How to rig an election without a fake ID

[Bronzeage]

If Roger Stone(who?) can be credited, there hasn't been a straight election in the past 50 years, maybe never.

As someone with great sentimental attachment to the Republican Party, as I joined as the party of Goldwater, both parties have engaged in voting machine manipulation. Nowhere in the country has this been more true than Wisconsin, where there are strong indications that Scott Walker and the Reince Priebus machine rigged as many as five elections including the defeat of a Walker recall election.

His plan is a little short on details and heavy on assumptions, but the short recipe is easy to follow.:

Here’s the recipe now:

(1) Publish a poll contrived to suggest the result you are going to bring about.

(2) Manipulate the machines to bring about precisely your desired outcome.

His basic premise is pretty simple. If an election doesn't follow the poll, it was rigged, but to rig an election, you need to lead it with a matching poll.

In any case, There's no mention of fake voter ID's.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

A toilet is not a machine! It is a sentient being.

 

[Bronzeage]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

We've become obsessed with finding out who won, as soon as possible. In the days of paper ballots, it might be a week or more before a statewide race could be declared.

For my voting life, the voting machine was just a giant mechanical adding machine, little different than what sat on an accountant's desk up until the electronic calculator was invented(sometime in the 70's). The voting machines lasted longer, but nothing made of cogs, gears, levers, and springs will last forever. They were heavy, hard to move or store, and tended to break down.

The last few elections have been with electronic machines. This time around, they gave us a Democratic Governor. If the party in power were really rigging elections, that would not have happened.

 

[Elixir]

His basic premise is pretty simple. If an election doesn't follow the poll, it was rigged...

The new paradigm is "if Trump doesn't win, it was rigged". You don't need all those fancy algorithms (they're rigged by those leftist mathematicians anyhow).

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

We've become obsessed with finding out who won, as soon as possible. In the days of paper ballots, it might be a week or more before a statewide race could be declared.

For my voting life, the voting machine was just a giant mechanical adding machine, little different than what sat on an accountant's desk up until the electronic calculator was invented(sometime in the 70's). The voting machines lasted longer, but nothing made of cogs, gears, levers, and springs will last forever. They were heavy, hard to move or store, and tended to break down.

The last few elections have been with electronic machines. This time around, they gave us a Democratic Governor. If the party in power were really rigging elections, that would not have happened.

How on Earth would it take a week or more? Now, when the polls close at 9, you get the first results coming in at 9:30 or 10 instead of 9:01, but there aren't week long delays.

Now, that doesn't take into account things like recounts when the results are close. In those cases, however, you want a lengthy and laborious process to ensure that you get everything right. You can't account for a computer bug which might have accidentally turned a 49.9% into a 50.1%.

 

[Bronzeage]

We've become obsessed with finding out who won, as soon as possible. In the days of paper ballots, it might be a week or more before a statewide race could be declared.

For my voting life, the voting machine was just a giant mechanical adding machine, little different than what sat on an accountant's desk up until the electronic calculator was invented(sometime in the 70's). The voting machines lasted longer, but nothing made of cogs, gears, levers, and springs will last forever. They were heavy, hard to move or store, and tended to break down.

The last few elections have been with electronic machines. This time around, they gave us a Democratic Governor. If the party in power were really rigging elections, that would not have happened.

How on Earth would it take a week or more? Now, when the polls close at 9, you get the first results coming in at 9:30 or 10 instead of 9:01, but there aren't week long delays.

Now, that doesn't take into account things like recounts when the results are close. In those cases, however, you want a lengthy and laborious process to ensure that you get everything right. You can't account for a computer bug which might have accidentally turned a 49.9% into a 50.1%.

I'm talking about paper ballots which had to be counted by hand and the totals certified and sent to the state capitol.

It took a week or more with mechanical voting machines.
When the polling place closed, all the poll officials gathered around and they opened the back of the machine and everyone wrote down the numbers for each candidate. This could be 30 or more entries on each machine. The machine was then locked and sealed, and shipped to the State Secretaries office. Each machine was opened and the official count was made. I have seen many "too close to call" elections reversed by the official count.

 

[jonatha]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

Total popular vote for the top 5 candidates in the 2015 Canadian Federal election: 17,451,328

Total popular vote for Obama/Romney in the 2012 US Presidential election: 126,849,296

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

Total popular vote for the top 5 candidates in the 2015 Canadian Federal election: 17,451,328

Total popular vote for Obama/Romney in the 2012 US Presidential election: 126,849,296

OK, so you have more than ten times our population and less than ten times the number of votes cast. I agree with you that it would be much easier for you to count paper ballots than it is for us. Thank you for confirming the numbers.

Was that the point you were making or were instead trying to say that there's one guy who counts the votes or something?

 

[hardeep]

It's weird that you use machines to vote. I get that your country has underfunded education for the past few generations, but aren't simple counting skills part of your people's repertoire?

Total popular vote for the top 5 candidates in the 2015 Canadian Federal election: 17,451,328

Total popular vote for Obama/Romney in the 2012 US Presidential election: 126,849,296

I don't really think it's the number of votes that is the problem in the US - here in the UK the referendum had 33 million paper votes and it was pretty much counted by 7am the next day. The 2014 European elections had over 120 million votes across the EU and again was pretty much done within 8 hours on a Sunday.

The issue it seems to me is the number of elections you have down ballot at the same time. (In my 25 years of voting in the UK I've never had to vote for more than two elections at the same time - a couple of crosses (or numbers) on two different coloured ballots then shove them shove them in the same box.)