2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy has no one here questioned the non-paper primaries?
I haven't heard one peep from people on here casting doubts on primary results in paperless ballot states.
CdnExtraNational
(105 posts)Any speeches to DiBold?
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)to give the primary vote to Rahm. So what makes you think some of the voting machines have been effected only by Republicans?
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)what makes anyone think that this election will be any different.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)See my comment above about the Chicago primary of Rahm vs. Chuy.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)The fear being that the very RW ownership at Diebold is rigging the machines for the Republican...
Would that happen for the corporate Democrat over the reformer, in a primary? Sounds like a lot of trouble and risk for a primary that I'm sure they assumed wasn't in doubt, back when they'd have had to start preparing an attempt at fraud.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)then will flex their Diebold muscles in the GE.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)you appear to be concerned about it. You brought it up for Minnesota, which is a caucus state. Our caucus system uses paper ballots. Our regular elections do too. You didn't appear to know that. So, please list the states where paperless primary balloting has taken place and discuss how that affected the results in those states.
It's not enough just to raise an open-ended question, particularly when you don't even know how Minnesota votes. Let's see your work on this, in a state-by-state discussion. Which states that have had their primary events are paperless? Let's discuss those, please.