SC Primary Shows Off New Election-Stealing System, Which Turns Your Choice Into a Barcode You Can't Read Before Tabulation

[Seymour Flops]

If it comes to a hand recount they won't be using the barcodes.

.

If the barcodes say one name and the print another the “election results” could overwhelmingly favor one candidate, so no recount would happen.

 

[ElmerMudd]

If the barcodes say one name and the print another the “election results” could overwhelmingly favor one candidate, so no recount would happen.

There will be errors with new technology automated voting systems. There will be more errors with a hand counted ballot. Guaranteed.

 

[Independentthinker]

Imagine putting that energy into the private side. Perhaps many know they cannot compete with that, and it is better to have an easier life as a government employee than digging ditches. Of course, there is government employment that has stress.

Private side? To these people, they want no provide side. They want government for the people, by the people, and nothing but the government.

 

[Independentthinker]

MAGA minions look for new ways to make excuses for losing.

Democrat minions look for new ways to make excuses for losing.

 

[Seymour Flops]

There will be errors with new technology automated voting systems. There will be more errors with a hand counted ballot. Guaranteed.

But less opportunity for fraud. I'm not concerned about the normal mistakes that happen and can go in favor of one candidate or another randomly. Those more-or-less cancel each other out.

Electronic voting is so easily rigged, that it might was well be those 900 numbers to vote for "Who is the Next Star?" or whatever.

 

[ElmerMudd]

But less opportunity for fraud. I'm not concerned about the normal mistakes that happen and can go in favor of one candidate or another randomly. Those more-or-less cancel each other out.

Electronic voting is so easily rigged, that it might was well be those 900 numbers to vote for "Who is the Next Star?" or whatever.

Wrong. Sophisticated computer forensics can catch errors and fraud much better than any manual system.
People, who do not trust the high tech voting machines, do not understand the technology.
Do a deep dive on the capabilities provided by sophisticated automated voting system with all of the safeguards.

 

[Lesh]

If the barcodes say one name and the print another the “election results” could overwhelmingly favor one candidate, so no recount would happen.

Nonsense. Regardless of the barcodes the actual names are what would matter

And they’re on the fucking ballots you dopes

 

[Seymour Flops]

Nonsense. Regardless of the barcodes the actual names are what would matter

And they’re on the fucking ballots you dopes

Again, the actual names would only matter in a recount. If the barcode cheating allowed the Democrat - I mean hypothetical cheater - to win by a wide margin, there would be no recount.

 

[Lesh]

Again, the actual names would only matter in a recount. If the barcode cheating allowed the Democrat - I mean hypothetical cheater - to win by a wide margin, there would be no recount.

Oh bullshit. Any claim of shinanigans could be easily dealt with by auditing the ballots by name… which doesn’t exist in the current SC ballot system

 

[OKTexas]

If the barcodes say one name and the print another the “election results” could overwhelmingly favor one candidate, so no recount would happen.

As long as they are using machines, whether they use bar codes or OCR, there will always be points where the vote could be manipulated. If everything is hand counted, the reported totals could be manipulated. So some trust is required no matter what system is used. and as in any accounting there have to be cross checks built in.

.

 

[Lesh]

As long as they are using machines, whether they use bar codes or OCR, there will always be points where the vote could be manipulated. If everything is hand counted, the reported totals could be manipulated. So some trust is required no matter what system is used. and as in any accounting there have to be cross checks built in.

.

As we found out in 2020, as long as the original ballot exists with the names of the candidates that were chosen on them, hand counts CAN be done.

The fact that there is ALSO a barcode does nothing to change that.

 

[Seymour Flops]

As long as they are using machines, whether they use bar codes or OCR, there will always be points where the vote could be manipulated. If everything is hand counted, the reported totals could be manipulated. So some trust is required no matter what system is used. and as in any accounting there have to be cross checks built in.

Unfortunately, the 2020 election gave us no reason to have any trust in the system at all. But you make a good point if the desire to cheat is strong enough, such as that desire produced by Trump derangement syndrome, cheating will always be possible.

What we really need is federal law that’s willing to fully investigate the cheating, and bring the cheaters to justice. But when the System itself is so politicized in favor of the party that relies on cheating, we are in danger of losing our Republic.

.

 

[OKTexas]

As we found out in 2020, as long as the original ballot exists with the names of the candidates that were chosen on them, hand counts CAN be done.

The fact that there is ALSO a barcode does nothing to change that.

If you bothered to follow the thread I said that already.

If it comes to a hand recount they won't be using the barcodes.

.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Unfortunately, the 2020 election gave us no reason to have any trust in the system at all. But you make a good point if the desire to cheat is strong enough, such as that desire produced by Trump derangement syndrome, cheating will always be possible.

What we really need is federal law that’s willing to fully investigate the cheating, and bring the cheaters to justice. But when the System itself is so politicized in favor of the party that relies on cheating, we are in danger of losing our Republic.

It is what it is.

.

 

[munkle]

As we found out in 2020, as long as the original ballot exists with the names of the candidates that were chosen on them, hand counts CAN be done.

The fact that there is ALSO a barcode does nothing to change that.

Will recount observers be given barcode readers?

 

[ElmerMudd]

As long as they are using machines, whether they use bar codes or OCR, there will always be points where the vote could be manipulated. If everything is hand counted, the reported totals could be manipulated. So some trust is required no matter what system is used. and as in any accounting there have to be cross checks built in.

.

You do not know what you are talking about.
Read about computer forensics. Foul play and mistakes can be tracked much easier on an high tech automated voting machine than on manual ballots.

You people don't know what you don't know. You talk out of your ass like you are an expert but you have half the information needed to talk intelligently about the subject.

 

[OKTexas]

You do not know what you are talking about.
Read about computer forensics. Foul play and mistakes can be tracked much easier on an high tech automated voting machine than on manual ballots.

You people don't know what you don't know. You talk out of your ass like you are an expert but you have half the information needed to talk intelligently about the subject.

All that and no link is sight. LMAO

.