Computer security experts say they have evidence that results were hacked or manipulated in three key states that emphasize electronic voting.
"In Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000."
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 … sults.html
It's worth mentioning the name of Reince Priebus, Trump's new chief of staff and RNC chairman. He was previously the Wisconsin Republican chair.
He and Scott Walker, the Republican Wisconsin governor, have great influence over the state elections there.
Your party would still be 64 electorals short.
As the article points out, the three states would swing the election in favor of Clinton. And those are just the three states they have identified so far.
Trump would end up with 260 and Clinton would have 278.
Regardless, do you believe any voting irregularities favoring either candidate should be investigated?
You mean like dead people voting democrat in chicago? Whats to investigate? Everyone knows it. Been happening for decades. Old news.
Even if what you say is true, which most non-partisan experts say is not, you can't compare a local election with a national one.
I guess you don't think people hacking our presidential elections is a problem. OK, we're clear.
Gosh im still waking up here. Need more coffee if I had it. I see. I see now. You are just interested in finding vote irregularities, but only if they favor your ideology.
Yes, you do. "Do you believe any voting irregularities favoring EITHER candidate should be investigated?"
Yes or no?
FYI, I can't take back my votes for Reagan and Romney.
We are kind of jumping the gun here. Both your links contain a "ny" in them. Im not sure if you are aware of it yet but lately there has been a lot of "fake news" and fake news sites. Have any of the two sites you have linked to been cleared by Google or Zuckerburg?
Do you think any voting irregularities favoring EITHER candidate should be investigated?
Yes or no?
That is obvious, Promisem, irregularities in the tabulation of votes is only applicable when complaints are made by Republicans. These rightwing types are people without principle and winning, fair or foul, is all that matters.
So, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a response as it could prove lethal for you.
Investigated by who? Brian Williams? The eff bee iii? Is Chelsea still a reporter on Sesame Street? Maybe Geraldo can look for votes in Capones vaults. We can get Holder to look into it.
Would you really be so flippant about it if Democrats responding in the same way about GOP accusations of dead people voting, or racial minorities being bussed around town to cast their ballots more than once? I am sure under those circumstances, you would find credible investigators.
All of that is evidenced by Democrats caught on video by Project Veritas Report. James O'Keefe has filed a complaint against the Clinton Campaign and DNC for voter fraud and election fraud.
Not to mention in-sighting protests, riots and violence, which Trump filed a lawsuit against Clinton and the DNC.
Hillary conceded instead of contesting because of the mountain of evidence of racketeering and collusion. Whoever, is carrying on, is just carrying on to make waves, headlines to earn money, and spread rumors and more lies. Its so divisive and typical!
Undercover DNC Rigging and more...
* http://hubpages.com/politics/forum/1384 … -election-
What does that have to do with the question? Do you favor computer hacking of national elections?
What no reply to facts? Proof!
Not on this thread. It was Russia.
It could be Russia. After all the incompetence of emails and smartphones by Hillary and I guess Obama's emails or texts were involved too but not 100% sure. If they run our elections like Hillary runs her emails and smartphone, who couldnt hack us? My grandpa?
But then we have to take into consideration, that the same dunderheads that would try to blame Benghazi on an obscure youtube video with 12 views and 3 likes, would likely blame the loss of an election on the Russians are coming story.
Not flippant but realistic and pragmatic. I was in the election for the entertainment. I enjoyed watching " as little drops of truth fell from the eyes" of cokie, savannah and andrea. Then I laughed as ...
tried desperately to figure out how hillary could still win if she has a path down the yellow brick road of electorals. Then a house of electoral votes landed on hillary.
How about those droplets of truth from Rush, Bill or Sean?
So, we find that the Wizard of Odd, is in fact an Orange tinged anomaly, behind the curtain.
Itsa valid point. I dont get Fox news, however, just broadcast. I think it is common knowledge that Fox has a conservative lean. Just as CNN is left. But now its just accepted that ABC and NBC are not just in bed with hillary but having how shall we say, avoir des relations sexuelles? So this is concerning that long established broadcast tv news stations have such ill repute, because of who, unsuspectingly might be influenced. Voting irregularities seems trivial and partisan to me by comparison.
Is he really a shade of oompa loompa? Or is it mostly an effect? Look at the backdrop and tones of the VP debate
You know Phoenix, another personage that gotmy attention was was Nostradamus.
He predicted in his quatrains the rise of the 'Great Orange One, as the father of tyranny and distress for the entire world. I have never been good with astrology, but based on how the planets would be aligned, such a alignment would not occur until 2017. That is pretty prophetic.
Gotta link to quatrain of great orange one? Not biggy on Nostra. Btw who won the Kennedy Nixon debates.
I am exaggerating a bit, Phoenix, about the Orange One, for a little levity.
You have to check him out though, he has been wrong about a great deal. But, in the late 1980s, I got fixated over him and his predictions. I went to the Denver Public Library in 88, trying to see if this guy was just hype or not. I pulled a book published in 1911 that had Notradamus' predictions in it. I saw his reference to the rise of Hitler, describing the nature of this 'tyrant of the future' and his geographical location. Identifying him by name, but misspelling it as HIster. Back in 1911, Hitler was politically irrelevant. That was interesting, no Monday morning quarterback stuff, so how did he know?
As for the Kennedy /NIXON debates it depends, did you hear it over the radio, or watched on television?
Exactly on debates. I felt and its mostly just a feeling, but when Perot was running and then Mccain later it looked like to me that the other candidates, including republicans in the case of perot, looked in technicolor, whereas Mccain and Perot looked like they were robbing a liquor store on closed circuit. I had no intetest in Mccain at all. Perot and the admiral were just odd. But I could swear the images on tv were being manipulated. Itsa pet theory. But yea gotta look into Promisems voting irregularities pdq. I dont wanna mess his thread. Promisem is okay. Hope all yall have a good T-day.
It's something called the Federal Election Commission.
Did I vote for them? Or could I have voted for them? In any deal like dc is there a fox that aint guarding the henhouse? They all crooked as a dogs legs... But most importantly from the top down.
Is your answer to my repeated questions yes or no?
Are we going to look into all the campaign money of dnc and hillary? Can I cross examine some dead people in chicago? If I were to guess who has been the most guilty of voting fraud recently and historically I would say the democrats are. Do I believe there would ever be an honest investigation into more than likely both sides cheating? Not in my wildest imaginations. Therefore the point is moot, for me anyway. Its like asking me who is the bad guy Manson or Hitler. Get real Promisem. Bring me some reports/accounts/eyewitnesses where. Trump votes were turning into hillary votes. You are not interested.
I am interested in you answering my simple yes or no question.
If there was hacking, people who refuse to answer the question must mean they are OK with Russian intelligence hacking our national elections as long as their party's candidate is the winner.
Which also means that a winning candidate is more important to some people than the U.S. Constitution they claim to love.
I think you have grossly overstated what the news media has reported on this, but if there is some evidence which validates the suspicion it should be looked into. I do not believe the Obama administration sees any merit in this; at this stage.
You didnt mention the Russians in your first post.
It sounds like a plot.
Well, voter fraud is usually done by democrats. It would be very odd to see voter fraud from the republicans. Or Trump because the republicans weren't really on his side until after the election.
Exactly. What, there is an allegation of voter fraud regarding Trump voters? Hey welcome to our world, where you been the last half century.
I'm not a republican. I'm an independent. Your statement is typical of those who don't get a rubber stamp to their opinions.
Someone who makes broad generalizations of another party is not an independent, i.e., "voter fraud is usually done by democrats."
Real independents are objective, open minded and see both the strengths and the weaknesses of each party.
I'll point out again what I have already stated, repeatedly. Every incident of voter fraud I have heard of in my lifetime is done by democrats. I suppose I can be one sided and insist that the republicans must do it just as often but that is difficult since I haven't heard of any. When the number of incidents by one side come close the number by the other I'll change my mind.
Heard from whom? Proven how? This fake news rumor has been thoroughly investigated and debunked.
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/trumps … ud-claims/
And you people are actually serious , BOOOooooo !, Watch out everybody ,the election ghosts are sneaking about . I have come to realize one thing , If it wasn't for conspiracies ,fantasies , fallacies and liberal newbies like yourself , elections would actually be booooorrrriiinnnggggg.!
"Do you believe any voting irregularities favoring EITHER candidate should be investigated?"
Yes or no?
I think, since the US government isn't investigating this means it doesn't warrant investigation. If it did I would think all citizens would support it.
As it stands it is simply another example of grasping because some don't want to eat sour grapes. Thank goodness the government doesn't act on every goose chase some want them to engage in.
Trump himself said the election was rigged many times, did he not? He only has himself to blame for this.
Besides, it's not a federal government choice. It is done by a state via anyone who pays for it. Jill Stein has already come up with the money for a Wisconsin recount. It's a done deal.
I see they had 1 million and need 2 by Friday. So, of the US taxpayer isn't footing the bill that's good.
I will say, as I have already stated in this thread, if there is a reasonable doubt backed by some evidence it should be investigated.
You commented: "I think, since the US government isn't investigating this means it doesn't warrant investigation. If it did I would think all citizens would support it."
I am not interested in changing your mind. I stand a better chance of hitchin' a ride from the cow that jumps over the moon. However, I am interested in how you could have such faith in a government that has clearly demonstrated over the last 250 years it's disregard for the working class, and for human life in general. How do you reconcile your faith with the truth?
Forget about that. Think of it like this. We, the people of the United States, want to have faith that our vote counts. We want the election process to move forward with honesty.
Now, a Republican won the White House. I doubt a Democrat in the land is happy about that and I doubt Obama is over joyed. If there is evidence that there is wrongdoing or tampering the majority will demand that it be corrected. I'm quite certain if there were a reasonable reason to believe that any tampering had occurred that the current administration would move forward with some type of investigation.
Not certain what purpose your little posters were supposed to serve in this conversation.
I agree. We want faith in our election system. Trump said many times the election was rigged. He has damaged the faith of many people.
If recounts in multiple states don't find any tampering, the faith of voters for both candidates will be restored.
This quote from that NY Magazine article says it all
"The group is so far not speaking on the record about their findings and is focused on lobbying the Clinton team in private."
Just more BS from the left wing media
aimed at fueling the protests, the left is so desperate and brainwashed they're just looking for and grabbing any straw they can find to put there so protesters have something to believe.
NEW YORK MAGAZINE
Promisem when will you ever learn.
Thanks for the extremist vent. Would you be happier with the right-wing New York Daily News?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic … -1.2884089
You are more confused than your comments if you think the Daily News is a conservative newspaper. Some have suggested that The New York Daily News’ editorial page is as reliably conservative as the right-leaning New York Post. It is not. The evidence? One does not have to sift through the pre-Obama-era archives in order to find examples of left-leaning op-eds at The New York Daily News. http://www.mediaite.com/online/no-the-n … y-is-huge/
Before you try another feeble attempt to support your nonsense I have to tell you since you seem not to think anything through, once the left media gets something out there other venues, even conservative may pick up on it because after all they need to make money from advertising so the band wagon of any story that may increase circulation is often jumped on.
And the left knows it, that's why they create the fake news, they know it will get copy just because venues want to make money.
Promisem when will you ever learn.
Very interesting "evidence". Wisconsin counties went Trump 48-13 over Clinton. And some counties used electronic voting. Therefore Clinton got cheated of 30,000 votes.
How about we find some computer hacking, with a trail showing changed votes? Except that the people providing this valuable information (but refusing to put their name on it) can't find any.Heck, why don't we just claim that every other vote was changed somehow - that way she will definitely win! But hurry - she's running of time to claim fraud in this lopsided election!
(Wonder if it ever occured to anyone that TRUMP got cheated in ares that did NOT use electronic voting)
Do you agree that voting irregularities in favor of either candidate should be investigated?
Depends on if we have any reason to think there were irregularities. And, I suppose that considering the enormous cost, whether it would change anything might be a consideration. As there is nothing but a tenuous statistical anomaly (so tenuous the "finders" won't even go public with their names), and it won't change anything, I'd say no in this case.
As Trump already won, the insinuation that he lost thousands of votes when paper ballots were thrown away doesn't seem like a winning proposition to spend a lot of money giving him a bigger lead. I'd think we'd be better off to look into why voters in a few areas of the state voted against the majority (I'm assuming that these unnamed areas went blue). Are even the cities, liberal as they are, getting fed up with the swamp?
I agree there is an important difference between manipulations and anomalies. The process should prove which one is the cause.
For the record, Trump has not already won. The Electoral College doesn't vote until mid December, and Congress doesn't ratify the vote until January. A recount before those dates could change the outcome.
I think the folks over at 538, have debunked the whole 'election-was-hacked' issue. Not a Right wing site.
If you read carefully these "computer scientists' are cherry picking results and using the idea that machines 'could' be hacked. The folks at 538 suggest shifting demographics are a far better explanation for results.
Finally, why limit yourself to one form of irregularity? Why not investigate all forms of irregularities, like dead people voting and non-citizen voting?
Yep, it's just like I said - left wing propaganda
http://hubpages.com/politics/forum/1389 … ost2856000
One article written by someone with no expertise in voting rights and computer security and published on a small, unknown website that doesn't list its staff or publisher does not inspire much confidence.
As I keep asking, and people on the right keep ignoring, should voting irregularities favoring EITHER candidate be investigated? Do posters on the right support the U.S. Constitution and U.S. election laws? Do they support hacking if it gets their candidate into the White House?
Such simple questions, and none of them dare to answer.
The "Computer Security Experts" claim is based on statistics (albeit poorly formulated) and the idea that the voting machine "could" be hacked. Has nothing to do with voting rights. It is a combination of fantasy and faulty logic. The article debunks the whole claim. Nothing to investigate.
Regarding the whole topic of investigating irregularities, I suppose if we had a justice department that was not corrupt, it would be reasonable to investigate legitimate voting irregularities starting with the biggest frauds perpetrated on the US electorate which are non-citizen voting and ballot stuffing.
You didn't answer my question.
Despite the fact that Trump himself said the election was rigged and started this new mess, your objection is moot.
The Jill Stein campaign confirms it now has enough money for a recount in both Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. It's the largest donation drive for a third party in U.S. history.
When was a recount in both Wisconsin and Pennsylvania confirmed? Yesterday officials in the three states confirmed that no recounts have been ordered. A spokesman for the U.S. Justice Department says it is not tallying the number of voting complaints to determine whether federal action is warranted.
promisem when will you ever learn, you can't blindly buy into the left wing media talking points
Its a partisan agenda driven inquiry based on zero evidence. If there are any irregularities or votes in specific places that were tainted of course the lefties want those votes to be thrown automatically to Hillary Clinton. Not just voided. Then conveniently they won't want any more inquiries.
If you actually read what I write, you will see I was referring to the funds that were raised to pay for recounts. Recounts in multiple states are now confirmed.
Even better, Trump himself now says there were "millions" of illegal votes.
A recount isn't confirmed by raising funds...again, you need to think about what you write, but then you always write misleading things, when will you ever learn? Last I heard she hasn't raised enough money to cover all the legal fees and expenses (over 6 1/2 million) and probably won't. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jill-steins … d-to-know/
You really aren't up to date. Maybe the Wisconsin election commission is lying too?
Up to date has nothing to do with it. You have already been shown by me and Tom how the premise of your forum topic is nothing but BS and a left wing attempt to raise money and create a false impression that Trump should not be president. This
http://www.podcastone.com/pg/jsp/progra … id=1693000
explains everything and before you dismiss it because it is a republican conservative telling you how nutso your take is, as you always do when faced with facts you disagree with try listening to it a couple times because I know you won't even allow yourself to think about it and of course you'll never admit you are wrong about anything when you are actually wrong about nearly everything.
Apparently Hillary Clinton has conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt. I guess Hillary has a rapport with the dead. Its no surprise they vote for her.
Trump votes changing to hillary.
http://www.usasupreme.com/texas-voting- … p-hillary/
I personally saw many claims of this on twitter.
Chinese hack a lot
Therefore the chinese could have done it.
Sarcasm aside, you are probably stunned to hear that I agree with your last point. If there was an any election hacking, it could have been done by the Chinese.
They have hacked us many times in the past. It's not a stretch to think they would do the same to our national election.
Both cases have the same " evidence " in common.
If it is true, why would we want to elect the same crew that would be so incompetent to have allowed it to be possible in the first place? Thankfully, that crew lost their jobs on Nov 8.
Recount - The last great gasp of a dying alt-left party line. -- Here's the thing - What does anyone expect from a party that compromised the entire election process in the Clinton crime theater ? They compromised the party itself ,they compromised and criminalized the DNC election system , they bought out and compromised the media ethics ,accuracy and what little honor they had left to begin with , they compromised the very counting process of all elections . What they couldn't do was convince the electoral college in the final mainstream election process to " take the fall"; WHY IN the World is anyone surprised that Hilary is NOW "All in" on the recount , in spite of her declaration of "accepting the election outcome "?
I know the answer she's all in ; for the $ !!!!!
Trump just announced that the election had "millions" of illegal votes. Is he wrong?
He's probably setting the stage in case the recounts go south.
If it did , and it probably does , its on the left - illegal voters - No voting I.D. required ?
Wrong, a recount will do nothing to find illegal voters. The machines don't identify who any voters are or who they voted for.
Then Trump is wrong about millions of illegal votes?
Even millions of illegal votes cannot change the electorally completed count . Wouldn't ya think ?
1. Many studies have proven that "illegal votes" are propaganda spread by the likes of Breitbart and other fake news sites. More than 1 BILLION votes have been reviewed with only a handful of fraud cases found.
https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/ … fraud-myth
2. All states require registration by address. You must confirm your address when you vote. You just don't walk into any polling place you want and vote without a registered address.
3. All states require some form of identification or proof of address.
4. The fact that some states don't require a PHOTO identification doesn't mean that you can vote without proof.
"These states have "non-documentary" ID requirements, meaning voters must verify their identity in other ways, such as by signing an affidavit or poll book (that match a registered address), or by providing personal information. In addition, all states have procedures for challenging voter eligibility." - National Conference of State Legislatures
5. Finally, the recount numbers must match the ballots, which must match the registrations of voting addresses, which are confirmed by the proofs of identification.
If any major fraud is done, it is done in the databases and not in the fantasies of Donald Trump and Breitbart.
How in the world do you get to that from a recount that cannot determine the legality of the vote is bad?
By the rules of our electoral process , Hilary lost the election , Have YOU heard her acceptance speech about" not questioning the process " ...for the integrity of our national interests ? Rather true to form of Hilary and the lefts hypocrisy- For sure !
What a loser she really is !
Which states that hillary allegedly won in are going to get recounted?
by Greensleeves Hubs3 weeks ago
So it's the final day. Let's be clear about the choice;Hillary Clinton is deeply unpopular. She may not be a nice person. There are so many negative reports about her, it is difficult to believe there is 'no smoke...
by ptosis6 days ago
Wisconsin #Recount2016 Obama White House statement did not see any suspicious cyber activity on election day and they are confident in the integrity of the voting machines, and that the results "accurately reflect...
by Susie Lehto2 weeks ago
* http://constitution.com/trump-leading-6 … 00-voters/ App maker: Trump will win election!* http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016 … /88640044/"What do you honestly think Trump meant by...
by ahorseback39 hours ago
Will liberals even admit it ? The possibility of millions of voters out of the twenty or thirty million illegals in America ?
by Susie Lehto10 hours ago
After THUMPING Clinton in Monday night’s debate, Trump headed to the sunshine state for a YUGE RALLY in Melbourne, Florida. (National poll has Trump 46.7% and Clinton 42.6%: http://www.latimes.com/politics/...
by TIMETRAVELER24 weeks ago
Copy from Facebook page of Kevin M Carney(opposing Views.) A gentleman named Bill Howell eloquently wrote the below letter.Dear Mr. Trump,It’s taken me a while to realize this and to admit it, but I’m...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.