1 1
kallend

Vote fraud is real and it's the GOP doing it

Recommended Posts

On 10/15/2020 at 8:50 AM, gowlerk said:

 Without a record of who voted for who, there can be none.

There is a record. You'd obviously have to enter in personally identifying info to vote online, the same you would to vote by mail. It's really simple. Whatever info the state needs from you to vote by mail the same would be required to vote online. You're like Trump pushing fake news here. Voting fraud is remarkably rare, to the point it's not worth even really being concerned about, and the Internet has a well proven track record of security when websites are programed by professionals who know what they are doing. There is literately no piece of technology in modern existence that is more thoroughly tested than the Internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Westerly said:

There is literately no piece of technology in modern existence that is more thoroughly tested than the Internet.

Once again:

Voting Software

 

Entire industries are built around the fact that the internet is an imperfect environment, with millions of people who make their living by either identifying security issues in order to fix them, or exploiting those same issues for personal gain.

Voting fraud is, as you say, incredibly rare - mostly because it requires physical acts to partake in. Removing the need for any real level of physicality opens up the process to whole new attack vectors that are much much easier for state and non-state bad actors to drive a wedge in to.

It *sounds* like a great idea, but it absolutely is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Westerly said:

There is a record. You'd obviously have to enter in personally identifying info to vote online, the same you would to vote by mail. It's really simple. Whatever info the state needs from you to vote by mail the same would be required to vote online. You're like Trump pushing fake news here. Voting fraud is remarkably rare, to the point it's not worth even really being concerned about, and the Internet has a well proven track record of security when websites are programed by professionals who know what they are doing. There is literately no piece of technology in modern existence that is more thoroughly tested than the Internet.

I spent years working in IT, and I could not count the number of times we engineers were overruled by the clueless fools in management on engineering decisions. Like I used to tell my peers:

"The only network I get to work on that is managed efficiently and securely, is my own home network."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
12 hours ago, Westerly said:

You're like Trump pushing fake news here.

Thems fighin' words right there dude. You are overlooking the need for ballots to be BOTH secret and secure. You can't have both along with accountability without physical ballots.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Actually, it seems to be coming from Russia & Iran.

The FBI just had a press conference (it pre-empted the local TV show on the GB Packers - BOOOO!!!). 

I'd love to blame it on Trump & the Rs, but it seems to not be.

Dan Rather's comment:

The Director of National Intelligence and the head of the FBI held a news conference on Russian and Iranian interference in the upcoming election. It’s critical information everyone should know. But with the highly politicized environment, something doesn’t feel right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the DNI says that claims about fraudulent ballots are not true, and that all of this was being done to undermine voter confidence, while talking about Iran and Russia.  DNI called them desperate attempts by desperate adversaries.

Odd the Donald Trump uses the same exact talking points, and the FBI/DNI didn't comment.  Did Russia and Iran get talking points from him, or the other way around.  Same strategy to disrupt the election. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ryoder said:

Dan Rather's comment:

The Director of National Intelligence and the head of the FBI held a news conference on Russian and Iranian interference in the upcoming election. It’s critical information everyone should know. But with the highly politicized environment, something doesn’t feel right.

Also followed right after an blistering Obama speech. And mentioned how this campaign was meant to hurt Trump.

A campaign that sent communication to people to say: Vote for Trump or else....was meant to hurt Trump.

DNI is a farce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

A campaign that sent communication to people to say: Vote for Trump or else....was meant to hurt Trump.

If this was done by a hostile foreign force it was done to hurt America not just Trump. Of course to people who can only see Trump's vision of America it is the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, gowlerk said:

If this was done by a hostile foreign force it was done to hurt America not just Trump.

Agreed. But that is not what America's Director of National Intelligence said during his announcement. (Hard to call it a press conference when no questions are allowed)

Edited by SkyDekker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Also followed right after an blistering Obama speech. And mentioned how this campaign was meant to hurt Trump.

A campaign that sent communication to people to say: Vote for Trump or else....was meant to hurt Trump.

DNI is a farce.

Hi Sky,

I agree.  I have a difficult time believing that Iran would be supporting Trump after what he did to the nuclear deal with them.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Sky,

I agree.  I have a difficult time believing that Iran would be supporting Trump after what he did to the nuclear deal with them.

Jerry Baumchen

I don't; I have a feeling some there get more satisfaction out of disrupting the US than out of the nuclear deal. Just consider what Trump would do in their place... Probably the same thing.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
7 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

I don't; I have a feeling some there get more satisfaction out of disrupting the US than out of the nuclear deal. Just consider what Trump would do in their place... Probably the same thing.

Wendy P.

Hi Wendy,

Re:  'some there get more satisfaction out of disrupting the US than out of the nuclear deal'

Possibly.  However, Zbigniew Brzezinski ( Pres. Carter's National Security Advisor ) said that one thing he learned while dealing with Iran is that once they agree to something, they stick to it.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  Try saying Zbigniew Brzezinski five times quickly.  :)

 

Edited by JerryBaumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JerryBaumchen said:

one thing he learned while dealing with Iran is that once they agree to something, they stick to it.

Which might mean that since we went back on our agreement, it's double down time...

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1