Do you trust the Alabama election results?

[garybeck]

According to VerifiedVoting.org, an unbiased organization that specializes in voting system security and accuracy, Alabama's system is listed as "inadequate" (the lowest rating) in a 2012 survey of election equipment. (see https://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/projects/counting-votes/)

Also according to VerifiedVoting.org, all of Alabama uses paper ballots that are fed into optical scan machines to count the votes. All of their system hardware is manufactured by a single company (ES&S).

It is presumed that Alabama received the "inadequate" rating because the election results are not audited.

It has been demonstrated many times by computer security experts that un-audited election systems like this, although they have paper ballots, can easily be rigged (by an insider at the voting machine manufacturer) or hacked (by an outsider with basic knowledge of how the system works) without detection. This is because the scanners could be counting the votes incorrectly (either by a mistaken software bug, or with purposeful/rigging hacking) and without random audits, no one would ever know.

This particular system would be considered to be particularly vulnerable because a single manufacturer is responsible for the entire state. That means the system would only have to be compromised in a single location (where the software code is written) to affect the entire state.

To simplify the concern, a person on the staff of ES&S could write the software code to change every third Jones vote to Moore. A single line of code as simple as this could throw the entire Senate and no one would ever know:

if N="3" and vote = "Jones" then vote = "Moore"

So, do you trust the results?

[ProudLib72]

1. Nyet comradsky!

All of your voting machines are belong to us.

[LenaBaby61]

4. THIS

[sandensea]

2. Trust but verify, as the Russians would say.

The problem is that Key LIEvey and the KKK-controlled AL Supreme Court won't let anyone do just that: verify.

[garybeck]

11. that is why all states must have mandatory audits. paper ballots are useless otherwise. n't

[sandensea]

13. +1

That we're still debating that, is what's really sad.

[garybeck]

15. very sad.... we're supposed to be a democracy... nt

[sandensea]

18. Problem is:

Much of Corporate America would rather have a "democracy" in the style of Mussolini or Stroessner. They're tired of having to negotiate anything with the public in general.

They held elections, sure - but the outcome was always pretty much predetermined. More importantly, it was government for the corporations by the corporations.

[SoCalMusicLover]

3. Check Back In 3 Hours

[ClarendonDem]

5. That's a very broad question

I haven't seen any evidence that the Alabama results aren't legitimate. Any evidence otherwise?

[garybeck]

12. what kind of evidence would you look for?

if the results are being counted (or possibly miscounted) by the vote counting software, what kind of evidence would you look for? the truth is there would be no evidence unless you counted the ballots by hand and checked the results that the computers gave. that is not being done, so the evidence you seek does not exist.

[ClarendonDem]

16. I'm not seeking evidence

I'm hoping for a Jones win, but not casting doubt on the election results because I've yet to see any evidence that any election in US history was compromised by actual fraud.

[Wounded Bear]

6. No, but it is what we are stuck with...

Need overwhelming numbers to ensure a win.

[bluestarone]

7. can't say that i do

just to much at stake to fully trust

[Hoyt]

8. Dont thing GOPers have to rig vote in AL. Ignorant white wing racists are deciding factor.

[ClarendonDem]

17. Yup

[TheCowsCameHome]

9. If Jones wins, yes.

otherwise, not so much.

[diva77]

10. Absolutely NOT.

Here we are again with a race allegedly neck and neck, and rethug controlled voting equipment; confusing ballots, forced provisional voting for dems, long lines for dems, no access to ballots for recounts, etc.

Gee, I wonder how this will end....

oh, and the Secy of State backs Roy Moore...

[GregD]

19. provisional voting, etc.

<<<confusing ballots, forced provisional voting for dems, long lines for dems>>>

I've been following the race, but not the details on the ground. Could you point me to links, please, or help us better understand what you are talking about here?

Appreciate it.

FYI, I built the first pro version of VV.org back in 2003, and I am passionate about this electronic voting shit. Pisses me off it's so f'ing easy to manipuate.

[diva77]

20. Wow, GregD, good to see you posting here. As for on the ground details, I was just reading various

posts by people in Alabama at the polls today -- I will try to find some of the ones I was referring to...

[diva77]

21. here's one, so far

Were being suppressed: Black Alabamians forced to cast provisional ballots

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029970415

https://thinkprogress.org/alabamians-cry-voter-suppression-50ddc1b53b3a/

more:

Last Thursday, a lawsuit was filed in an Alabama circuit court on behalf of 3 voters (a Republican, a Democrat, & an Independent). They asked the court to order election officials to preserve electronic ballot images from the upcoming #ALSen race.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/940510156894425089

------------------
I suggest further perusing the many threads in Discussion forum for more details...

[GregD]

22. so disgusting.

I'm here reading daily, but my life is intense, and I don't post often.

thanks.

[House of Roberts]

14. Make sure to hold back the big city returns

until very late, so the Rs don't 'discover' just enough votes for Moore to win.