6425
Comments (123)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
144
PeteJeffrey 144 points ago +145 / -1

How crazy is it that if this order didn’t come in, there would literally be zero paper trail and we would just have to trust the machine and it’s software?

That is bat shit crazy

99
LiberalismIsTheVirus 99 points ago +99 / -0

I keep hearing they're supposed to keep paper ballot records for at least 22 months. Dems keep trying to get this removed in various cities/states.

72
BidenHunter 72 points ago +72 / -0

They can't. It's federal law. Yet, a bunch of states are not in compliance. We need lawsuits against these states to force them to do what federal law requires.

53
minotaurbeach 53 points ago +53 / -0

Obama Never gave up the white house

37
deleted 37 points ago +37 / -0
16
iamherefortheluls 16 points ago +16 / -0

we need not just lawsuits but charges against people.

Just because your state does not have a law against doing X (where x='destroying ballots before that date), does not mean you can ignore a federal prohibition on that.

7
ShrikeDeCil 7 points ago +7 / -0

And: No one gives a shit if your state even "gives you immunity" - they aren't the darn feds.

4
BidenHunter 4 points ago +4 / -0

^^^yes

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
3
RexCollumSilvarum 3 points ago +3 / -0

If they're not in compliance, they shouldn't be permitted to nominate electors.

2
BidenHunter 2 points ago +2 / -0

Completely agree

9
IvIA6A 9 points ago +9 / -0

No one should be against keeping records or elections, and I'd argue 22 months is too litte, should be 7 years minimum if not forever.

5
CaptainQuip 5 points ago +5 / -0

Should be at least 4x as long as the IRS says I have to keep my tax records.

3
Vir4030 3 points ago +3 / -0

Why wouldn't we keep them for 22 years?

59
Granite_MAGA 59 points ago +59 / -0

MA destroys ballot images as soon as the vote is tallied.

Some districts have machines that shred them immediately after.

All for transparency, of course.

35
MyUsername 35 points ago +35 / -0

If they do that, the voting is void.

10
iamherefortheluls 10 points ago +13 / -3

that's where 'states get to decide how to run their own election' bit comes in

and before any one thinks that the remedy is 'feds should decide' imagine Biden getting certified and saying 'All state elections now run on Dominion. and you have to shred paper ballots just as MA does'

10
sahMsNt38 10 points ago +10 / -0

There's federal law requiring it. As the Federal government is the recipient, they need to ensure minimum federal standards for the election to be valid.

states get to decide how to run their own election

This understanding was so strong until 2018, the FBI wouldn't investigate voter fraud, ever. Trump changed that, of course.

4
Persistence1 4 points ago +4 / -0

Lol that’s exactly where were at dumbass, feds dont get to run the elections but they should be able to dictate and force states to being able to check on the elections

2
Vir4030 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's why I'm so glad when I hear about state congresspeople weighing in on this. They're the ones that should be fighting to make sure their state's elections are accurate.

1
Granite_MAGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Someone is going to have to FORCE them to stop then.

13
JimmyJam 13 points ago +13 / -0

the problem with these machines is that the paper ballot that it generates could be flawed if the tabulation was flawed during input - let's say you choose candidate A but candidate B is tabulated and the paper receipt is printed as candidate B - the only system that makes sense to me is a system in which at the paper ballot is marked by the voter and scanned - the paper ballot then is saved. A paper receipt generated by the machine that is not verified by the voter is almost useless. Sure it can prevent against the numbers being changed downstream, but it does not protect against software fuckery at the time of vote.

3
ShrikeDeCil 3 points ago +3 / -0

ShikeVotingSystem:

First, ID,etc to get to go to the 'voting booth', which is a computer for all the choices/etc. So you click buttons "Trump" or "Biden"

But that's merely the "Ballot Preparation Stage" - it prints a ballot that has only your choices on it in clear, unambiguous terms (on security paper, with special ink, and a block of crypto). This entire computer and everything about it is basically useless to "hack" - it makes a nice printout.


State of Washington Official Ballot

Precinct 17

Federal:

  1. President of the United States: Donald J. Trump.

  2. Vice-President of the United States: Mike Pence

Washington State:

  1. Governor: Lauren Culp

  2. Lieutenant Governor: (write in) Joshua Freed


This isn't even official until you go to the desk, "Yeah, this is my final decision" and it gets a stamp "Officially Accepted" and logged, etc. Note that there's a spot here for the voter to say "This is effed up entirely", stamp their own ballot "Spoiled" and trade that for permission to go back to the computer... Handing after that point can continue in different directions.

This is similar to yours, but should make it wildly implausible to have "ballot curation" - which is jut begging for insanity.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0