As pointed out elsewhere, it is against the law in California to connect voting equipment to the Internet so they do not come equipped with modems. The county in question used Starlink to connect to voter registrations systems for same day registration and provisional ballots. No voting data was uploaded via Starlink.

The question was did Starlink upload, download, or host election data. Starlink was used. Your only proof is it's against the law?? Have you met maga?

Just for voter registration. This claim has been floating around for awhile, has been investigated and found to be false.

It being against the law is a crucial point because certified voting machines don’t have modems to ensure that is no connectivity. Therefore, having Starlink connectivity at a voting site is irrelevant because the machines can’t connect to it. I don’t think people appreciate how bad internet connectivity is in rural areas, and your voting sites need connectivity for voter registration.

Do you have a link to this investigation, or are you referring to Snopes (the outlet that said it was false dfg said there's good people on both sides in Charlottesville) saying it's typically not connected to internet?

Same source as your link.

https://abc30.com/post/starlink-system-is-not-connected-voting-machines-tulare-county-elections-office-says/15541598/

ABC just asked them a question? Sorry, maga has dumped ballots on the side of the road, voted more than once and for dead relatives, they stormed the Capitol. They don't care about laws, and Starlink has absolutely no business anywhere near our election offices.

If all parties involved say it didn’t happen then you are going to have to present some facts, rather than just wild claims. Given that equipment is inspected and certified with bi-partisan observers, you can start by explaining how modems were illegally installed on the machines. No modems - no connectivity.

I don't have to explain anything, that's what an investigation is for. Elon held an illegal lottery to bribe people, he took their data and did God knows what with it, and he's been in regular contact with Putin. He said anything could be hacked by changing one line of code. Dfg is a known cheater who came right out and said he doesn't need votes. Cyber security experts have come out and said there's a lot of very hard to explain weirdness in the voter data. There's more than enough to open an investigation. It's hard to understand why some on DU are so against it.

So yes, you do have to provide enough facts that would allow a judge to order an investigation. All you can point to is speculation with no facts. Yes, Trump, Putin and Musk are not to be trusted, but you still have show some evidence that there was fraud. If the campaign and the Dem governors, SOS and AGs in the swing states all say the election was fair then you’re going to provide something. They’re the ones on the ground, with far more data to look at than we do. I trust them far more then “experts on the Internet.”

The State of PA and the Federal Government have open investigations into Musk for illegal lottery, talks with Putin, etc... Tabulators not picking up absentee ballots, ballots found on the side of the road, ballot boxes blown up, bomb threats from Russia, people all over sending screen shots showing their ballots haven't been counted. There's more than enough probable cause.

which is a typical when conspiracists get asked questions they can't answer.

Are you going to answer my questions? How does voting equipment send data over Starlink without modems? To what system would they connect to if they had modems?

... involvement. I didn't see how either want as conspiracy theories.

They need as much valid data as possible to prosecute those responsible.

If the Governor, SOS and AG of PA have moved on then I suggest you do the same. You need far more "evidence" than anecdotal posting from strangers on the internet. If there had been genuine evidence of wide spread fraud then it would have picked up on it. The fact that the campaign, the Dem officials in the swing states, and Biden's DOJ all say the election was fair is good enough for me. Why are you rejecting their conclusions? I mean, the are closer to the situation and have far more data then we do?

One of many that came forward in 2020 pushing fraud arguments that fell apart upon contact with law enforcement and the courts. Making a fuss on the Internet is not a sign of expertise. More to point, if all the experts in the swing states and federal government says there was no fraud then why should we ignore their expertise? If the overwhelming consensus was we had a fair election then it’s going to take more than some self described experts on the Internet to change that consensus.

Trump is a cheater (on wives, golf, and last election) he has openly colluded with Russia. He's openly planning on destroying our economy, country, and giving Putin whatever he wants. He said he doesn't need any votes, and took millions from melon usk who hosted an illegal lottery, captured people's data in an illegal voter registration, and somehow got Starlink into election offices. If an investigation and recounts prove no votes were actually tampered with I would still say this was not a free and fair election. Our entire media did nothing but bad mouth Biden. They didn't acknowledge any of his accomplishments, and they sanewashed an ajudicated rapist/felon. We should be able to sue them for misinforming. Bomb threats, ballot boxes exploding. We deserve the same investigations, recounts, court cases that the R's were allowed. They set the precedent.

We act on facts, not dislikes and emotions, and that’s all you have to offer.

Lol, ofcourse we are. One thing has nothing to do with the other. The fact is that there's a lot of issues with this election and these people and we deserve answers before we just roll over for Putin. Nobody is talking about storming the capital, we just want the same level of investigation and recounts that they had.

Especially one that says in the second graf "the election results weren’t affected by software breaches"

I'd love to have some hope...

Cyber experts duty to warn letter to Kamala Harris. There's also a guy named Spoonamore (sp ?) On Twitter who's an expert speaking out about all the weird anomalies.

And there were 600,000 bullet ballots?

Could this be the connection we're looking for?

Not to mention that the claimed bullet ballot math doesn't work. He's claiming 350,000 in North Carolina, but the total difference between the presidential and governor's race is fewer than 90k ballots. So unless there were 260,000 votes that didn't include the presidential race, that doesn't add up.

How it would work is that they would have fake voter registrations. It would be a complicated scheme since someone in the elections offices would have to look the other way when it came to match up signatures. Or else, that free flow of money that Elon had, could have bought a few thousand angry elfs to help him.

But even if it wasn't, you still haven't accounted for the fact that the difference between the vote totals isn't anywhere near 350,000.

It was used for same day registration, which is tiny fraction of total registrations. All voting locations have electronic chap books connected to the Internet to check in voters. That’s why there are no modems on voting equipment.

Only the voter registration/check in system in linked to the internet. The machines that mark the ballots and the machines that read the ballots are not connected. I have been an election judge in the past and I was a poll watcher for the 2022 election where I was in the central counting or tabulation room.

And the local jurisdictions can verify accuracy by just looking at the SOS site and confirming it matches the data they uploaded. It is not a situation of the tabulators connecting to the SOS systems.

If there is was connection at all, everything is on the table.
Also CA went for Kamala so it's not relevant really

Unless you can explain how modems were illegally installed on voting equipment despite multiple layers of security. After doing so, you would then have to explain why they even bothered since there would be no place to connect and upload data because that is illegal so there would be no place to connect to.

This issue applies to all states. Precincts count locally and send their data through various means to the state. The precinct has its own totals so it can verify that the number the state uploads to their website is accurate. Voting tabulators do not connect because it is illegal, which means there are no modems and no system to connect to.

If it is illegal to connect voting equipment to the Internet, then that means there is nothing for a voting machine with an illegal modem to connect to. Do you understand that what you are proposing is a logical impossibility?

... that element (involvement at all not what aspect of involvement) because I have rational reasons not to trust someone hyperpartysin as Melon Usk.

This is simple... Star Link being anywhere near anything involved with this election is shady by itself

The impossibility I mentioned refers to the voting data being uploaded via the Internet through ANY provider. I argue that it is impossible because: one - the voting equipment doesn't have modems, and two - even if someone illegally installed modems there would be nothing from them to connect to because, if it is illegal to send voting data over the Internet, you don't build systems to accept voting data over the Internet.

Can you please address my points? if not, you're just trolling.

Don't expect a serious answer, any proof otherwise will be discounted and the goalposts will be moved.

I'm sure I'm forgetting 100 or so ISPs in the country that carry voter registration data.

So the machines do not come with modems.

https://www.wabe.org/election-officials-in-georgia-and-other-swing-states-knock-down-starlink-vote-rigging-conspiracy-theories/

Thanks

No Internet connectivity, which is accomplished through air gapping ALL voting related equipment. This stuff is not connected to the internet.

And what is a Central Tabulator? Tabulation is usually done at the precinct.

Many of them use internet. Many of them are regular windows PCs.
It's just one vulnerability of many, including the memory cards which are programmed at a central location by third party in an often unsecure location.

And the count is done locally and the local election officials verify that the numbers on the state website are accurate after it is uploaded. And post election audit best practices include doing a random hand count to ensure the tabulator are accurate. That is the law in NC. These are not original concerns - people have thought of them.

Look, obvious problems have obvious solutions, and given the scrutiny elections are receiving, those solution are being implemented in most jurisdictions. Spend some time on Board of Election sites and you’ll see that the issues you raise have been addressed.

…. about them being “air gapped?” Damn.

I asked the question because we have tabulators in the voting sites in NC so I was unsure as to what you were referring to.

Are you referring to a system that combines the voting data?

We need as many signups as possible. Ask questions when you do it too!

N/t

If you have thought of it, so has the election security community.

Don't ask DU, where interested and biased parties can muddy the field with baseless claims and social media misinformation. Just look it up. These are all fact checks found in a single google search.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/11/14/starlink-election-destroyed-fact-check/76261926007/

https://news.abplive.com/fact-check/fact-check-experts-elon-musk-starlink-voting-machines-2024-us-election-1731902

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/11/13/fact-check-was-elon-musks-starlink-used-to-rig-the-us-election

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/musk-starlink-2024-election/

This information has been out there all week, and people still insist on pretending not to see it and perpetuating claims.

Also lots and lots of disinformation is being pushed too.

Clearly.

Instead of “just asking questions”? All the election officials in the swing states have denied this claim - what do you have to counter this. I’m partial interested in knowing how thousands of illicit modems were added to the voting equipment to allow this connectivity.

And in asking a question a new path to enlightenment might be found weed hopper.
And now snatch the pebble from my hand.

I take it you have no answer to my question? Here’s another one for you: if it is illegal in almost all states to connect voting machines to the Internet, where would they connect to? If jurisdictions aren’t passing voting data then there would be no system in place to accept the data.

The early numbers are just to try to give viewers and reporters a heads up and have absolutely no official standing.

Where I poll worked the machines were sealed at the end of the day when the polls closed and *after* we wrote down what the results were. We posted the results on the door, so if somebody wanted to run the gamut of precincts they could get their own officially tally. The "we" was an evenly matched set of (D) and (R) poll workers. (This was years ago in NYS.)

When the official canvassing occurred, the machines were again sealed and the numbers written down or downloaded to a thumb drive were compared against the unofficial tallies made on site when the polls closed, and pollworkers called to explain any differences and say what happened. "Oh, we got the numbers backwards," or "Yeah, there was a car horn in the parking lot so maybe I misheard." Whatever.

The machines were not unsealed until all court cases were done, irregularities settled, and the state results officially certified and presented to whomever they get presented to.

Everything that involved even one vote was utterly air-gapped. (Back in 2004 there were claims of "secret modems" installed, but I haven't seen that claim made; and that the thumb drives were corrupted or had two sets of numbers. Whatever.)

Yet there are interviews with poll workers crediting STarlnk for the lack of long lines.

on baseless conspiracy theories.
I wonder how many here are sincere, and how many might be trolls spreading disinformation and conflict.

See #49

How do you think they send in vote totals
updates throughout the night? The phone lines. Anytime the machines are exposed they can be infiltrated.

Just retired recently. No one uses phonelines to transmit data anymore unless they live in a very rural area.

In addition there are secure firewalls and data encryption that makes hacking very difficult.

In Ohio, Franklin County, the precinct judge and his or her assistant hand carries the voting results, the poll logs, machine paper print outs, and the EES voting machines memory cards* to the County’s BOE and the
precinct’s results are posted where the public can see it. I can promise you nothing is phoned in.

@ least this is how it was up until 2020.

*. This stuff is put inside a pouch and the zipper on that pouch is locked too.

And I suppose it's just a coincidence that Elon Musk once owned a company called Zip2??

Wake up sheeple!

We do call the results into the county BoE, but those are considered unofficial until the canvass.

Typically through State Board of Election portal. That allows the counties to verify that the totals match at both ends.

They are "unofficial". They are sent from elections offices to various outlets.

Elon owns Starlink, Starlink is used as an internet access point, so Elon allows, say, Russian hackers to create an hack that intercepts packets, assembles them into a conversation between voting machines and state wide or county wide tabulations, changes the top of ticket totals for Trump v Harris... and then passes these packets on to the tabulation programs? All while defeating the VPN technology that someone would likely be using ( thus encrypting each packet along the way ). And doing so without being caught. Oh, and being clever enough to do just enough votes to give Trump the win by 1 to 3 percent.

illegality aside, such a thing might be possible. Depending on how many precincts use Starlink.

I doubt it.

I would not choose this method to hack the election.

The much better place to install the hack is in the tabulation software or the voting machines themselves. You don't have encrypted data to worry about. You have the binary code of the voting systems which is easily turned back into source code, you have 3 years to perfect your hack so it leaves NO TRACE which test runs or audits would show. And so long as there are NOT strictly hand filled out paper ballots that are later hand counted multiple times, all the way up to the publicly reported vote totals at each state... you are home free.

but I get it... Eloon - bad billionaire... starlink - owned by Elon - Starlink is point of access for internet - everyone thinks hacks are somehow related to internet... bingo. But seriously, this would be a lot harder to pull off than simply hacking the software inside the vote machine and taking a few years to get it right.

And typically do a post election tabulator audit by hand counting batches of ballots and comparing them to the tabulator totals. There are several states that still use electronic voting but they’re not swing states. The points you raise are obvious, which means they are addressed in security protocols.

cannot bypass except at places like the NSA.

There they have tempest rooms with 1/4 inch copper plate surrounding the computer rooms.... isolated power, isolated cooling, and marine guards with man traps and biometric ID checks... and no internet access, none.

the local elementary gym with some voting machines or tabulating machines run by some well meaning but elderly ladies from the volunteer elections board... no matter how well trained and following their SecState guidelines for running a "secure" election... does not constitute "security". I have a phrase I use occasionally at work when I critique our company's security protocols... it is a thin patina of security.

I worked in IT so I know that to be true. That’s why you have multiple layers and that’s why you involve the public. The fact that our system is so decentralized, involving thousands of pieces of equipment and jurisdictions, is also a major plus for security because any conspiracy would have to be huge, involving lots of people.

We can always create hypotheticals but possibility does not equal probability, and at some point proof is needed.

"Tulare County Registrar of Voters Michelle Baldwin says access to connectivity was improved this year thanks to Starlink satellite internet."

Source: https://abc30.com/post/tulare-county-sees-larger-voter-turnout-during-2024-presidential-election/15519472/

was Starlink used for voter registration and/or voter material / information OR was used to connect voting machines / tabulating machines to county or state run vote totals?

In other words... Starlink is very often used by citizens in rural areas with no cable, no other wired service, not even cell service to access the internet. I know of many such people... and if they can register to vote and get sample ballots at home via Starlink... that's great for democracy. They still have to make the trip into town or mail in their paper ballot to be counted or vote in person.

So the question you really want to know is "Was the ballot ever transmitted electronically over a public or private network"? By the way, there is nothing that says Starlink cannot be used to create non-internet connected private networks. This is the key question that needs to be asked. Then you can demand an investigation into if there was some sort of vote flipping hack done inside Starlink.

You continue to spread disinformation. You're not better than the Magat scum who did this in 2020 and if I had to guess, you are a Magat troll here to spread this shit.

You can claim ignorance the first time, but you continue to maliciously spread lies.

Stop. It's embarrassing for you and embarrassing for our community.

... Tulare County Registrar of Voters Michelle Baldwin meant by her statement, and it could very well be that starlink did indeed transfer ballot information to whever they may have wanted to.

Random DU poster's ideas of what might have occurred are certainly not enough to pretend I have been "corrected".

There is no system in California for them to transmit voting machine information to. It does not exist.

A link to the follow up answers explaining exactly what you have been told, that Starlink was used to connect to voter rolls is in this very thread and states:
"Starlink was used to provide the internet to their laptops and connect to their database, allowing them to check voters in or check their registration status and nothing else.

"Those voting check-in laptops are in no way connected to the voting system. No way connected to the vote, tabulation or voting process other than making sure that that voter is a registered voter within our county," explained Hill."

Links to a number of sites debunking your claims have been posted in multiple threads.

Again, you can not claim ignorance on this any longer. You are intentionally spreading disinformation.

"...most voting machines are not connected to the internet."

And that... "The seven battleground states – Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – all have laws or policies that bar voting equipment from being connected to the internet during voting, if at all" (wait, we need laws to prevent something that isn't possible???)

And that... one day after election day, before any results could even be questioned "Jen Easterly, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said in a Nov. 6 statement that there was “no evidence of any malicious activity that had a material impact on the security or integrity of our election infrastructure.” yet.

...and other various internet claims that starlink wasn't used for anything except voter roll stuff, but still, nothing shows that starlink wasn't actually used for anythng except voter roll stuff.

And for some reason, a lot of people are very strongly against investigating this issue.

Very weird.

Your statement about needing laws to prevent something that is impossible is nonsensical. It is technically possible to connect voting equipment to the internet, which is why the law was passed. The impossibility we are talking about is that the equipment doesn’t have modems, so it is impossible to connect to the Internet, and even if someone illegally installed a modem it would be impossible to upload voter data because there is no system to upload to.

As to your point about nothing shows Starlink wasn’t used to upload voter data, how can we prove a negative? Doesn’t the fact that there is no system to upload voting data to prove that what you are proposing is impossible?

"It is technically possible to connect voting equipment to the internet,...it is impossible to connect to the Internet..."

Why do I feel you are gaslighting me?

It is technically possible to connect voting machines to the Internet and upload voting data but practically it is impossible because they don’t have modems, and if you were to install one it would be impossible to upload data because there is no system to upload to.

All clear? No gaslighting, just you continuing to ignore what is presented to you.

..and I don't even care why that might be, but I also have a right to an opinion on whether we should be rigorously verifying the first-count results of any election. Don't you agree?

We are dealing with digitized information. It is by it's very nature vulnerable to manipulation, and there are many multiple ways that manipulation can be accomplished within any given machine or info transmission method.

Since the swing states (and CA) overwhelming use paper ballots. That allows us to do tabulator audits by doing hand counts. In other words, the existing process is sufficient to detect problems, which is why extraordinary measures are unnecessary. That’s why everyone moved to paper ballets. All you are doing is creating doubt about elections, which is bad for democracy.

...of our election totals because we might turn people off of voting if they can't just blindly trust the voting process is weird to me.

Wouldn't it be better if we could simply assure everyone that the voting process was actually accurate by doing multiple accuracy checks without telling them they will have to take our word for it (or calling them ugly names)?

The existing process is obviously NOT sufficient to provide trust in the system if people keep doubting it's suffiency to detect problems and only recounting when margins are close while ignoring any other possible cause of false results is not sufficient to protect our votes OR to build trust in our election system.

People doubt elections because people like you are raising doubts by making unverified claims about fraud. Yes, I know, you are “just asking questions” and “expressing concerns” but your intent is clear. That’s why you’re getting pushback- we saw what QAnon did to the GOP and we’re not going let you do the same to our party.

No BlueAnon on DU.

What the heck is "Blueanon" and when did that get made up???

If anyone thinks it will help.

https://chng.it/BbgwwwnPkx

You do know that Democratic Underground WAS STARTED for people who were questioning the outcome and win of bush in 2000, don't you?

I really think it's more than appropriate for those of us here who are now demanding that this election be very vigorously verified.

What was the name you posted under on DU1?

...it was mentioned just today in a post on one of these threads about the call for Harris to request rcounts, but I have no idea where it is.

But why do think I'm a DU old-timer?

If you weren't there, maybe don't make the claim. That is how mis-information is spread.

...you could, you know... do your own research?

I accept YOUR concession.

...before they can be accepted.

I'll have to research that.

And want me to do it for you, I accept your concession.

From https://participedia.net/organization/268

History

"Democratic Underground was founded by David Allen and Dave Allsopp. The website was launched on January 20th, 2001, the same day as the Inauguration of Republican President George W. Bush for his first term as president. The founding date of the website is no coincidence, primarily in the way that the website was created specifically to openly exhibit opposition towards George W. Bush’s victory over Al Gore for the presidency."

Where do you see a difference between...

"Democratic Underground WAS STARTED for people who were questioning the outcome and win of bush in 2000,"

and...

"the website was created specifically to openly exhibit opposition towards George W. Bush’s victory over Al Gore for the presidency."

?