Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

23. Have you ever worked at a polling place? There are a number of procedures

Reply to TheFrenchRazor (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 27, 2016, 11:03 AM

Nov 2016

to ensure accuracy. Do errors occur? Sure, and they did with paper ballots, throwing rocks in a bowl, etc. Sure computers COULD be hacked, but I trust Obama, Clinton, and others who say no evidence of hacking was found.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

31 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

When is a recount a sham? [View all] Coyotl Nov 2016 OP

When electronic voting machines have no back-up that can be examined. eom guillaumeb Nov 2016 #1

Excellent article SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #4

Which is the case in PA, I believe oberliner Nov 2016 #5

True, and in other states as well. eom guillaumeb Nov 2016 #9

You are correct Glassunion Nov 2016 #11

esp when these electronic machines are old, outdated and use very old software womanofthehills Nov 2016 #28

Possibly by design? eom guillaumeb Nov 2016 #30

Wrong. Maybe HassleCat Nov 2016 #2

Exactly SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #3

who said you need 50 people? 1 from each party and maybe an independent person would work. nt TheFrenchRazor Nov 2016 #16

I was just going by what the OP said SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #18

We've already gone from voting was hacked to recount is a sham. What conspiracy will be next. Hoyt Nov 2016 #6

Yep SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #7

On election night, the chances of trump winning tavernier Nov 2016 #21

I guess you didn't see Nate Silver SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #22

What is your perspective on the article? bigmonkey Nov 2016 #12

The article is like a 1000 more just like it discussing what COULD happen. Fact is we lost. Hoyt Nov 2016 #15

I don't either and Jill Stein cannot be trusted. She's a fucking tool. Does she think it's the seaglass Nov 2016 #13

I guarantee you DemonGoddess Nov 2016 #24

blind faith in computers is the true conspiracy. nt TheFrenchRazor Nov 2016 #17

Have you ever worked at a polling place? There are a number of procedures Hoyt Nov 2016 #23

A lot of people just don't want to admit... vi5 Nov 2016 #26

Sanders would've lost even worse, anti-semitism is at its height, and radius777 Nov 2016 #27

I didnt say anything about Sanders vi5 Nov 2016 #29

When you send a bus load of lackies to Florida randr Nov 2016 #8

I just hope Stein isn't trying to divert attention from the Russian voter manipulation issue mtnsnake Nov 2016 #10

This article is a set of cautionary tales, indicating that recounts can be gamed. bigmonkey Nov 2016 #14

BBV is bit of a black box itself. ucrdem Nov 2016 #20

that is true; the recounts should involve eyeballs on paper, not just re-running the same bogus TheFrenchRazor Nov 2016 #25

The strange case of Bev Harris. ucrdem Nov 2016 #19

When stupid fucks yammer on about how it will make not difference in the outcome before it even lonestarnot Nov 2016 #31