Voter Fraud, been around

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[Raoul]

Well, I can't speak for the rest of the state of TN, but I was an election officer in Sullivan County for the last 15 years. In that time I worked with some very fine folks representing both parties. Everyone with whom I was involved went out of their way to insure a fair and honest election. Not once did I see anyone intentionally do anything improper. Everyone I worked with only was interested in making sure that registered voters had the opportunity to cast their vote.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I doubt it happens much except in larger precincts in the larger cities and mostly up north.

I've never heard of any voter fraud in Tennessee.

[Worriedman]

I doubt it happens much except in larger precincts in the larger cities and mostly up north.

I've never heard of any voter fraud in Tennessee.

Uh, does no one remember the dead folks, felons and out of district folks voting for Ford in Memphis? How about the the 37 indictments issued, 35 which were felonies against Shelby County poll workers in 2006?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I guess I did forget that. I started to say Memphis was always ripe for it

with the Ford family machine there.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest HvyMtl]

I too have been an election official, last in charge of a small precinct, in Nashville. No voter fraud occurred in this precinct. Signatures matched, photo ids or voter cards used. (IMHO, Voter cards should also have picture.) Actually, the location in Tennessee one has to look towards for possible fraud, is the Memphis area, and certain precincts there.

Memphians would be more able to speak towards such fraud.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Something went on in Bridgeport, CT

this time, read it on Drudge. Some

angst between a poll watcher and

poll worker about mixing ballots.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JayC]

Well, I can't speak for the rest of the state of TN, but I was an election officer in Sullivan County for the last 15 years. In that time I worked with some very fine folks representing both parties. Everyone with whom I was involved went out of their way to insure a fair and honest election. Not once did I see anyone intentionally do anything improper. Everyone I worked with only was interested in making sure that registered voters had the opportunity to cast their vote.

Have you moved over to electronic voting machines yet? You'd never have a clue if there was voter fraud going on if you're using those. A single poll worker, or in some cases a voter can have a large impact on the results.

BTW, there are some very interesting studies showing tell tale signs of electronic voter fraud in many parts of the country in the last presidential election, but without a real time paper backup it's nearly impossible to prove.

[Raoul]

Have you moved over to electronic voting machines yet? You'd never have a clue if there was voter fraud going on if you're using those. A single poll worker, or in some cases a voter can have a large impact on the results.

BTW, there are some very interesting studies showing tell tale signs of electronic voter fraud in many parts of the country in the last presidential election, but without a real time paper backup it's nearly impossible to prove.

We've done both. My question is, what paper backup. If you vote on a paper ballot your name is not on it.

If you get a receipt for your vote...so what. Most people would not keep their receipt. The truth is the voting process will always involve faith. Unless your vote is recorded on paper with your name attached to it in some way, there's no such thing as an actual paper trail. And to have an actual paper trail violates you privacy of the vote.

If you think about it, most of modern life is a leap of faith. We are conditioned to expect that our vote is recorded correctly, that our taxes are correct and mostly fair, that paper money has an actual value, that the beef we buy in a package is actually beef.

Most of our existence is based on our conditioning to expect certain responses to certain actions.

Ok, sorry...I'm just having a moment here. But still

[Guest HvyMtl]

Nashville has had electronic for a while. There is a paper report printed at the end of the day, and the numbers must match the number of signed voter forms.

Numbers always matched, so I do not know what happens if they don't.

Voter does not get any receipt for their vote.

However, the final printout does list the number of votes per candidate, per race.

The media always sends someone to get the numbers at the end of the race. The precinct officials have to post them on the door, for all to see, after the end of voting. So, if you are curious as to how your precinct voted, drop back by your voting location around 15 minutes after the end of voting...

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well, it's sad there are those that would consider cheating the American people to

win a race by tampering with election results. If that is the only reason a candidate

can win, he isn't much of a candidate, and it can't be tolerated. Al Franken's election

shows voter fraud from elected officials and their minions in the party apparatus. It

may not be wide spread, but it sure should be stopped cold before that happens again.

I wonder if it will?

Just the fact that it does happen, and primarily by Democrats, shows that their party

is filled with a bunch of evil people, and don't have the best interest of America at heart.

It's one solid piece of evidence to show one not to vote for them.

[JayC]

Paper backup in the sense that the voter see a printed paper ballot and agrees that ballot matches what is on their screen. This doesn't violate the voters privacy in anyway shape or form... it provides a paper record that is still completely anonymous and kept like current paper ballots today.

I'm not suggesting a receipt that they take home, only that a paper track record to compare to the computer results.

Voting has never been based on faith before... That is why we have poll watchers to try and prevent voter fraud... We've gotten pretty good at preventing fraud in most areas (still having issues with felons and dead people) but that isn't fraud at the ballot box as much as fraud in the voter rolls. You're adding the ability to conduct massive and impossible to track voter fraud at the ballot box with electronic voting machines.

This type of fraud isn't a theory it's been tested the machines are fairly easy to attack, and any election worker would have enough access to infect the machines.

We've done both. My question is, what paper backup. If you vote on a paper ballot your name is not on it.

If you get a receipt for your vote...so what. Most people would not keep their receipt. The truth is the voting process will always involve faith. Unless your vote is recorded on paper with your name attached to it in some way, there's no such thing as an actual paper trail. And to have an actual paper trail violates you privacy of the vote.

If you think about it, most of modern life is a leap of faith. We are conditioned to expect that our vote is recorded correctly, that our taxes are correct and mostly fair, that paper money has an actual value, that the beef we buy in a package is actually beef.

Most of our existence is based on our conditioning to expect certain responses to certain actions.

Ok, sorry...I'm just having a moment here. But still

[JayC]

This type of fraud doesn't add votes... it changes your vote as you cast it... so on the screen it looks like you voted for candidate Alpha, but on the report printed at the end of the night it shows a vote for candidate Bravo instead.

The current 'checks' done at the polling location would not detect this type of attack.

Nashville has had electronic for a while. There is a paper report printed at the end of the day, and the numbers must match the number of signed voter forms.

Numbers always matched, so I do not know what happens if they don't.

Voter does not get any receipt for their vote.

However, the final printout does list the number of votes per candidate, per race.

The media always sends someone to get the numbers at the end of the race. The precinct officials have to post them on the door, for all to see, after the end of voting. So, if you are curious as to how your precinct voted, drop back by your voting location around 15 minutes after the end of voting...

[DaveTN]

I doubt it happens much except in larger precincts in the larger cities and mostly up north.

I've never heard of any voter fraud in Tennessee.

Well I’m glad to see that being a criminal is based on where a person was born or raised.

Those damn Yankees.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That was a generality, DaveTN. The larger precincts in the much larger cities in the north

have a history of voter fraud, dating way back, and it has nothing to do with where a person

is born or raised. That trend may be changing, though, and becoming more widespread.

The SOS program of George Soros is showing up in different places around the country. It

is all about manipulating elections using key elected officials. It is a Democrat(progressive)

program that helped Al Franken in Minnesota. Hints of voter fraud are turning up in races

like Connecticut and North Carolina now, possibly others. Even a sore loser Republican may

be involved in a bit of voter fraud in Alaska. We'll have to wait and see about that one. I

think she's just angry that the primary went against her dynastic dreams.

The Harry Reid race may have been infected, but at this point, pure speculation to me.

I should have included "in the past" in that first sentence you quoted. I responded to the

second one earlier. My mistake:D

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I too have been an election official, last in charge of a small precinct, in Nashville. No voter fraud occurred in this precinct. Signatures matched, photo ids or voter cards used. (IMHO, Voter cards should also have picture.) Actually, the location in Tennessee one has to look towards for possible fraud, is the Memphis area, and certain precincts there.

Memphians would be more able to speak towards such fraud.

I have to ask this, because I don't know, but I do suspect. Can the electronic voting

machines protect against software changes that might allow a formula, or other method,

to change a number of votes? By the reports I heard, there may have been an attempt

like this. Matching numbers of cast votes to voter roles wouldn't prevent that, and it

appears that it would be extremely difficult to find this type of manipulation. I don't

have enough background in software programming or the security of the networking

used with these machines. I think it would be very troubling to find something like that

happening. I am sure that someone, somewhere, has thought about it and/or tried.

Don't know, just curious.

[JayC]

It is possible to design a harden voting system that would be virtually impossible to attack, there is a open source version available for counties and states to use free of cost which has been audited by some of the best security researchers in the country.

Most of the current systems are designed on Windows (the same as what you use on your home pc, or mobile phone), and as such as fairly easy to attack.

Also, while it's impossible to prove there are telltale signs of ongoing electronic voter fraud there are some very interesting papers on the subject, if you want I'll try and find some links...

I have to ask this, because I don't know, but I do suspect. Can the electronic voting

machines protect against software changes that might allow a formula, or other method,

to change a number of votes? By the reports I heard, there may have been an attempt

like this. Matching numbers of cast votes to voter roles wouldn't prevent that, and it

appears that it would be extremely difficult to find this type of manipulation. I don't

have enough background in software programming or the security of the networking

used with these machines. I think it would be very troubling to find something like that

happening. I am sure that someone, somewhere, has thought about it and/or tried.

Don't know, just curious.