Trump surrenders for historic fourth arrest

[TimeMachine]

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

And how would you design a system in which a record is kept of who the anonymous voter voted for that could only be checked by this anonymous voter?

You get a voter id number and password. Much the  same as everything else you would use on the net.  

[Danderman123]

4 hours ago, TimeMachine said:

No.  I want to see my vote.  Not a record you give me. 

Up to you.

 

But, there is no evidence that the 2020 election in Georgia was stolen.

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

And there lies the problem.  How can you gather evidence when there is none. With an open system there will be evidence to support both sides. Nobody can complain and throw bottles then.  

If there is no evidence then you have no case, its as simple as that, unless your name is Trump of course, then you rally the crowds to go to Capital Hill.

[Danderman123]

8 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

You get a voter id number and password. Much the  same as everything else you would use on the net.  

Unless you believe that the voting machines are rigged, a receipt should be sufficient.

 

Do you have any evidence that voting machines are rigged?

[TimeMachine]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

If there is no evidence then you have no case, its as simple as that, unless your name is Trump of course, then you rally the crowds to go to Capital Hill.

Totally agree.  Without evidence you can't do anything. Violence is not a good reponse if there are other options. Rather than the riot I would rather see a change of some sort to improve how people at least perceive things. 

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, TimeMachine said:

Totally agree.  Without evidence you can't do anything. Violence is not a good reponse if there are other options. Rather than the riot I would rather see a change of some sort to improve how people at least perceive things. 

 Other options were taken, 60+ court cases, still no evidence. That's when you know, hey guess what, I was wrong....

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

 Other options were taken, 60+ court cases, still no evidence. That's when you know, hey guess what, I was wrong....

Some might reach that conclusion. Others never will.

[TimeMachine]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Unless you believe that the voting machines are rigged, a receipt should be sufficient.

 

Do you have any evidence that voting machines are rigged?

Am I able to inspect them and see what they did with my vote? I can only think that that part isnt the issue though as it is currently.

But for imlrovement,  

Just modify the machines to read a card,  confirm with voter the details and imbed all the encrypted info into the database. When ive seen my vote on database I know machines have done their job along with any other middle man tasks.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, TimeMachine said:

Am I able to inspect them and see what they did with my vote? I can only think that that part isnt the issue though as it is currently.

But for imlrovement,  

Just modify the machines to read a card,  confirm with voter the details and imbed all the encrypted info into the database. When ive seen my vote on database I know machines have done their job along with any other middle man tasks.

At that point we could have done it long ago. Voting online would be way more secure than any voting machine. Banks don't seem to have a problem with operating online. That way, you and only you could view the ownership of your vote. I'd support that. They could do away with mail in voting and drop boxes, no queues and more people would be able to vote. Trust me, the republicans don't want that.

[TimeMachine]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

Some might reach that conclusion. Others never will.

Lets say,  just for arguments sake,  there was fraudulent  activity. Currently someone may  find it extremely difficult to prove and it can be hidden as if proof doesnt exist.  Why was there so many cases?  

 

For open source you would need one case. 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Some might reach that conclusion. Others never will.

Here's a few of the others.................

 

 

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

Lets say,  just for arguments sake,  there was fraudulent  activity. Currently someone may  find it extremely difficult to prove and it can be hidden as if proof doesnt exist.  Why was there so many cases?  

 

For open source you would need one case.

Voter fraud can't be hidden. Election fraud, involving financial irregularities can be hidden. Especially when the supreme court lets you hide them.

 

There weren't so many cases. There were a few and most of those convicted were republicans. The salient point was there were nowhere near enough to sway an election.

 

Would you disqualify an election if you could prove a single case? Or throw it to the opposition?

Edited September 1, 2023 by ozimoron

[Danderman123]

8 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

Am I able to inspect them and see what they did with my vote? I can only think that that part isnt the issue though as it is currently.

But for imlrovement,  

Just modify the machines to read a card,  confirm with voter the details and imbed all the encrypted info into the database. When ive seen my vote on database I know machines have done their job along with any other middle man tasks.

But there is no evidence that the 2020 Georgia election was stolen.

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

Lets say,  just for arguments sake,  there was fraudulent  activity. Currently someone may  find it extremely difficult to prove and it can be hidden as if proof doesnt exist.  Why was there so many cases?  

 

For open source you would need one case. 

 

 

For onesies or twosies, yeah, they are hard to detect.

 

But, mass voter fraud would be easy to see.

[Danderman123]

16 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

Totally agree.  Without evidence you can't do anything. Violence is not a good reponse if there are other options. Rather than the riot I would rather see a change of some sort to improve how people at least perceive things. 

Once Trump goes away, this also goes away.

 

Today, there is virtually nobody suggesting that voting macines are inaccurate.

[Bkk Brian]

'I just hope it ends': Arizona election official shares emotional story as harasser sentenced to prison

Hickman told a judge that he remembers the night in 2020 that dozens of protesters — propelled by lies about the fairness of the county’s presidential election — came to his home while his wife and young children were inside. He remembers the years of harassment against him and his colleagues. He remembers the moment he saw that his teenage son understood his choice to not respond to the hatred with a physical confrontation or violence.

“My son looked at me and he understood me,” he said, choking on his words.

Behind him at the defendant’s table as he spoke sat Mark Rissi of Cedar Rapids, Iowa – one of many who had threatened him.

https://www.rawstory.com/arizona-elections-2664740684/

[TimeMachine]

Anyway.  I only dream. No president and all the pollies will ever want that system. 

Time for me to close down the idea.  Nuff said. 

Cheers all. 

[Danderman123]

3 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

I will give you a few clues and you can work it out for yourself.

• Presidents can pardon people
• There is an election coming soon
• Trump will likely be running in that election 

Trump has been indicted in New York and Georgia. Even if he wins in 2024, he cannot pardon himself for state convictions.

[Danderman123]

35 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

You get a voter id number and password. Much the  same as everything else you would use on the net.  

So vote riggers would create a system where you see your vote, but its not in the real system that you can't see.

 

Once you go down that rabbit hole, there is no solution for your apprehensions.

[Nick Carter icp]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

At that point we could have done it long ago. Voting online would be way more secure than any voting machine. Banks don't seem to have a problem with operating online. That way, you and only you could view the ownership of your vote. I'd support that. They could do away with mail in voting and drop boxes, no queues and more people would be able to vote. Trust me, the republicans don't want that.

You are just wanting to stop all the poor/unintelligent people voting , the ones who do not have means to access a computer or don't have the ability to use a computer and so wont be able to vote .

   

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

You are just wanting to stop all the poor/unintelligent people voting , the ones who do not have means to access a computer or don't have the ability to use a computer and so wont be able to vote .

   

I agree with you.

 

Online only voting would exclude a lot of people from voting.

[Bkk Brian]

30 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

At that point we could have done it long ago. Voting online would be way more secure than any voting machine. Banks don't seem to have a problem with operating online. That way, you and only you could view the ownership of your vote. I'd support that. They could do away with mail in voting and drop boxes, no queues and more people would be able to vote. Trust me, the republicans don't want that.

I think it could be another option to have a phone app along with mail in and visiting traditional ballot boxes. But not only online voting, it could be vulnerable to hack attempts. They partially trialed it in the UK.

 

Voters in U.K. Cast Ballots Online, in Test for Internet Voting

LONDON—Members of the U.K.’s ruling Conservative Party who are voting to decide the country’s next prime minister are for the first time casting ballots online in a leadership election, a rarity among democracies wary of internet voting because of cybersecurity concerns
Over a several-week period, the party is offering internet voting alongside voting by mail, in part to provide greater convenience during August weeks when Britons take vacation and to avoid disruptions by striking postal workers. The results are to be announced Sept. 5.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/voters-in-u-k-cast-ballots-online-in-test-for-internet-voting-11660993200

https://archive.ph/Jefxt

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, TimeMachine said:

And there lies the problem.  How can you gather evidence when there is none. With an open system there will be evidence to support both sides. Nobody can complain and throw bottles then.  

How will an open system provide evidence without revealing how individuals vote?

1 hour ago, TimeMachine said:

Open system will magically create the opportunity to find evidence. 

Isnt that great? Whats the downside?  

How?

1 hour ago, TimeMachine said:

You get a voter id number and password. Much the  same as everything else you would use on the net.  

Meaningless.  Verifying there is a record of who you voted for will not verify your vote was counted properly, but it will mean there is a record of how everyone voted.  This record would supposedly be completely unhackable, but it won't be.

 

The only way an "open" system would prevent the kind of fraud you seem concerned about would be if every vote for every candidate could be traced to the people who cast those votes, and the count could be independently verified. 

 

However this would not only open the doors to coercion of voters (which would happen), it would also make possible and inevitable the creation corrupt political machines in which those who are elected would reward those who voted for them and punish those who didn't.  Think Tammany Hall on steroids and nationwide.

 

All this because some people believe, without evidence, that the current system isn't trustworthy.  Sorry, but I'll stick with a proven system in which there is no evidence of fraud over a backwards leap into an age of rampant corruption.

[Danderman123]

There are cases of people making death threats against Georgia election officials. Given that there is no proof that the Georgia election was stolen, can our Trump fans here explicitly condemn such vile behavior by people threatening election officuals?

[rudi49jr]

3 hours ago, TimeMachine said:

Got back from exercise.  Was ok.

 

Now. Think we are off track.  It seems people are rejecting my idea about open source voting because they think Im talking about that to side with Trump. Im siding with the small guy who wants his vote to count wether he votes for Biden or Trump.  In this case Biden wins so you all think I am attacking the voting system to back Trump.  Either way,  if next year Trump wins I will still have the same opinion.  The voting system is not trustable. I wont debate to death with anyone who is better to vote for.  Vote for who you like. 

I just so happen to think Trump can be a better option than Biden who should be in aged care.  Its disgusting he is being encouraged to stay as president despite his mental health issues.

 

I should be able to vote with confidence for who i choose and so should you if you disagree. 

 

So no need to debate about Trump and Biden.   Ill leave them to prove their own worth. But the idea that people dont want to be able to check voting for themselves is just a reaction to support the idea that the vote was not tampered with and Biden won fairly. 

 

Anonyminity is not a problem either way.  You can still be anon in an open source vote.  However if I want my fellow Americans to see my vote I dont have that option in the current system.

 

So forget about Trump and Biden. The idea you trust random members of the public to ensure your vote is handled correctly versus you having control over it.  Id much rather check myself. 

 

Why would you want to continue with the current system.  You can never convince people it is fair without them being able to check for themselves.  Trust us stuff doesnt work any more. 

 

 

Woosh. That’s the sound of your post going right over my head, I have no idea what you’re on about. All I get is that you’re very suspicious of the voting system for no good reason at all. All I can say is: enjoy your paranoia.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

Voter fraud can't be hidden. Election fraud, involving financial irregularities can be hidden. Especially when the supreme court lets you hide them.

 

There weren't so many cases. There were a few and most of those convicted were republicans. The salient point was there were nowhere near enough to sway an election.

 

Would you disqualify an election if you could prove a single case? Or throw it to the opposition?

As I pointed out above, even if such a system was implemented, so what? The Trumpistas would just make up some other fictions. For instance, they could claim that the government was stuffing the system with fake votes. How would a personal ID system address that charge? Remember that these are the same people who not so long ago were the lemmings following Trump over his campaign to investigate whether or not Obama was born in the USA. They were convinced that Obama was born in Kenya and that he was ineligible to be President. A lot of those people are still posting here. This election fraud stuff has nothing to do with rationality.

[bendejo]

Notice that no one on the MAGA/conservative side of things is casting any of the election fraud suspicions on Putin and his cabal.  Suspicious, that.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 8/31/2023 at 6:45 PM, Danderman123 said:

I dunno.

 

2 hand recounts. Lots of other checks.

 

Trump's own people could only find 36 dubious votes after a year of research.

 

Rudy Guiliani admitted he lied about election workers.

 

What have you got?

 

Let me guess: you have a feeling it was stolen.

 

WRONG. I don't have an opinion on whether the election was stolen or not, as the facts have been hidden under a mountain of BS, IMO.

All I can say is that I would not be surprised if it actually had been.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

There are cases of people making death threats against Georgia election officials. Given that there is no proof that the Georgia election was stolen, can our Trump fans here explicitly condemn such vile behavior by people threatening election officuals?

Did any Trump fan on here actually say they support making death threats against election officials? I doubt it as they'd probably have been suspended for it and the post deleted, quite rightly too.

 

IMO your post is just baiting.

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Once Trump goes away, this also goes away.

 

Today, there is virtually nobody suggesting that voting macines are inaccurate.

Florida comes to mind when saying voting machines are infallible.