Please critique my proposed policy to ensure an honest vote

[Foxfyre]

And there are 113754 polling places and you say 6 people will count. That's nearly 700,000 people. And who is going to check the counting to make sure they count it correctly. Then there are the recounts. Today automated vote counting is very accurate and election fraud in the counting is extremely rare. The method you are proposing is less accurate and more subject to election fraud.

Also keep mind a presidential ballot will average about 30 items to be voted on with about 3 or 4 choices. That mean about 100 running totals. So that precinct with 1200 ballots turns into 120,000 counts. After the first counting of votes recounts would have to done until the recounts agree. That is not a couple hours works.

Every one of those polling places has personnel assigned to check in the voter, give then a ballot, instructions on where and how to fill it out, and what to do with it when they have done that. Some small town precincts are places where everybody knows everybody and people respect the law and those are never any problem. One person can count and tally a few hundred ballots as rarely does every person in a precinct show up to vote. It is the larger precincts with heavy turnout that 5 or 6 people might be needed to complete the count in a few hours. It was done that way for many generations. It needs to be done that way again. New fangled, modern technology is not always an improvement over the more primitive methods.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

I am saying that more than 60% of the electorate is convinced there was sufficient cheating/fraud/unanswered questions re the 2020 election to be of concern. That has little or nothing to do with Trump.

NFBW: Really? A conservative poll prior to the Jan6 insurrection pretty much matched the national popular vote of 51% Biden, 47% Trump.”

Poll Proves Americans Believe There Was a Serious Vote Fraud Problem | Restoring Liberty

A new voter survey "has found support for President Trump's vow to fight on with his challenge to the election, with more believing that it was plagued with fraud."

joemiller.us

Overall, 46% of voters believe there was fraud, “reported Paul Bedard in his Washington Secrets” column for the Washington Examiner.

NFBW: After the Jan6 Trump insurrection the polls taken have hovered in the 33% range of Americans who believe the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

• A January 2021 Morning Consult survey of 1,990 registered voters nationwide showed 65% responded that they believe the 2020 election was "free and fair." But when those results were broken down by party affiliation, only one-third of Republicans were in agreement with that statement. When asked what sources helped lead them to believe the election was fraudulent, a majority of Republicans cited former President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly claimed without evidence that his loss was not legitimate.
• A December 2021 poll of 1,000 adults conducted by the University of Massachusetts Amherst and YouGov, found that 58% of all respondents believed Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election was legitimate. Only one-third of respondents said it was not legitimate. Of those who view the election as illegitimate, 83% named "fraudulent ballots supporting Joe Biden" as the reason for their belief.
• Another December 2021 poll, this one conducted by the Washington Post and the University of Maryland, asked 1,101 adults: "Regardless of whom you supported in the 2020 election, do you think Joe Biden’s election as president was legitimate, or was he not legitimately elected?" Nearly 7 in 10 respondents said Biden was legitimately elected, while 29% said he was not.
• A Quinnipiac University pollconducted one month after the November 2020 election found similar results. Six in 10 respondents said Biden’s win was legitimate, versus 34% who said it was not legitimate. A majority of respondents in the Quinnipiac poll also said they did not believe there was widespread voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election, whereas 38% said they did believe there was fraud.
• When Quinnipiac conducted a second poll six months after the election, the number of respondents who believed the election to be legitimate increased to nearly two-thirds. Respondents who said the contest was illegitimate dropped to 29%.

END2210132117

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Have a pleasant evening.

I am, but will have an even better evening if you respond with honesty and with respect for knowable facts like polls as presented in my post #335

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I installed biometric authentication systems in the physical buildings in at least three US Intel agencies. I don't have time to watch TV.

How long did it take to catalog the required information? Weeks? Months? Years?'

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Electoral rules must be enforced.

Good luck with that. My opinion is that the election should just be thrown out until they get it done properly.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Have a pleasant evening.

You too.

According to the Quinnipiac poll, 43 percent of all men surveyed said that widespread voter fraud happened during the 2020 presidential election. Only 29 percent of the women polled believed that voter fraud had taken place.​

​

The only majority from the entire population that believes the 2020 election was stolen from Trump is white men,

​

Out of those totals, more white people adhered to the idea that voter fraud happened. According to the poll, 54 percent of white American men believed that widespread voter fraud occurred during the 2020 presidential election while 36 percent of white women in the U.S. agreed.​

​

43% of Men Believe There Was Widespread Voter Fraud in 2020 Election: Poll

Despite assurances from election officials that no fraud was involved, some Americans continue to believe that voter fraud had an impact on the 2020 election.

www.newsweek.com

Why do you think white people are more inclined to believe the party that is home to 9 out of 10 black voters committed voter fraud and was the only way that Biden won?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

In 2016 it was the Democrats hollering fraud, stolen election, Trump was an illegitimate President etc.

NFBW: No complaints about the election process or attacks on poll workers and voting machines manufacturers etc occurred in 2016. Clinton conceded and Obama and Biden were committed to the peaceful transfer of power just like every outgoing president in our history..

 

[Flopper]

The nice thing about computers is that they log everything. Every keystroke by any person at any time is logged and that data is automatically stored at an off-site location if the proper security arrangements are in effect. Access can be rigidly controlled, and at some point software updates can be denied. By anybody. IOW, no hacking of the programming or the data itself. And even if an attempt is made, that too can be logged and questions asked later. Protocols can be put in place to monitor the entire election process, and flags raised when anomalies arise as defined in the operating software.

Done properly and correctly, computer systems can be as accurate and trustworthy as possible. Fraud would be far more likely to occur at the point of data entry, and there's not much the system can do about that except to raise the anomaly flag when 5,000 votes come in and they're all for the same candidate. And that data can be simultaneously sent to any number of interested parties, including the media.

The problem of stealing an election at a polling place is our thieves would have to know how many votes they need to steal but that number is determine by the vote total in other precincts which are not known till after the election. This is why voter fraud is so rare. The chance of success is so low and penalties are so high.

For same reasons grave robbing today is very rare so is voter fraud. There is little to be gained and penalties are high. So when you look at the Heritage Foundation Election Fraud Database what do find?
1384 proven cases of voter fraud in all 50 states over a period 43 years of which there have been over 3 billion vote cast. Of these cases, at least one fourth do not involve ineligble people voting or attempting to vote.

In summary the Heritage Foundation writes, " after extensive research has shown — it is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning than impersonate another voter at the polls.

The Heritage Foundation is an American Conservative Thinktank

Voter Fraud Map: Election Fraud Database | The Heritage Foundation

Explore a sampling of recent proven instances of election fraud from across the country. The database is intended to demonstrate the vulnerabilities in the election system and the many ways in which fraud is committed.

www.heritage.org

file:///C:/Users/HarryG/Desktop/Report_HeritageAnalysis_Final%20(1).pdf

The nice thing about computers is that they log everything. Every keystroke by any person at any time is logged and that data is automatically stored at an off-site location if the proper security arrangements are in effect. Access can be rigidly controlled, and at some point software updates can be denied. By anybody. IOW, no hacking of the programming or the data itself. And even if an attempt is made, that too can be logged and questions asked later. Protocols can be put in place to monitor the entire election process, and flags raised when anomalies arise as defined in the operating software.

Done properly and correctly, computer systems can be as accurate and trustworthy as possible. Fraud would be far more likely to occur at the point of data entry, and there's not much the system can do about that except to raise the anomaly flag when 5,000 votes come in and they're all for the same candidate. And that data can be simultaneously sent to any number of interested parties, including the media.

The problem of stealing an election at a polling place is our thieves would have to know how many votes they need to steal but that number is determine by the vote total in all precincts which would not be known till after the election. This is why voter fraud is so rare. The chance of success is so low and penalties are so high.

For the same reasons grave robbing today is very rare so is voter fraud. There is little to be gained and penalties are high. So when you look at the Heritage Foundation Election Fraud Database what do find?
1384 proven cases of voter fraud in all 50 states over a period 43 years of which there have been over 3 billion vote cast. Of these cases, at least one fourth do not involve ineligible people voting or attempting to vote.

In summary the Heritage Foundation writes, " after extensive research has shown — it is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning than impersonate another voter at the polls.

The Heritage Foundation is an American Conservative Thinktank

Voter Fraud Map: Election Fraud Database | The Heritage Foundation

Explore a sampling of recent proven instances of election fraud from across the country. The database is intended to demonstrate the vulnerabilities in the election system and the many ways in which fraud is committed.

www.heritage.org

file:///C:/Users/HarryG/Desktop/Report_HeritageAnalysis_Final%20(1).pdf

 

[scruffy]

It doesn't matter who thinks there was fraud. In 2016 it was the Democrats hollering fraud, stolen election, Trump was an illegitimate President etc. And I suspect there will be all kinds of challenges to the votes in this election too, maybe on both sides.

The point is the electoral rules, system, process has been so corrupted it is too easy to cheat, and whether or not that actually happens, the majority of the electorate has serious concerns about the validity of the vote. We need rules, regs, systems, processes in place to ensure that only eligible registered citizens vote and they only vote once.

We have to have confidence in our electoral process and assurance that it is fair and honest for our constitutional republic to prevail.

This. ^^^

 

[scruffy]

I am, but will have an even better evening if you respond with honesty and with respect for knowable facts like polls as presented in my post #335

Don't derail.

This is not about polls.

It's not about popularity

 

[Flopper]

It will only reduce voter turn out among those who don't give a damn or who are cheating the system. I don't see any big problem if those people don't vote.

If you don't see the problem of millions of voters not voting, then don't understand the success of our democracy depends on voter participation. The less voter participation, the less elected officials work for public and more they work for special interest groups.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

We have to have confidence in our electoral process and assurance that it is fair and honest for our constitutional republic to prevail.

WE have to have at least two political parties that can recognize the reality that when they lose an election they concede. And if a challenge to a result is justified, take it to court and win or lose there, accept the court’s decision.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

I am saying that more than 60% of the electorate is convinced there was sufficient cheating/fraud/unanswered questions re the 2020 election to be of concern.

Don't derail.

NFBW: i’m not derailing. Foxfyre is spreading disinformation to justify re-arranging our election process. His cause is based on a lie that 60% of the electorate is convinced there was sufficient cheating/fraud/unanswered questions re the 2020 election. The truth is it is 33% of the electorate is convinced there was sufficient cheating/fraud/unanswered questions re the 2020 election. That is only Trump voters.

I was invited here to criticize Foxfyre ’s ideas to change a process that ain’t broke and come to find out that Foxfyre ‘s reason for fixing what ain’t broke is based on disinformation I suspect he picked up on rightwing Facebook.END2210132223

 

[whutTHEYsay]

It will only reduce voter turn out among those who don't give a damn or who are cheating the system.

there was no evidence of any abnormal cheating of the system in 2020.

Don’t fix what ain’t broke.

 

[task0778]

I will consider this. But I know too many computer programmers who have confided in me that a computer can be programmed to do just about anything you want it to do, and it would take other experts in the field to detect any hanky panky. Even to the point that you simply produce the data you want, switch out the hard drive containing the same data but without the reprogamming footprint, and nobody would ever be the wiser. I just think taking electronics out of the equation and going to a more primitive filling out a paper ballot and hand counting the ballots is the only way the electorate will be confident of an honest and legitimate vote.

If you went to paper ballots and hand-counting, how would you know whether somebody counted a ballot for one person when it really was another candidate? 150 million ballots is a lot of counting, and anytime people are involved then you have the opportunity for cheating. How many people would that take, and for how long? How many mistakes might be made, honest or otherwise? There are 58 races on my mid-term ballot, and it will take some time to count all of the races correctly and double check them on just one ballot. Suppose a different person is the one doing the double-check; he or she comes up with a different total for a given batch of ballots, what then? I'm not seeing this method as feasible, it's too time-consuming and labor-intensive IMHO. And I think too accessible for fraud.

Now a word about programmer hacking. Some computer systems are closed to external inputs, if the hacker has no avenue to get into the computer then he or she can't do shit. They can be hard-wired and hard-coded with machine code with encryption keys and once installed are not hackable. I'm not talking about the current technology of any of our election systems, they may or may not be all that secure, but they damn well can be. What I am saying is that hackers may be able to acquire somebody's password but it won't do them any good if they can't access the target computer. And that is what our election systems computers need to be. They can be designed, programmed, tested, and fielded with no chance of hacking if it's done right. The key I think is to have different companies and people cross-checking for who did what, to reduce the chances for collusion.

So far as I know, not one of our election computers got hacked, or the data compromised. The problem lies with data entry, people were apparently allowed to input ballots that were not legitimate according to the existing laws, and in some cases observers were shielded from seeing what actually went on. That cannot be allowed to happen again. Even if there are very few cases of voter fraud convictions, when you have nearly half the country with doubts concerning the integrity of our elections, that is truly dangerous to democracy more than anything else.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

This. ^^^

You guys are standing around the burnt down building talking to the guy who came out with empty gasoline cans and a lighter who also owns the building that he was losing money on and had it insured it for ten times what it was worth - yepp talking to him about changing the electrical and fire codes so it doesn’t happen again.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

The problem lies with data entry, people were apparently allowed to input ballots that were not legitimate according to the existing laws, and in some cases observers were shielded from seeing what actually went on. That cannot be allowed to happen again.

Shielding observers didn’t happen in the first place. A recent court decision disqualified some ballots over a date stamp in an election for a judge in Pennsylvania So can’t say it didn’t happen

CNN —
The Supreme Court on Tuesday threw out a lower court ruling that said undated mail-in ballots in a Pennsylvania judicial race had to be counted, a decision that could eventually impact the commonwealth’s closely watched US Senate race.

The justices vacated a May 2022 ruling from the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals that ordered 257 undated ballots be counted in a Lehigh County judicial race. They instructed the lower court to dismiss the case as moot.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Even if there are very few cases of voter fraud convictions, when you have nearly half the country with doubts concerning the integrity of our elections, that is truly dangerous to democracy more than anything else.

Then denounce Trump and his political party that enables the big lie to stay alive. Him and his party are the only reason a third of voters don’t have confidence in our election process.

Vote election deniers out and keep them out and problem is fixed.

 

[Flopper]

This. ^^^

In 2016, democrats never questions the election process nor vote counting. They claimed that Trump won the election with the help of the Russians who created disinformation campaigns to hurt Clinton's chance of wining. Trump claims that the 2020 elections are fraudulent strikes at heart of election process which is the heart of our democracy. Unlike Clinton who gracefully accepted her loss, Trump chose to attack our election process because he could not accept the simple fact that he lost the election which all political non-partition organizations agree.

 

[Flopper]

Then denounce Trump and his political party that enables the big lie to stay alive. Him and his party are the only reason a third of voters don’t have confidence in our election process.

Vote election deniers out and keep them out and problem is fixed.

The people that don't have confidence in the election process are the same people that are attacking it, republicans. They have been so successful 1 out of 6 republicans are questioning whether they should vote. Democrats have turn a deaf ear to their claims. I have always thought republican attacks on our elections are going hurt them more than the democrats