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

Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 839 posts

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#741

Post by simonh »

jimmygrapes wrote: post #685
useerup wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, there were claims made about massive voter fraud in the 2016 election: When Trump could not stomach the fact that he lost the popular vote, he claimed that more than 3 million ineligible voters had voted for Clinton and that he had in fact won the popular vote. There was even a voter-fraud commission set up to investigate the claims. They quietly disbanded.

They were not able to acquire any data because Alex Padilla, now temporary Senator replacing Kamala Harris, refused to cooperate. A class case of "we refuse to look for evidence, therefore there is no evidence"

One guy in one state asks for actual evidence such as an actual reason why fraud is being alleged and the entire investigation shrugs it's shoulders, says oh well we tried, and shuts itself down and quietly goes away? Really?

Also why pick on Padilla, why not Jon Husted (Rep, Ohio). What about all the Republican lead states where massive fraud was supposed to have happened? Trump expended no political capital or effort whatsoever on doing anything meaningful about supposed voter fraud, and couldn't even persuade any Republican state administrations he had any credible evidence or reason for alleging it. He just gave up immediately at the first hurdle of being asked what he wanted to do and why. In fact he didn't even pursue this personally, he just delegated it to some flunkies and walked away from the issue until the next election.

How to explain this? It's almost as if he had no credible reason for making the claims and the whole thing was just for show.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#742

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

reaperducer wrote: post #64
seanalltogether wrote: post #43

I remember a lot of accusation about Diebold voting back in the 2000s, and concerns about lack of auditability. My understanding is that newer systems now let you vote at a machine, but it spits out a receipt that the voter can verify and the county can hold on to for the sake of audits and recounts. Is this standard now, or on a state by state basis?

My understanding is that newer systems now let you vote at a machine, but it spits out a receipt that the county can hold on to for the sake of audits and recounts. Not new. I've had paper voting receipts for at least 15 years. Probably longer. Is this standard now, or on a state by state basis? There are no voting machine standards. It varies by state, and in some states by county. Some people see that as a flaw. I…

How can I be sure that my paper ballot receipt that I’m holding matches the ballot that was actually submitted?

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#743

Post by simonh »

useerup wrote: post #416
simonh wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without the investigation, oversight or legislation... the skepticism is pointless. Which is the tell that Trump didn’t believe his own claims of vote fraud. Bear in mind he pulled exactly the same stunt in 2016 claiming massive vote fraud but when he won never mentioned it again until 2020. If he’d actually believed there was vote fraud or a chance of it, he would have done something about it. Investigations, hear…

Actually, there were claims made about massive voter fraud in the 2016 election: When Trump could not stomach the fact that he lost the popular vote, he claimed that more than 3 million ineligible voters had voted for Clinton and that he had in fact won the popular vote. There was even a voter-fraud commission set up to investigate the claims. They quietly disbanded.

That's what I said, he pulled exactly the same stunt in 2016 claiming massive vote fraud.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#744

Post by akvadrako »

hota_mazi wrote: post #718
mmazing wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's terrible to see some of the disinformation that is out there regarding open source software. Time and time again open source is shown to be the way to go, and you still hear lies about how it's not safe. I can already hear the politicians going on about how "being open source" lets "anyone put their own back door in! BE AFRAID!"

They are not lies. Open source is not safer than closed source, unless you can verify with 100% certainty that the code you saw is the code that's running. And that's impossible. People who think open source is the solution to the voting challenge haven't given this problem much thought.

That's like saying a car is only safer if you can be 100% certain it won't crash.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#745

Post by bdowling »

aw1621107 wrote: post #727
bdowling wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is correct. The problem above was conflating "on the merits" with determining facts by considering evidence.

> This is correct. Your comment appears to imply otherwise. Did I misread it? > conflating "on the merits" with determining facts by considering evidence. Do you mind elaborating on the difference?

> Your comment appears to imply otherwise. Did I misread it?

My comment wasn't very clear. Sorry about that. Usually we think of a judgment "on the merits" as one that occurs after considering both the law and facts of a case.

> Do you mind elaborating on the difference?

In the case of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the judge in theory assumes that the facts alleged in the complaint are all true. If he dismisses the case, it is because as a matter of law the plaintiff cannot win. In such a case it is incorrect to say that the evidence was found to be lacking because the evidence was never considered.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#746

Post by simonh »

leric wrote: post #662
briandear wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim is that voter laws were changed by Secretaries of State rather than the legislatures as is required by the constitution. Secretaries of State changing voter laws is unconstitutional. Read the constitution. It’s crystal clear. That happened. It’s a fact.

This is what censorship looks like in hackernews

It's what disagreement with a factually incorrect comment looks like. Legislatures can delegate legislative power.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#747

Post by bronzeage »

Other democratic countries are looking at the US elections with confusion.

Voting machines are by design undemocratic even if they act exactly as advertised. They allow centralization of vote counting, they are opaque mechanism and single point of failure which by themselves can cast doubt on the whole process.

The entire premise of democratic elections is that the government proves to the little citizen its supported by other citizens. A process which involves the government telling the little citizen the little citizen didn't provide evidence of widespread fraud isn't democratic, how can the little citizen hope to prove to the almighty government anything?

I'm sickened by the thought the same sham notion of elections can reach my country with the support of Facebook and Twitter.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#748

Post by rwmj »

rconti wrote: post #326
rwmj wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has paper-only ballots and none of this stuff is a problem. (There are no "hanging chads" because ballots are marked by the voter with a pen or pencil on a piece of paper). The polls close at 10pm, the votes are counted overnight by volunteers, and the winner takes office the next morning. It always baffles me that the US system is so complicated.

You're telling me out of millions of ballots, none of the pen or pencil markings could be unclear? The reality is, there are always ballots that fall in a grey area. That's being exploited to sow doubt in the uncertainty of an entire election. Hell, same thing happened during Brexit: > The first stage will see all ballot papers - though not actual votes - counted, a process known as verification. > Any ballots which…

> You're telling me out of millions of ballots, none of the pen or pencil markings could be unclear?

I didn't say any such thing. Of course there are disputed and spoiled ballots, and these are resolved quickly by the volunteers and local observers from the parties taking part in the election. Unless the number of disputed ballots exceeds the difference it's not really a problem. Recounts happen, especially where there's only a few hundred votes in it.

Spoiled ballots (where the voters are actively protesting by scrawling "I hate them all!", or some other message across the paper) are tallied separately, but are otherwise ignored when calculating the election outcome.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#749

Post by rwmj »

Pxtl wrote: post #422
rwmj wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has paper-only ballots and none of this stuff is a problem. (There are no "hanging chads" because ballots are marked by the voter with a pen or pencil on a piece of paper). The polls close at 10pm, the votes are counted overnight by volunteers, and the winner takes office the next morning. It always baffles me that the US system is so complicated.

The trick is that American ballots bombard their voters with dozens of questions and dozens of options. Judges, ballot initiatives, various functionaries, etc, which makes hand counted paper ballots impractical. In parliamentary systems, you elect people so they can vote on those matters for you.

The solution to this (also one which is used in the UK) is to put these other votes on different pieces of paper. That way you can count the presidential election first and leave the local initiatives to a bit later, or however you'd prefer to prioritize the results.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#750

Post by justinzollars »

the_drunkard wrote: post #88
justinzollars wrote: post #63

I worked on campaigns for 10 years, I was an elected Hillary Rodham Clinton DNC Delegate and I witnessed real problems that should be of concern of every American. Votes should be cast in person, with identification and counted by hand. If Democracy is sacred we can wait a few days for results we can all trust. The system is clearly breaking down today where 75% of Republicans do not trust the election results and 75…

Can you elaborate on this? I'm very interested, especially given your perspective. The 2004 election also had its fair share of electronic voting criticism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_election_vo...

Sure,

What I saw was this. The voter file was completely inaccurate. It was very common to go to a residence where voters:

  a. had moved
  b. had died
  c. had multiple 12+ voters currently registered at one apartment address, none of whom live there.
From my perspective there are real issues with sending unsolicited mail in ballots to homes because the government does such a bad job managing the voter file. Often it is deliberately mismanaged because "purging" a file is a loaded political term. Who wants to be that guy who deletes voters?

Moreover, my role as a campaign staffer was to collect votes. Often, people would ask "what do I vote for?", and I would just point and tell them what to vote for. This is also common. It also feels unethical.

Based on this experience, I strongly support voting in person, with an ID.

Don't trust me. If you would like to see this for yourself, volunteer with a campaign (any party) and canvass an apartment building in a swing state.

Post reply on HN