Wi-Fi sniffers strapped to drones—Mike Lindell’s odd plan to stop election fraud | Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.
Wi-Fi sniffers strapped to drones—Mike Lindell’s odd plan to stop election fraud | Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.
Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.
Wi-Fi sniffers strapped to drones—Mike Lindell’s odd plan to stop election fraud | Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.::Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.
You're viewing a single thread.
Here's a fucking simple solution: use paper vote. It's difficult to fraud at scale.
It's not about the voting method. These people want to invalidate votes they don't like. Arizona Republicans went on a wild goose chase of looking for bamboo fibers in printed ballots which would "prove" they were printed in China.
From what I know about American politics I can believe their motive is to invalidate votes they don't like instead of actually preventing election fraud.
My suggestion of paper voting is a tongue-in-cheek recommendation for them to prevent election fraud because it would prevent them from being the ones to do it (at scale).
Even simpler solution: don't take claims of voter fraud seriously when it's the mypillow guy.
2020 election had 160 million votes. There were 2 cases of fraud for Trump. How about you prove the existing system is fraudulent before suggesting a change?
My understanding is America uses voting machines, which by their very nature is easy to attack without being tracked. How were the 2 cases of fraud detected and did they involve a voting machine?
This will vary by state but most states use paper ballots which are counted by voting machine, but the ballots themselves are kept as a backup. This is how recounts happen in very close elections, but also notable that recounts are mostly a roll of the dice to see if enough human errors stack up in the right direction to change the outcome in favor of the otherwise losing candidate
the ballots themselves are kept as a backup Ideally they are transported and kept under watch by many different parties with a stake in the result. Is the backup watched until it's deemed no longer needed?
recounts are mostly a roll of the dice to see if enough human errors stack up All the different parties should be watching out for errors, a human error should be difficult to happen when many humans wanting their party's votes to be counted :s
Ideally they are transported and kept under watch by many different parties with a stake in the result. Is the backup watched until it’s deemed no longer needed?
My understanding based on what I remember hearing a family member who works the polls explain is that they are locked up, then transported by the manager of that poll to presumably the county clerk who then takes possession of them and again they are kept under lock and key. These paper ballots also have to match up with a separate ledger of voters and signatures from that polling place, so even if someone added or subtracted ballots in between it would be identified. They would have to replace the ballot, which I believe is also numbered so they'd have to also forge an identical ballot of the correct ballot number to replace it with.
All the different parties should be watching out for errors, a human error should be difficult to happen
My understanding of the process is they'll have two teams of people repeating eachother's work on sets of 50 ballots, verifying the ballot matches the ledger tallying the votes then check if their counts match for every batch of 50, if the two teams counts do not match they recount the batch of 50 until the two teams counts match. So miscounting and not catching it is difficult, but if you've got 200,000 ballots and you assume an error rate of 1/10000 that's potentially 200 votes that might flip due to pure human error. It's a roll of the dice for the candidate, but if you lost a key county by 75 votes then you've got decent odds of the recount changing the outcome of that county election
Thanks for your explanation. A counting machine is still concerning but I'm a little less concerned now.
I mean there hasn't been any at scale fraud of electronic machines. All of the Ambulatory Tupee's claims have been shown to be false.
How do you determine that? Voting result aligning with 3rd party polling?
I don't know about those claims nor the specifics of the machines used in America. I fundamentally believe you can't have trustworthy electronic voting due to the undetectable weak-points at every stage. Why Electronic Voting Is a BAD Idea - Computerphile
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.