• Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 hours ago

    The first stone has fallen out of the wall. I hope it leads to more. If you look at the various numerical anomalies that occurred in swing states only, it becomes very plausible that Harris actually won.

    • Mail-in votes closely reflected polling, but election-night voting (i.e. on the machines) contradicted the polls.
    • Split-ticket voting occurred much more often than usual - in this case, ballots with a vote for Trump and votes for Democrats the rest of the way. This does happen in elections, but not nearly to the degree it happened in the swing states.
    • The anomalies were always enough for Trump to win, but just below the thresholds that would trigger automatic audits.
  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s the old projection thing again.

    Republicans: the Dems hacked voting machines and stole the election! Lock them up!

    Also Republicans: we hacked a voting machine so we can steal the election.

  • dan1101@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Normally vulnerability testing would be a good thing, but in this case I think it’s safe to assume the worst motivations for it.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Ironically, the initiative was reportedly complicated by the fact that Elon Musk’s DOGE squad had laid off the CISA agents who would have known how to actually break into voting machines.

    Article casually assuming that some vulnerability existed to exploit. The more journalistically-responsible way to phrase it would’ve been something more like “the CISA agents with expertise who might have been able to find a way to break into voting machines.”

  • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The administration wanted a voting machine hacked, but DOGE had already fired the experts capable of doing it. Apparently the one thing stopping a potential election conspiracy was Elon Musk’s ability to make government incompetent at absolutely everything. Task failed successfully.

  • switcheroo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Early voters are reporting some hijinks when selecting their choice so be VERY CAREFUL about confirming who you are voting for.

    I know I am going to be checking in to make sure my vote was counted and counted for the people I want to win. You should to.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Providers of voting machines have skewed GOP in their donations since Bush 43. Variations of voting results from polling have been strongest in Ohio and Florida.

    Obviously this is yet more extreme corruption, but election rigging is possible/likely happening without this embarrassment. Vote rigging is more subtle than buffoon in chief thinks it should be.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    There is no such thing as security if you have physical access to the device. So yes, I am sure they could “hack” it. (Remove storage, alter the votes, re-insert storage).

    That doesn’t mean elections are compromised. It means one machine is compromised.

    • _chris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The storage had better be encrypted and locked to the machine it was installed on. It’s such a basic thing that…shit, yep they probably didn’t do it.