6 ms·

Your post shows how much disinformation has propagated. > We don't identify voters and we removed chain of custody on ballots. Source? Voters are identified b

Your post shows how much disinformation has propagated. > We don't identify voters and we removed chain of custody on ballots. Source? Voters are identified by signature (and in some places voter ID). Re: chain of custody, as far as I'm aware, states generally require representatives from both major parties (plus independents) to be present when ballots are moved or opened. Since states generally have the power to conduct their elections as they deem appropriate, finding a national source is impossible, but I invite you to find me an example where such a chain of custody was violated. Mail-in-ballots do not subvert this chain of custody [1]. > Instead we put unsecured boxes on street corners to collect ballots and put them in the mail. Drop boxes are locked with keys and are monitored with video surveillance. Sometimes, people set fire to ballot boxes, but when this happens security is tightened [2] [3]. In any case, the small number of ballots damaged by arson would not change the outcome of an election. > We eliminated signature validation. This is not true. Give us a source. The closest thing to "eliminating signature validation" is giving voters the chance to fix signatures [4]. "Eliminating signature validation" is a false claim that Trump has spread [5]. > I have no idea who got the most legitimate votes, but neither does anyone else. The fact is Biden got the most legitimate votes. End of story. Any other claim is refusing to accept the overwhelming evidence that there was no significant fraud. That's not to say that the vote count is accurate, but all evidence shows that any inaccuracies would not have changed the outcome of the election. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/article/fact-checking-mail-in-voting.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/fact-checking-mail-in-voting... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/us/elections/in-boston-someone-set-fire-to-a-ballot-drop-box-officials-called-it-a-disgrace-to-democracy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/us/elections/in-boston-so... [3] https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/10/20/us/trump-biden-election#ballot-box-fire-california https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/10/20/us/trump-biden-elect... [4] https://apnews.com/article/pennsylvania-election-2020-pittsburgh-elections-presidential-elections-fc464c287c18823ff57fedc13facf7e5 https://apnews.com/article/pennsylvania-election-2020-pittsb... [5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/11/trumps-latest-falsehood-democrats-are-trying-end-signature-verification-ballots/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/11/trumps-la...

Consultant32452 6y ago
Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules ballots can't be rejected based on signature comparisons. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/23/pennsylvania-court-ballot-signatures-431794 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/23/pennsylvania-court-... Your link about mail in ballots says they are secure because of measures like signature validation, except we got rid of that. Not that it should matter, but I'm not a Trump supporter. He is a war criminal as far as I'm concerned.
- tylerhou 6y ago
  > Your link about mail in ballots says they are secure because of measures like signature validation, except we got rid of that. I was not accurate, but you were also not accurate. Pennsylvania did not "get rid" of signature verification for absentee voting; it never had signature validation in the first place. States have the power to hold elections in the manner of their choosing, and of the last 28 years, Republicans had trifecta control of the legislature for twelve [1]. They had the full power to amend the election code as they saw fit, but they chose not to. In any case, the absence of signature validation still does not prove fraud. The purpose of signature validation is to "prove" is the person who cast the ballot is the person who registered to vote. To take advantage of a lack of signature validation, an attacker would have to: 1. Find people who are registered to vote, but who don't intend to vote -- even in person. 2. Acquire their ballot by either: 2-a. Re-register them under a new address controlled by the adversary (which notifies the voter). 2-b. Steal their ballot from their mailbox (and the voter may become suspicious if they don't get a ballot). 3. Fill out their ballot and mail it in. Steps 1 and 2 each very difficult to do without raising suspicion. Step 3 is nearly impossible to do by a single person for a large number of votes. The vote difference in Pennsylvania was 81660 votes. So if Biden had 81661 fraudulent votes, then Trump should be the winner. Let's assume that if more than a hundred people notice that their ballots were missing/voter registration changed, then there would be an investigation and the attacker would be exposed. In other words, the attacker must flip ~80,000 votes, while only alerting suspicion 100 times. Their success rate per ballot must be therefore greater than (1 - 81661 / 100) = 99.878%. A thousand? That would still require a success rate of 98.775% per ballot. How many reports are there of missing ballots in Pennsylvania? I can't even find one person claiming such a thing, much less a hundred or a thousand. [1] https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_Pennsylvania_state_government https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_Pennsylvania_state_...

Consultant32452 6y ago

Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules ballots can't be rejected based on signature comparisons. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/23/pennsylvania-court-ballot-signatures-431794 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/23/pennsylvania-court-... Your link about mail in ballots says they are secure because of measures like signature validation, except we got rid of that. Not that it should matter, but I'm not a Trump supporter. He is a war criminal as far as I'm concerned.

tylerhou 6y ago
> Your link about mail in ballots says they are secure because of measures like signature validation, except we got rid of that. I was not accurate, but you were also not accurate. Pennsylvania did not "get rid" of signature verification for absentee voting; it never had signature validation in the first place. States have the power to hold elections in the manner of their choosing, and of the last 28 years, Republicans had trifecta control of the legislature for twelve [1]. They had the full power to amend the election code as they saw fit, but they chose not to. In any case, the absence of signature validation still does not prove fraud. The purpose of signature validation is to "prove" is the person who cast the ballot is the person who registered to vote. To take advantage of a lack of signature validation, an attacker would have to: 1. Find people who are registered to vote, but who don't intend to vote -- even in person. 2. Acquire their ballot by either: 2-a. Re-register them under a new address controlled by the adversary (which notifies the voter). 2-b. Steal their ballot from their mailbox (and the voter may become suspicious if they don't get a ballot). 3. Fill out their ballot and mail it in. Steps 1 and 2 each very difficult to do without raising suspicion. Step 3 is nearly impossible to do by a single person for a large number of votes. The vote difference in Pennsylvania was 81660 votes. So if Biden had 81661 fraudulent votes, then Trump should be the winner. Let's assume that if more than a hundred people notice that their ballots were missing/voter registration changed, then there would be an investigation and the attacker would be exposed. In other words, the attacker must flip ~80,000 votes, while only alerting suspicion 100 times. Their success rate per ballot must be therefore greater than (1 - 81661 / 100) = 99.878%. A thousand? That would still require a success rate of 98.775% per ballot. How many reports are there of missing ballots in Pennsylvania? I can't even find one person claiming such a thing, much less a hundred or a thousand. [1] https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_Pennsylvania_state_government https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_Pennsylvania_state_...