Electronic Voting Machines & Why Voters Should Be Suspicious Of Every Election

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Adam Taggart via PeakProsperity.com,

Long an 'exporter of democracy' to the rest of the world, there is ample evidence that the United States lacks even the most rudimentary, basic protections necessary to preserve voting integrity within its own borders.

Some of the evidence is circumstantial, some is statistical, and some is pretty direct and clear-cut. Taken together, a pattern that emerges strongly suggesting that ever since electronic voting machines were introduced in the United States, we’ve had a string of suspect election results that frankly are not consistent with a free and fair voting outcome.

This week, we're joined by Brad Friedman, election integrity analyst to understand better the systems and practices currently in place to collect and tally votes in America. As we gear up to elect our next president, it's clear that numerous concerns exist about the state of 'free and fair' voting in our country:

Trust is different than 'verifiable'. Trust, frankly, has no place in elections. There is no reason to ever trust anybody. We need to be able to verify all of this.

 

There are basically two different types of electronic voting systems that are currently used today.

 

One is the touchscreen system that people know about. They’ve seen those votes flipping and so forth. Those machines are, in fact, 100 percent unverifiable -- period. I’ve asked the companies that make the systems many times, if they have any evidence whatsoever that any vote ever cast on one of those machines during an election, for any candidate or initiative on the ballot, if any of those votes have ever been recorded as per the voter’s intent, any evidence whatsoever. They have none -- they are 100 percent unverifiable. Thankfully, many states are getting rid of those and they’re moving to paper ballots.

 

The problem, however, with hand marked paper ballots is that most of them are run through optical scan computers to be scanned. The problem is, they often don’t work. You can’t tell whether they have worked properly, whether they have accurately recorded the vote, unless you actually hand count the paper ballots -- begging the question of why the hell are we using these optical scan systems in the first place. So when you have a paper ballot, at least it is verifiable if anybody bothers to do a hand count. But we don’t bother to do so in this country; almost never. When problems are found, often they are completely ignored.

 

So that’s why I’ve argued for years now that the most transparent and reliable way to run an election is to hand count the paper ballots at the precinct on election night publicly in front of everyone with the results posted at the precinct before those ballots are moved anywhere.

 

Short of that, it really is faith-based elections. We're trusting that they’re recorded accurately, even though we’ve got so much evidence that they often are not. I think it’s a crazy way to run a democracy if you ask me(...)

 

There is every reason to be suspicious of every election. There's a lot of money at stake, a lot of money, a lot of power at stake in these elections and so people should be suspicious about them.

 

No matter what you do, people will try to game elections. There's just too much at stake for people to not want to try to do that. That’s why you need a system that is as transparent as possible because people are going to try to game it. The trick is you have as many eyeballs looking as possible to make it as difficult as possible to game the election. That’s the trick; and when you begin to use security by obscurity and hide the way that votes are actually counted and the way that votes are actually cast and the systems that are used to tally them, we have no idea in the end.

 

I think that’s just absolutely crazy. Every time I come out and make that argument, it depends what election has just happened, but I'm then branded either a Democratic partisan, a Republican partisan, a Bernie supporter, a Hillary supporter -- whatever it is. People don’t like to hear these facts. So I’ve had to go to bat for a lot of candidates who I would have never ever even considered voting for. But I think that their supporters have the right to know whether they won or lost, and have the right to know that the election was tabulated accurately. That’s what we no longer have in this country and it’s ridiculous.

Click the play button below to listen to Chris' interview with Brad Friedman (53m:45s)

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Joebloinvestor's picture

They still can use the mail in vote if they don't get the results they want.

Just ask Austria.

peddling-fiction's picture

Good video.

I am an IT veteran and I would say that DO NOT trust computers for voting. The more it is manual and physical, the better.

NoDebt's picture

But if we did all our voting over the Internet that would be safe, right?  What could be more secure than that?

 

peddling-fiction's picture

Is the /sarc missing or implicit?

NoDebt's picture

I don't use /sarc tags.  You get it or you don't.

Rock On Roger's picture

I'm sure the photos and fingerprints collected by the machines are easily verifiable.

Uchtdorf's picture

One way or another, the elites will get their guy or gal in the WH.

Look what Billy is up to these days:

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/737025756488978432?ref_src=twsrc%...

JamesBond's picture

Can these machines tell if an illegal is voting?  Exactly how many votes from noncitizens does it take to get to the center of an election nulification?  Only the SCOTS knows...

 

jb

The Saint's picture
The Saint (not verified) JamesBond May 30, 2016 9:52 PM

Didn't all of this mainstream national election rigging start in the Kennedy era and expand from there?  That's why the Democrats are so good at it.  They've had the most practice and lack of moral fiber.

VWAndy's picture

Still clinging onto that ol red team blue team shit?  Read it again.

The Saint's picture
The Saint (not verified) VWAndy May 30, 2016 10:23 PM

The Red team or the Blue team are going to be the ones in charge.  Get off your horse and realize how things work, buddy.

VWAndy's picture

 Wow it just bounces right off.

Jubal Early's picture

A few times in interview the Martenson claims that Switzerland uses electronic voting.  This claim is 100% bogus. All votes are done on signed ballots sent to all registered citizens of the community weeks before the vote.  You can mail your vote or drop it off by city hall any day from 3 weeks prior up until the actual vote.  If you don't register in a community, which is obligatory, you never get a ballot.

There is so much bullshit on the internet and on ZH about things Swiss.  I especially love it when they say "by law all Swiss men have an assault rifle at home". 

Ghordius's picture

+1 Jubal for... truth.

 (they have if they are in the militia army, which is compulsory (with a way out in civil service))

btw, are you going to stop trying to put words in my mouth?

DeadFred's picture

If it's on the internet you know it's true.

Seeing Red's picture

@PF:  It shouldn't take you 19 weeks to notice and appreciate NoDebt.  One of the best posters we (still) have.

Kassandra's picture

Anyone remember "hanging chads?"

Yeah, they put in place who they want..or who has been bought and paid for. Same thing.

junction's picture

Ask Bush family election consultant Michael Connell.  Oh wait, he died is a suspicious private plane crash.  Dead men tell no tales. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/republican-it-guru-dies-in-plane-crash/

thisguyoverhere's picture

"We love to be lied to", this is the assumption of TPTB. Untill you show them they are incorrect they will keep making the same plays from the same playbook.

Normalcy Bias's picture

Diebold couldn't possibly create a machine that could print a coded paper receipt (that could be used for verification purposes).

Urban Roman's picture

Who gets the receipt? How long does he or she have to hold on to it? When does it get counted, and by whom? Can humans read the code, or is it just another computer bar code? Will the software that does all this be open-source? With verifiable hash codes? Can poll-watchers from any concerned party audit the code and the receipts?

The thing is, all this audit-trail stuff was worked out for paper ballots at least a century ago. None of the proposals I have seen for machine-voting comes anywhere close. Every single step of the current crop of machine-voting process is broken.

Normalcy Bias's picture

Agreed. Some auditing mechanism would be better than none, which is what we have now.

I think electronic voting should be outlawed. It makes election rigging as simple as a few keystrokes.

durablefaith's picture

Glad to see this issue getting some coverage.

Leta go ahead and connect the dots.

If digital voting is bad, then digital currecy is....

Comon on bitpromoters, you can do this logic...

dvfco's picture

This opened my eyes a few months ago.

I can literally track and see if a package consisting of a $.20 battery has been delivered - where it was, when it was dropped off, who signed for it, etc.

But, I can't track my fucking vote!

How about printed receipts with tracking #s allowing every citizen to check a database to see if their vote has been recorded and received?

How about the receipt comes with not only a tracking # - to check against federal records - but the exact list of candidates for whom I have voted?

Fucking Bullshit:

1 - Obama re-election website and databases get him re-elected in 2012

2 - At the same time, Healtcare.gov doesn't work and loses hundred of billions in US Taxpayer $$.

3 - We're about to be Federally Fucked again in 2016!?!

 

My apologies for the caps/bold/underlines.  

This shit pisses me off.

Main_Sequence's picture
Main_Sequence (not verified) May 30, 2016 6:08 PM

"it's not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes."

-Josef Stalin

Captain Obvious.'s picture

Me old mate Joe wasn't a communist. He was a starfish.

VWAndy's picture

 Yep. Rigged up every way possible and then some.

VWAndy's picture

 Its just more moving goal posts crap. After watching them move them once or twice one would think kicking Lucy would be a better choice.

cart00ner's picture

Microsoft builds voting machines - donates $200k to Hillary,

I'm seeing a conflict of interest here - oh wait, rules only apply to us saps, silly me!

Ms No's picture

Shhhh... don't tell anybody that their votes won't count.  They will figure it out after the next election.  Your spoiling the fun. 

If/when Trump voters discover that their votes have been stolen there will likely be epic days of rage on the horizon.  Not the type of rage that targets local businesses and community.  There is a huge amount of energy that has been held back for a very long time now and something is due to fracture.  It will be interesting to see how this goes down.   

dvfco's picture

Amen, brother.  

A lot of shit will be hitting a lot of fans come November.

Couple the election fraud with an attemp by the falsely-elected left to institue a gun ban - and we'll have -

BOOM!!!!!!!

gregga777's picture

Elections in the exceptional United States of America are rigged and the vote counting is a fraud. I have no faith in the legitimacy of the American electoral process, political process or political system. The entire electoral process is a scam.

pocomotion's picture

We need voting monitors brought in from Iceland.

magnetosphere's picture

how bout inviting monitors from saudi, north korea, and venezuela?

dvfco's picture

Christ - at this point - I'd even take up Cuba's offer from Fidel to help with the Bush / Gore recount - and all future recounts.

Was it said to bust our stones?  Of course.

Was it 100% correct?  Well, you can be the judge of that.

John_Coltrane's picture

When the votes for a particular candidate, say Obama, in a particular precinct(s) exceeds 100% of the registered voters I suspect "somethings rotten in Denmark".  It smells fishy and it is fishy.  When we start to see negative votes appearing then I'll be doubly suspecious, particularly when their all on the Rep side.  And when votes are counted as complex numbers on both real and imaginary axis what shall we do?  Imaginary votes would then have real meaning!  Right now we can simply ascribe them to dead people and felons.  I guess the same dead felon voting multiple times for Obozo is the most egregious current issue as even the multiverese hypothesis can't fully explain it.

SillySalesmanQuestion's picture

"Every single step of the current crop of machine-voting process is broken."

Hmmm, I wonder who could of possibly made it that way?
Who figured in this day of technological advancement, that there is not a 100 % reliable method to verify actual voting...

no ita lever's picture

Nah, just send the paper ballots down to Mexico to be counted fairly. Just like the SPanish tabulators in 2008 or was it 2012? Did you know Soros had ownership in those companies? hmmmm

I think we had 120% of precinct turnout during those elections for Obama? No? I Must have been mistaken?

YBIC

Purple thumbs?

 

EDIT: Coltrain, I swear I just read your comment, amazing. I see we agree. I think there were some people who voted from the grave as well.

Dragon HAwk's picture

yeah when they couldn't find a single Mormon in Philadelphia that would stand up in a court of law and say i voted Rommney i knew the fix was in..   some drunk had to hit the wrong key at least once. for Christ sake.

InnVestuhrr's picture

It's not the voting machines that you have to worry about, it is the entitlement-tit-sucking incompetent failed brain-dead proletariat parasites doing the voting.

durablefaith's picture

Its amazing you can type but apparently cant read.

Go back and read the article and try again.

InnVestuhrr's picture

So you are claiming that all the votes for free-stuff commie bernie in the primaries were rigged by the oligarchs, huh ?

crossroaddemon's picture

I think you need to re-read the article. The proletariat doing the voting doesnt matter one bit if the whole thing is rigged. I'm convinced that it is. The winning candidate was long since chosen and the machines will simply spit out the pre-programmed result. They won't even count the votes.

are we there yet's picture

The primaries are largely rigged
The elections are rigged in layers of ways
Such as gerrymandering, lobbiest back room deals, voting machine companies owned br George Soros, voting on bills that can not be read, to name a few of corruption methods.
D.C. Politicians are much closer to slave masters than to public servants. Hint: you are the slave, and there is no Underground Railroad.

psyclone's picture

put the ballot on a blockchain - casting a BitVote beats a hacked Diebod box or dipping fingers in purple dye

rejected's picture

Which is the main reason I no longer vote. It's much easier for them to flip votes then invent votes.

Second reason is the trash candidates chosen for our affirmation is really bottom of the barrel.

Third reason is things always get worse after every election,,, never better.