2016 Postmortem

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)

17. With optical scan tabulators, a recount would make this connectivity meaningless.

Thu Dec 15, 2016, 05:39 PM

Dec 2016

The tabulator counts the ballots, then the results are collected, in some fashion. No matter if the tabulator can report results wirelessly or a paper tape is printed and driven to the collection point, one needs to have the ballots to produce the same result. Any wide swings would be easily seen.

Only touch screen machines represent undetectable opportunities for tampering.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

131 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Critical Discovery During Wisconsin Recount: Cellular Connectivity of Tabulators [View all] Coyotl Dec 2016 OP

But recount lawyers not given triron Dec 2016 #1

No one gets to see the secret code owned by the ultra-right vote counting corporations. Coyotl Dec 2016 #2

And that's exactly where the cyber scientists triron Dec 2016 #3

they should have done it a long time ago, but they are blocked by GOP every step of the way. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #11

+ 1,000 Achilleaze Dec 2016 #7

Many, many years! Dustlawyer Dec 2016 #19

Why spend money on a costly ground game SticksnStones Dec 2016 #26

Exactly. The Dem leadership's failure to demand that this issue be corrected has Nay Dec 2016 #104

I may get killed here for his but there were anomalies in the democratic primaries elehhhhna Dec 2016 #129

You're not going to get killed for saying that. The very fact that Dems don't fight Nay Dec 2016 #130

Welcome to the Democratic Underground! Kolesar Dec 2016 #102

yep; it is a f*cking joke. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #10

Urosevich brothers are the evil behind these machines. alfredo Dec 2016 #12

nothing to see here folks, move along... nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #39

The fact that our voting machines are controlled by "secret propiratary software" is Dark n Stormy Knight Dec 2016 #34

And the coders have an agenda, that is not consistent with our secular constitution. alfredo Dec 2016 #70

Not sure I understand the issue HoneyBadger Dec 2016 #4

treason, end of story. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #9

+ 1,000 Achilleaze Dec 2016 #105

With optical scan tabulators, a recount would make this connectivity meaningless. Thor_MN Dec 2016 #17

Anything communicating over a network has bidirectional protocols hellofromreddit Dec 2016 #23

And possibly a back door in the code. How would we know if we don't get to see the secret code? Coyotl Dec 2016 #48

Poll observers looked at the ballots as they came out of the machines and compared the counts to the AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #67

Except, they don't necessarily count every vote, and they aren't double checked by humans. Coyotl Dec 2016 #100

I'm not talking about hand counting. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #123

it was nice of the Repubs to allow Obama to win twice..... frankieallen Dec 2016 #78

knr triron Dec 2016 #5

Our Election Procedures Are A Joke colsohlibgal Dec 2016 #6

i'm shocked... not. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #8

For the 99th time, this is no discovery and it is not news DFW Dec 2016 #13

I closed an argument with a local elections official, who believed the voting machines were safe, SharonAnn Dec 2016 #22

Your argument is nonsense. OldRedneck Dec 2016 #28

Just out of curiosity, OldRedneck ... Aimee in OKC Dec 2016 #32

no reply from redneck zippythepinhead Dec 2016 #44

Voting machines & vulnerability Aimee in OKC Dec 2016 #111

Your argument is nonsense Coyotl Dec 2016 #49

Let me guess the response DFW Dec 2016 #30

And yet no white hat hackers left one of these machines showing 99999999 for Trump and 0 for Hillary AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #52

I believe there was a county in WI that had over 100% turnout. KamaAina Dec 2016 #115

That can happen naturally. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #122

yep; the machines are working exactly as intended. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #92

Jim March ... Bev... same cast different election. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #14

As long as voting machines are owned by right-wing corporations Rex Dec 2016 #15

Not only owned DFW Dec 2016 #95

This is why I doubt every election after 2000. Rex Dec 2016 #112

Our credibility wasn't exactly enhanced DFW Dec 2016 #117

Spot on. Rex Dec 2016 #118

It is called a backdoor Botany Dec 2016 #16

exactly. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #40

Cellular connectivity is available as an option on my CPAP machine too. So what. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #18

it's not zero. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #31

Says who? AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #51

Like I got time to school you ... keep up or don't post Ellipsis Dec 2016 #55

Sorry, I don't read Fox News. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #56

ah. and I posted it just for *you* Ellipsis Dec 2016 #58

R/The_Donald? You'r really good at finding crazy right wing sources. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #59

yeah you got me.. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #60

Or, you could just use a reputable source. Or a non-right wing source. Use whichever adjective you AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #62

Why? Ellipsis Dec 2016 #63

Because I read the fucking rules. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #64

You misconstrue the point. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #68

So that's five machines. In a county other than the one in question here. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #74

Why does a machine in a rural county need a modem? Ellipsis Dec 2016 #76

Hand counting occurred. That's why these optical machines are superior to touchscreens. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #79

You may pass Ellipsis Dec 2016 #81

I tend to agree on the speed of results piece. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #83

I doubt many are installed. But they pitch hard on thier product page. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #85

Instant gratification society. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #87

what makes you think that the installation of cell capability would be "recorded" anywhere? TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #93

Cell calls generate cell bills which get paid by ??? HoneyBadger Dec 2016 #103

maybe, but who's going to be checking? we can't even get the votes looked at. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #110

The election board handles, inspects, programs, and controls the physical access to these machines. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #125

I'm also angry at the cognitive dissonance. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #80

Sorry I reject the premmise. Later dude. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #82

As I reject the premise that these machines are quite so vulnerable as the other posters in this AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #84

Sure. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #86

Snopes has debunked this as FALSE forthemiddle Dec 2016 #71

Tampering yes... Installed modem cards no. Ellipsis Dec 2016 #72

"The seals were broken by the technician who came to install the modem in each machine. . . . '' ucrdem Dec 2016 #57

THIS n/t Coyotl Dec 2016 #101

Hi, I'm new here but... RealityChik Dec 2016 #116

Indeed. Coyotl Dec 2016 #119

Awww... come here you. Welcome to DU Ellipsis Dec 2016 #121

wow, you sure are a trusting soul... nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #41

No, i'm a skeptic. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #53

This is exactly the "unintended" flaw that just sank a bill imposing electronic voting in Argentina tenorly Dec 2016 #20

It's not a 'flaw', it's an option you have to BUY. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #21

I'm sure buying such a thing would be cinch for the GOP and its fellow travelers. tenorly Dec 2016 #24

They have to be purchased and installed by the election board. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #25

Memory cards in numerous WI voting machines were in fact shown to have been tampered with. tenorly Dec 2016 #27

Links? AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #54

The oengths ppl are going to to deny any weakness in our candidate is breathtaking... dionysus Dec 2016 #43

As are the lenghts people are going to insist on attacking the candidate with a historic number synergie Dec 2016 #73

Her weakness, IMO lies in hillary the candidate, not the president she would have been. dionysus Dec 2016 #88

65 million people, and tens of thousands of others whose votes were not counted synergie Dec 2016 #107

You are so right! triron Dec 2016 #108

No russian misinformation had to do with my mom voting for Trump. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #126

Yes, that's a ton of people. However, in a sane country we'd be talking about the biggestst dionysus Dec 2016 #120

Kind of tells you how good the "anti-establishment" sales people were. They were just synergie Dec 2016 #131

seriously??? OMG. nevermind... nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #94

Yes, seriously. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #124

More than this triron Dec 2016 #29

K r voteearlyvoteoften Dec 2016 #33

As soon as I used the phrase "cellular connectivity" to my husband, he said: pnwmom Dec 2016 #35

Did you two discuss this triron Dec 2016 #36

No, I just emailed him the article a couple minutes ago. pnwmom Dec 2016 #37

From wikipedia triron Dec 2016 #38

It is not a matter of who votes but who gets to count the vote UCmeNdc Dec 2016 #42

no reply from redneck zippythepinhead Dec 2016 #45

"Waterboarding" would be helpful in solving this! dmosh42 Dec 2016 #46

NY uses these machines and I've always vouched for their security. Well shit... LLStarks Dec 2016 #47

We need to go back to the old, mechanical, lever voting machines NY used to have brush Dec 2016 #61

There are a variety of tried and tested means to hack a mechanical voting system. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #65

Don't see how you'd hack those old lever ones since they are not on networks. brush Dec 2016 #69

Chaining ballots is one of many methods, and could be considered 'hacking'. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #75

Remember the modem excuse for the broken seals ? ucrdem Dec 2016 #50

From snopes AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #66

Snopes quotes the official admission: "ES&S sent out a technician to install modems in the scanners" ucrdem Dec 2016 #90

We should just ask Carl Rove. He knows! rainy Dec 2016 #77

Statement by Loretta Lynch about voting machine hacks. Exilednight Dec 2016 #89

well, i guess it's all goood then... NOT!!! nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #97

WI election officials admit they installed modems in the voting machines, per Snopes: ucrdem Dec 2016 #91

Game. F-ing. Over. how can ANYBODY trust these machines?? nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #96

Because the machines passed physical observation by the poll observers. AtheistCrusader Dec 2016 #127

Are we talking about dialup? HoneyBadger Dec 2016 #98

Is it 1986? ucrdem Dec 2016 #99

don't know, but not very much data would need to be sent. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #109

Who exactly is "recount now" - no names, no location given nt Kashkakat v.2.0 Dec 2016 #106

A new offshot of an Election Integrity group. Jonathan Simon heads it, I think. Coyotl Dec 2016 #114

And the FBI had reported prior to the election... ElementaryPenguin Dec 2016 #113

Comey should MFM008 Dec 2016 #128