everywhere.
3. The ID is 100% free.
None of these compromise the security you are looking for. However, no conservative will agree because they do prevent actual voters from being disenfranchised, which is actually what they want.
Prove me wrong.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
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.
It's called the electoral college, it's pretty ironic that you call out someone else for being dumb. It's how it's always been done, for good reason, and it's not a "loophole". If you can't understand that we are the United STATES of America, and not just "America", as in, one huge monolithic overbearing federal government, then the whole concept of the country is lost on you.
Furthermore, they weren't looking to back any one candidate: Mueller's info shows that the Russians that were indicted were essentially trying to create division and paranoia among the voting public, and thanks to people like you they've been wildly successful. Remember they also put out ANTI-trump ads, and pro BERNIE ads as well. And lest we forget, the DNC did their part to push Trump as a republican nominee.
http://observer.com/2016/10/wi...
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Do you have to believe the election was stolen to want to secure it? It seems both sides agree our elections are in jeopardy and nobody wants to do anything about it.
What is wrong with doubling down on securing our election tools? We have ample proof that outside parties want to manipulate our elections. If they have or have not does not matter, we need to take steps to ensure that our elections are secure and safe. They are literally the most important part of our country. If they are compromised the US is compromised.
I could give a fuck who is president, but I want to know for sure that idiot (be it democrat, republican, or reptilian) was elected properly and without interference from outside parties.
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.
The true cost isn't the dollars, it's the time required to obtain an ID card. When the nearest office is 2 hours away, and your boss will fire you if you take an entire day off from work to go there, it becomes pretty much impossible. Statistically, minorities are more likely to be in that situation, but it's really just as much an attempt to discriminate against the poorer working population as it is racial discrimination.
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.
Yes, I've met several. In my city, around 5% of the population and 6% of the voting-age population haven't got ID and don't have the cash or time to get one. That's only the ones I can roughly count, and doesn't count things like adults who never got an ID in the first place because they didn't drive and their parents didn't keep records. The same thing happens with many elderly who no longer drive: they lose their social security cards, and have to pay $125 to get a copy of their birth certificates and have licenses printed up and all--often these people are on a fixed income.
You can get SNAP and other welfare by uh...using your voter registration card as an ID. Seriously. You can use just about anything--a school ID, an ID badge from a job, proof that you're receiving or have received some other form of welfare...
Support my political activism on Patreon.
There was attempts to influence the elections. It probably had no effect on the outcome. However, neither should it be treated as if it's perfectly ordinary. Russia was involved in trying to influence the election and that can't be allowed to just be glossed over. And this most certainly was not the peak of their capabilities and they've not lost the means and motivation. In fact, the bigger scandal is not the Russian interference itself but the attempt to cover it up and deny it.
So true, some Democrats may be blowing it out of proportion, but also too many Republicans are just trying to shut the whole investigation down and pretend nothing happened.
The vast majority of states don't have mail-in voting, so #1 seems necessary in most of the country.
We have #2 in my state. It's not chaotic in the least. No provisional ballots are necessary. You just show the documentation, they look it over and verify you're in the correct precinct, add your name to the rolls, and give you a ballot.
There aren't wild explanations. No one is seriously claiming that the Russians "stole" the election, except some stupid voters who don't know how to reason (and we have plenty of those types of voters on both sides).
The real problem however is him trying to hinder the investigation. This is going to hurt him far more than if he just admitted that the Russians indeed tried to influence the election. He's only doing this because he wants everyone to believe he's the most popular guy ever, that he had the largest inaugural day ever, that he won by a huuuge margin, etc. He's embarrassed that by focusing on the Russian scandal that some people might think he isn't as popular as he claims. His denial is all ego based.
The boss is already breaking the law by employing someone without verifying they are legally eligible to be working and filing the proper tax documents. You know, by checking their ID.
Hi Coward, it's me a concerned DNC supporter!
I've been quite concerned that they apparently robbed Bernie of his chance at the 2016 election. I've been quite vocal about it in fact...
Glad we could clear that up. So you can stop calling BS and start actually replying to forum comments in a constructive and hopefully insightful manner.
Good Day Coward!