Donald Trump keeps giving away the game and STILL we refuse to listen to him. Just as Trump’s been telling us his presidency’s illegitimate, he keeps telling us HOW he thought he would stay in the White House — via the VOTING MACHINES. Even Trump’s not dim enough to think he could “ride to victory” on the strength of a red wave. That’s the jingly keys here. Trump wanted HIS voters to skip voting by mail and vote by machine because the machines are where the fix was set up and ready to roll. Right now, everyone’s asking aloud “how could ALL the pollsters be sooooo wrong again?” They weren’t wrong. Stop looking in the wrong place for the answer to the question.
It’s only a “conspiracy theory” if it has no receipts and the connected dots are sketchily connected at best. Put this in the “Stone Cold Fact” column: most of the voting machine makers are owned by card-carrying Republicans. Their business is almost completely unregulated. The Republican owners are significant donors to Republican politicians and Republican politicians sit on the boards of the voting machine making companies. Conflicts of interest abound — unregulated.
Also add to the “Stone Cold Fact” column: hacking a voting machine doesn’t even amount to “a piece of cake” it’s so easy.
Also add: every last voting machine made by these companies has at least one back door available to the company.
Also: to cheat in an election using a voting machine would NOT require any sort of “grand conspiracy” whatsoever. It could be accomplished with, at most, a handful of people. Hell, if properly organized, one could steal a presidency (or a few Senatorial elections) with three. One — at the ownership level — to provide a back door, another — technically competent and able to access that back door at the appropriate time (so the ownership level can claim plausible deniability) so as to drop in the code — and, then the third (the political side) guiding the whole pirate ship with subtle hints and clues. Three people could pull this off and no one would ever know. Plausible deniability uber alles.
These are all facts. Demonstrably true. These machines are vulnerable to criminal behavior intent on changing the outcome of the elections they’re tallying.
The most blatant way to steal an election via computer code in a voting machine would be to overtly steal or flip votes. We KNOW FOR A FACT that that happens! It’s been documented! But that’s too easily caught; it CAN be caught if the voter is vigilant. If too much of that happens (putting myself in the criminal’s expensive loafers), it’s apt to raise questions or, worse, alarm. There needs to be a better, subtler, more nuanced way to win via code.
Padding. That’s the ticket.
The code would go something like this: “for every tenth vote for the Republican candidate, add one vote”. Thus, ten votes becomes eleven votes, twenty becomes twenty-two votes, thirty becomes thirty-three votes and on and on. We’ve just added ten percent to the vote total with very little way to check it out — since the computer code that gave the instruction can either be removed or written so as to “remove itself” after having executed its instructions. This is coding that near-amateurs could probably write.
In 2016, the chattering class was quick to jump on Hillary Clinton and the Democrats for botching the election. For sure, the campaign had its flaws. But look at what it was swimming upstream against: RUSSIA and a full-on cyber war attack with the full-on participation of the entire Republican Party. How typical for the boys to gang up on one girl. The false narrative the news media invented to explain how “the polling could be so wrong!” (it wasn’t) was the “secret Trump voter” who lied to the pollsters out of shame but proudly voted for Trump when the time came.
I’m trying to recall if the news media ever stuck a microphone under the nose of any such voter… They should try now — to find a similar voter who voted for Joe Biden (and everything he stood for) but also for the vulnerable Republican Senate candidate — and everything Trumpian he or she stood for. That sounds… no, it SMELLS like bullshit. It stinks of bad analysis that refuses to look at ALL the possible explanations. Instead, it invents a character it can’t produce so as to interview and VERIFY their story.
Very few people in this election “split their vote”. This was tribal — top to bottom.
It might not be possible anymore to forensic evidence from the voting machines. I don’t know. But the Democrats should be all over that like a Republican on an illegal campaign donation.