When will Dems tire of analyzing their message & deal with the real reason they "lose"?

[Amaryllis]

Dems seem to be endlessly obsessed with analyzing how they need to fix their message while ignoring the real reason they "lose". I have never been able to figure this out when computer security experts have been screaming about this since 2000.
(and this doesn't even take into account factors like Kobach's Interstate Crosscheck voter suppression system.) And yes, the Electoral College needs to be gone!

Elections officials outgunned in Russia’s cyberwar against America:

Detailed breakdown of the vulnerabilities of our election systems with a lot of data about specific states from 2016 - it's not just the Russians, and yes, voting machines can be compromised even if not connected to the internet. Hopefully all this info coming out will get Dem leadership to make the leap that if the Russians can do it, so can the GOP.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article157039299.html
*****
A computer science professor told the Senate Intelligence Committee Wednesday that voting machines that create an electronic record of the voters' decisions are open to fraud and computer hacking, vulnerabilities that are big enough to potentially change the outcome of some elections.

J. Alex Halderman: Our voting structure is vulnerable to sabotage, even to attacks that can change votes Computer science professor whose research focuses on computer security and privacy has (with colleagues) studied voting machines and tested and verified that they can be hacked by foreign actors. "The key lesson from 2016 is that these threats are real." What needs to happen: * Upgrade old voting machines to new ones that have optical character recognition to recognize votes made on paper ballots. * Use those paper backups to verify the ballot count is accurate. * Harden voting systems against sabotage by applying cybersecurity best practices. We can upgrade our election infrastructure by 2018.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4674512/j-alex-halderman-voting-structure-vulnerable-sabotage-even-attacks-can-change-votes

J. Alex Halderman, professor of computer science at Michigan University, said he and his team began studying "direct-recording electronic" (DRE) voting machines 10 years ago and found that "we could reprogram the machine to invisibly cause any candidate to win. We also created malicious software — vote-stealing code — that could spread from machine-to-machine like a computer virus, and silently change the election outcome."

Halderman's testimony comes as the committee is trying to assess the scope of Russia's attempts to not only spread disinformation in the 2016 elections, but also its efforts to hack into U.S. voting systems.

As a computer science professor, Halderman has not only run academic trials on hacking voting machines, he has also run real-time examples.

"The one instance when I was invited to hack a real voting system while people were watching was in Washington D.C in 2010, and in that instance it took less than 48 hours for us to change all the votes and we were not caught," Halderman said about the experiment.

More:
Computer expert: Some voting machines can be directly hacked:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/computer-expert-some-voting-machines-can-be-directly-hacked/article/2626633

At least he is saying it CAN be upgraded by 2018. At least the Russia hacks are bringing awareness to just how vulnerable our election technology is. Many have been trying to call attention for years...it is good that finally this is coming out in hearings.

It would, however, take the political will of those in power to do it.

[onecaliberal]

1. When will people acknowledge the repukes cheat with suppression and gerrymandering

Plus WE WON BY 3 MILLION.

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. As I have said repeatedly, Trump did not win any of those 4 states.

And I am pretty sure Ossoff won in GA.

This fucking LIE that trump won, he didnt, and that he won because you know who didnt give working class people a reason to vote for her, is, like i said, a FUCKING LIE

[Amaryllis]

3. I am also pretty sure Ossoff won, but we will never know as long as they are using paperless

voting machines.

[ProudLib72]

4. So what is happening with the lawsuit?

We heard about it two days ago, and I suppose it has been filed. Of course, the judge will probably throw it out.

[Hoyt]

5. Having lived in that District, there is no doubt the white wingers got out the vote.

We didn't. We need to quit whining about conspiracy theories that could happen, but didn't -- and vote for Democrats at all levels of government to stop gerrymandering.

In the 6th District, a judge gave us a gift of an extra month to register people, you could vote by mail, and we had a month of early voting. It's a red district, but at least 40% of registered Democrats did not show up.

It wasn't stolen, we gave it away. Just like we'll do the next election if we keep making excuses.

[Decoy of Fenris]

6. It's a shame we differ so starkly on guns, Hoyt.

I find almost all of your non-firearm postings some of the most rational and well-reasoned posts on the entirety of D.U. and I tend to find myself agreeing with you more often than not as of late.

Keep on keeping on, mate. You speak a lot of truth, even if it may cause some undesirable waves.

[diva77]

8. with the machines not meeting the burden of proof that they can't be hacked and w/no forensics

carried out (not that all vulnerabilities would become apparent with forensic analysis), to declare a winner and loser definitively in a "close election" is not possible.

[Hoyt]

9. Well, I haven't heard one Democratic poll observer complain. I guess they are all in on

the election "thefts" across the country. And not a one has ever said a thing. Christ, I expect this junk from GOPERS, but . . . . . .

Could've happened, doesn't mean it did.

[diva77]

10. How can you claim you are observing polls when all the action is unobservable?

That is why Germany outlawed electronic voting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_by_country#Germany

snip...Germany ended electronic voting in 2009, with the German Federal Constitutional Court finding that the inability to have meaningful public scrutiny meant that electronic voting was unconstitutional.[37]...snip

-------------

By the way, computer experts have spoken out -- see OP

[Hoyt]

11. Computer experts have said it COULD happen. I agree, it COULD. It COULD happen with paper

ballots too. I definitely know gerrymandering happens. But I'm tired of every time we lose, sound like I boxer -- "I was robbed."

[diva77]

17. The fact that it COULD happen violates election law - elections are supposed to be transparent

As it stands now, elections conducted with software & hardware are not observable. Germany ruled that such elections are unconstitutional and banned computerized voting.

We are supposed to have a secret ballot -- which is not guaranteed with voting machines that are recording votes with proprietary software.

We are supposed to count the votes in public -- which is not possible with proprietary software.

The OP includes info. regarding the vulnerabilities of the computerized voting machines.

With elections having the consequences that they do, why take the risk with these machines?

There is all kinds of documentation regarding obstruction when people found discrepancies between optiscan and handcounts, and flipping of votes in DREs. And then there are reports of elections officials obstructing hand recounts with intimidation, etc.

[Hoyt]

18. Oh come on. Paper ballots went missing, were stolen, were purposely miscounted, were

miscounted on purpose, were ignored, etc., often when I was growing up. The only law that matters is that we make the best effort possible to safeguard the systems. There were are all kind of reports that are BS. There were some people in the Ossoff election who said they were turned away from the polls in their county. Turns out, they lived in parts of the country that were not in the District.

Voting machines are fine. Maybe we need for the machine to punch out a ticket that is dropped in a box to match against tally. Of course, the excuse then will be the software was tampered with.

We will lose in 2018 and 2020 if we keep focusing on the wrong thing and whining. Sorry.

[diva77]

20. True, paper ballots can go "missing" but not on the scale of computerized voting

it's the difference between retail election fraud (paper ballots missing) and wholesale election fraud (computerized voting, optiscans, central tabulators). The solution is to beef up security with paper ballots being hand counted at the precinct level on election day.

You can use the tactic of repeating over and over again that voting machines are fine. That doesn't make it true. The OP here presented evidence, there is all kinds of evidence you can research if you want to work with facts.


I am done with this exchange now. Best wishes.

[Hoyt]

25. You use the tactic of substituting DID for COULD happen.

[Amaryllis]

23. You say voting machines are fine. Did you listen to the testimony of the cybersecurity expert

in the OP who very much disagrees with you?
2. or read any of the articles in the OP that spell out what cyber security experts have to say and have been saying for years about that?
3. Are you saying you know better than cyber security experts whether they are fine or not?
4. On what are you basing your opinion that they are fine? Are you a cyber security expert?
5. Where is your evidence?

[Hoyt]

24. I'm saying cybersecurity people are selling us/you "what could happen," not what did happen.

Besides, it's good for their business and exposure. Not disputing it could happen in a district or two. If government security agencies are doing their jobs, that's about the extent of it.

Where is your evidence it did happen?

[TheFrenchRazor]

26. so you don't think the fact that the machines could be hacked is a problem? and that this hacking

could be on a much wider scale, and harder to trace, than what would be possible with traditional paper ballots? for many of us, these facts alone are reason to go to a more secure method. it is really not necessary, or even advisable, to wait until it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that our elections have been rigged. by the way, how about proving i'm NOT a doctor, or let me operate on you... i think you've got the burden of proof backwards; election methods must be proven secure before they should even be allowed to be used. you don't install bogus, secret, computer voting machines, and then say, "okay, PROVE these results aren't accurate, or we keep using these machines forever. oh, and you can't see the software, or the paper ballots, if there even are any... seriously?

[LaydeeBug]

7. KICK. But they will pretend it didn't happen...or it couldn't have happened...or that there is no

evidence of it happening (because they refuse to look at it). We. know. the.plain. truth.

[NCTraveler]

12. Kick.

Unfortunately, the blind are still calling these things conspiracy theories. We have an uphill battle when it comes to educating the willfully ignorant.

[spanone]

13. K&R...

[mythology]

14. There is zero evidence of any vote changing

This is no different than Republicans screaming about in person voter fraud with no evidence it is a thing. It is silly conspiracy theory nonsense.

[Amaryllis]

16. Did you even READ the articles linked to in OP? How many documented actual attacks do you

need before it is considered a problem? It is difficult to get actual evidence of changed vote totals, but do you not consider numerous documented attacks on election infrastructure cause for alarm? Do you not consider it cause for alarm when a computer security expert testifies to Senate Intel that absolutely the vote totals could have been changed and there is no way to know for sure?
ANd that if we don't do something, the Russians will do what they did again in 2018? And if the Russians can do it, so can others. As stated in one of the articles .

[diva77]

19. The OP presents lots of evidence. You can google around for more evidence if you are open to facts.

What would it take to convince you that this is not a conspiracy theory?

[LaydeeBug]

21. There is zero evidence of any voting machine investigation, so spare me

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-intel-russia-hearing-live-updates/

[TheFrenchRazor]

27. yeah, it's kind of hard to obtain evidence when you're not allowed to see the ballots or software; p

pretty convenient, isn't it?

[LaydeeBug]

30. exactly...but they repeat that shit like it's MANTRA because GASLIGHT. nt

[mac56]

15. To quote Gary Gulman:

"It doesn't add up IF YOU DON'T ADD IT UP."

[ananda]

22. Yep.

Deal with gerrymandering, voter suppression, Russian hacking, etc.

[loyalsister]

29. Maybe because it calls into question their own elections?

This is conspiracy theory land that would lose future elections of any office holders that started this tantum with a few news articles making claims. It would also call into question Obama's election.