Voting is a Farce...."43 States Will Be Using Outdated Voting Machines in 2016 Election"

a reply to: nullafides

There's an easier way to do it than altering the counting because that returns a higher number of votes, than total votes cast. Do this at the start when you're declaring your variables

int offset = random(0, 50)
int totalVotes = 0
int candidateOne = offset*-1
int candidateTwo = offset

Now you have a 0-100 vote discrepancy in that district and candidateOne+candidateTwo votes will sum to totalVotes.

This hack I just outlined was proven to work on our 2004 election machines (in the movie I mentioned), it didn't even require access to the device, it only required an already altered memory chip to store votes to be sent to the board of elections and used.

originally posted by: MOMof3
Why don't you vote for mail in votes like in my State of Washington? Our whole family like the system real well. No lines, time to think, mail it, top two win.

Mail in votes don't get counted. Aside from the fact that bags of them routinely go missing, they are only counted if the number of mail in's is larger than the current vote spread. They cease to be counted the moment that is no longer true.

the first 4 words in the title....voting is a farce......no need to expound....sounds about right for these days.....evil, sorry sapsuckers that run this....
had to stop b4 I really got to cussin

Nice thread, too bad it's not getting the attention it deserves. As recent as the last presidential election there were studies done on these machines. The results shocked and saddened quite a few.

Unfortunately, many people still stuck by that voter fraud did not happen, though there was significant evidence to show otherwise. It may only change when people find that "their guy" was unfairly treated for not being a majority candidate. Often then it was too late by the time investigations were concluded.

Keep up the good fight!

a reply to: [post=19830787]Aazadan[/

You guys are so funny. So now the tactic is to convince voters to not vote.

a reply to: nullafides

Hey thanks for taking the time to demonstrate this to me. The answer would be an independent party creating the software and another independent party overseeing the process ... in an ideal world. Unfortunately reality would probably show coercion or infiltration.

It reminds me of an article I saw a few months ago on the history of SSL encryption. The article claimed that the encryption industry wanted 16-bit (at that time) but it was reduced to 8-bit at the request of the CIA as they said 16-bit was too difficult for them to crack. I am not sure how valid this claim is.

originally posted by: MOMof3
You guys are so funny. So now the tactic is to convince voters to not vote.

I'm not saying don't vote, I'm saying don't use a mail in ballot. They're treated the same as provisional ballots which is to say they have a habit of randomly going missing and in most circumstances aren't counted.

a reply to: Aazadan

In Washington state we vote by mail. They have to count the mail in ballots. I just voted in a city council election. 340 people were registered to vote. All votes were accounted for in two days. Not to mention we all know each other and would sniff out fraudulent counts.

a reply to: nullafides

Not to detract from your very important point about the security of our elections' systems, but I spent about a year researching the election reforms after the 2000 and 2004 elections. It seems to me the election systems in Florida and Ohio were seized under the guise of those reforms.

If you can control the vote in Florida and Ohio, you can rig the entire election.

a reply to: MOMof3

When I lived in Washington State and got my first mail in ballot, I filled it out with write in candidates.

They apparently didn't find it amusing I thought "God and his dog" should be in charge, and sent me another one a few weeks later, almost as if to say....."come on kid, take this process seriously this time around".

At least they took the time to read it, right?

originally posted by: nullafides
a reply to: deliberator



But, the point is...you are trusting someone to write this logic. You are trusting someone to be honest with YOUR VOTES.


How often have you found that you can trust someone you've never met, someone who has never met you? Someone who may not care at all about your best interests? Possibly truly only cares about their own interests?

Well then...as a retired after 40+ years as a software engineer/computer scientist...

Software engineers are professionals...true professionals are people that One should be able to trust to complete the task/job as originally specified. If they can not, it will become very apparent very rapidly, and they can be replaced by someone who is actually professional.

And, by the way...obfuscation is a technique that is used to protect intellectual property rights, not a method used to "sneak" in bad or malicious code. And, obfuscation is NEVER used at the source level...it is added to the "compiled" version as a means of additional security.