Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

probablydance.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 467 posts

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#61

Post by TheDong »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #59
maxerickson wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be less democratic (small d) than the current system. Do you have some reason that Wyoming should actually have an equal say with New York or Texas or Florida or California?

Because they are all states that should have an equal say in what president is elected. A republic of states is beholden to the states. Each state is beholden to its population.

Federal law impacts all citizens. It doesn't just make laws concerning the states.

Why should a man in wyoming's opinion on what federal laws I should live under count 70x as much as mine?

Why should a minority of the country make a decision that impacts the majority of people?

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#62

Post by ed25519FUUU »

maxerickson wrote: post #46
ve55 wrote: post #12

What I dislike about a lot of these potential fraud analysis techniques is that if a group that was performing fraud was aware of them, then they would simply perform the fraud 'properly' such that the given technique(s) don't show evidence (since they know what others are looking for and hoping to find, they simply ensure it isn't there). The same goes for similar techniques like Benford's law: once you know about t…

What 'modern improvements' can be made over paper ballots?

I think most of the improvements can be made in relation to voter registrations and rolls. How a state can keep people who have obviously died on voter rolls should be a red flag.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#63

Post by nanny »

Terrario wrote: post #52
nanny wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The electoral college is a form of protection for the naturally less densely populated agrarian states against the densely populated urban ones. This is commonly repeated, but it's BS. What "protection" does the electoral college give to Kansas, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Idaho, or Montana? Presidential candidates don't pay any attention to any of those "less densely populated agrarian states". In addition, dense states…

> What "protection" does the electoral college give to Kansas, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Idaho, or Montana? Their collective voice along with the rest of the “heartland” is the backbone of the GOP. Trump and Bush both won without the popular vote because the electoral college amplified their collective voice. The electorate doesn’t make them win, it gives them better odds. The campaign focus on swing states should explai…

Why should their voices be amplified while mine (in a rural part of NJ) is muffled? Why should the same persons vote be five times more powerful in Wyoming compared to if they lived in California? Why should we disenfranchise the millions of Trump voters in New York and millions of Biden voters in Texas? What about all the cities in red states and the rural areas in dense ones?

I don't see a single good reason for the electoral college. And you haven't explained what they're being protected from and why they need such protection.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#64

Post by maxerickson »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #59
maxerickson wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be less democratic (small d) than the current system. Do you have some reason that Wyoming should actually have an equal say with New York or Texas or Florida or California?

Because they are all states that should have an equal say in what president is elected. A republic of states is beholden to the states. Each state is beholden to its population.

So take a step back. Why would (the people of/in) California and Texas and so on choose to support such a republic?

As it is you've defined a circle. "It's a republic so it should be run based just on the borders of the constituents".

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#65

Post by maxerickson »

mistermann wrote: post #37
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The system is secure and robust, at least with regards to the mechanics of individual votings. Among the main factors is its distributed nature. You just can't run a scam with senior citizen volunteers in thousands of individual precincts. Then, there are observers. Famous case from this week's election was Republicans complaining that their two dozen(!) observers weren't allowed closer than 6 feet to the ballots. It…

> The system is secure and robust, at least with regards to the mechanics of individual votings. Not a single vulnerability or shortcoming? How would one know such a thing? > You just can't run a scam with senior citizen volunteers in thousands of individual precincts. Is this the only possible exploit? Is corruption of thousands of precincts even needed in a tight race? > It would be impossible for fraud to happen o…

In practice, interested parties observe the process.

It's relatively party based (where parties have better access).

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/polici...

It's relatively difficult to pull off hoodwink when you've got adversarial observers standing there.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#66

Post by dionian »

maxerickson wrote: post #65
mistermann wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The system is secure and robust, at least with regards to the mechanics of individual votings. Not a single vulnerability or shortcoming? How would one know such a thing? > You just can't run a scam with senior citizen volunteers in thousands of individual precincts. Is this the only possible exploit? Is corruption of thousands of precincts even needed in a tight race? > It would be impossible for fraud to happen o…

In practice, interested parties observe the process. It's relatively party based (where parties have better access). https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/polici... It's relatively difficult to pull off hoodwink when you've got adversarial observers standing there.

There are cases in court right alleging this was not allowed to happen.

"The Trump campaign said it is calling for a temporary halt in the counting in Michigan and Pennsylvania until it is given “meaningful” access in numerous locations and allowed to review ballots that already have been opened and processed." - https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-seeks-voting-stop-25...

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#67

Post by anonu »

I think arguably the electoral process makes fraud harder. If the goal was to tip the scales, in a popular vote you could basically do this anywhere across the country. But in an EV system, you would need to pick and choose 1 or probably more places (vulnerabilities) to attack to tilt things in your favor

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#68

Post by Glyptodon »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #32
Glyptodon wrote: post #8

Always keep in mind that however distorted the electoral college is, that distortion is tremendously magnified by the cap on the size of the US house of Representatives and the fact that the Constitution specifies a lower bound for district population but no upper bound.

I have been thinking that maybe states should get an equal number of electoral votes. We would get the protection of the electoral college and every state would have an equal say.

That's why the Senate exists basically.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#69

Post by unityByFreedom »

anonu wrote: post #67

I think arguably the electoral process makes fraud harder. If the goal was to tip the scales, in a popular vote you could basically do this anywhere across the country. But in an EV system, you would need to pick and choose 1 or probably more places (vulnerabilities) to attack to tilt things in your favor

Great point. I don't know why some states all of the sudden want to trust the others' voting systems. One state could choose to go electronic with no paper trail, for example, and we all know that's a bad idea.

Voter fraud does not happen on any sort of wide scale. Election fraud could.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#70

Post by Terrario »

yongjik wrote: post #60
Terrario wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California has 55 votes, Montana and DC only have 3 each. Is that not enough influence? Cali and NY make up almost a third of the electoral votes. Is it really fair for these two places to control and dictate the policies of a country spread as far and wide as the US? Hasnt the blue/red divide, not only in the country but within states themselves show that the desires and attitudes of people are heavily influenced by…

> California has 55 votes, Montana and DC only have 3 each. Is that not enough influence? No, California and DC always vote Democrat, and Montana always vote Republican. Individual Republicans in CA and Democrats in MT have zero voice - their voices literally don't matter. In fact, even Democrats in CA and Republicans in MT have zero voice - because these states' outcome is predetermined, no presidential candidate ha…

Your argument doesn’t follow. It sounds like you have a problem with the winner takes all system in us elections and not the electorate. Conservative voices in Cali and Liberal voices in Texas would be more relevant in a proportional system and not a winner takes all. These would be particularly relevant for states with split populations.

> No places should control an election. People should.

You say this but you dont mean it. In practice, removing the electoral college today would guarantee that certain places (coastal/densely urbanized states) control the election.

Should a Taiwan be able to dictate the laws and policies of a Tibet just because they have a larger population? The reason there are borders (in theory at least) is for different communities with different interest to have certain autonomy to choose their own destinies. It was part of the “deal” when the union was made because of this. If you want to remove the electoral college, then there should be a painless and democratic way for states to secede.

There are very few countries as large as the US, this circumstance is not shared by many countries. We should have a proportional system and then there wouldn’t be much of a need for an electorate AFAIK.

Post reply on HN