General Discussion

triron

(22,031 posts) Sun Jan 7, 2018, 02:33 PM Jan 2018

Just heard Malcolm Nance say (on MSNBC)

that the central tabulators of each state are where the vote count
is most vulnerable (and thus could be altered by election hackers--these my words).
But then he said "thank goodness this didn't happen in 2016"''

I believe he is wrong about this last statement.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Just heard Malcolm Nance say (on MSNBC) (Original Post) triron Jan 2018 OP

I didn't see that clip Nictuku Jan 2018 #1

Were computer forensics performed to determine whether or not there was election tampering? LenaBaby61 Jan 2018 #5

I also believe he was wrong about his last statement... Raster Jan 2018 #2

I think Nance is right. We lost because white wing voters went to the polls and enough Hoyt Jan 2018 #3

It's so obvious this is being done Abouttime Jan 2018 #4

They have also tried it with Obama... DAMANgoldberg Jan 2018 #6

Might that have been sarcasm on his part? GoCubsGo Jan 2018 #7

I do too, and this is just one reason: RandomAccess Jan 2018 #8

Not to mention the consistent lean toward Trump triron Jan 2018 #9

Right, tons of proof that didnt happen... ??? Transparent as a black box inside a vault lostnfound Jan 2018 #10

Nictuku

(3,622 posts)

1. I didn't see that clip

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 02:43 PM

Jan 2018

.. but every time I have heard the talking heads (I don't include Malcolm Nance as a talking head), I've listened carefully and it is usually phrased ... "We found no evidence of election tampering"

That is a true statement only because if you don't look for evidence of tampering, then of course you found no evidence of election tampering.

The better question would be: Were computer forensics performed to determine whether or not there was election tampering? If yes, then I might believe the statement, but my guess is the answer to that question is a great big no, they didn't even look.

LenaBaby61

(6,979 posts)

5. Were computer forensics performed to determine whether or not there was election tampering?

Reply to Nictuku (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 03:13 PM

Jan 2018

From what I've read on the subject from several writers Ari Berman, Jeffrey Toobin, and in several articles from The Southern Poverty Law Center, time.com, Washington post.com, I don't remember reading that there was any computer forensics performed, and if that is/was the case, I agree with you in feeling that since there probably WAS no computer performed, how can Malcolm or anyone state with 100% certainty that there wasn't election tampering.

IMHO, we'll probably not know all of what happened with the 2016 GE as far as election tampering goes. There have been articles written about what happened in Ohio with Ken Blackwell in 2004, and we all SAW what happened in 2000 with Jeb Bush/Katherine Harris in Florida. We know what the GOP game plan on expanding voter-suppression and gerrymandering if they get the ruling they want from the Supreme Court concerning Wisconsin, but who KNOWS in what WAYS the ruskies will interfere with our 2018 mid-terms, and how wide-spread it will be THIS next time around. I don't trust this tRumputin administration, beauguard nor our current DHS to make sure voting is fair for "everyone."

Raster

(20,998 posts)

2. I also believe he was wrong about his last statement...

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 02:49 PM

Jan 2018

...all that was necessary was to hack the central tabulators in just a few states to make a huge difference.

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

3. I think Nance is right. We lost because white wing voters went to the polls and enough

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 03:04 PM

Jan 2018

Democratic leaning voters stayed home, or voted for some other candidate, because Clinton had been bashed and lied about by GOPers, Ruskies, Comey, and even some Democrats.

Abouttime

(675 posts)

4. It's so obvious this is being done

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 03:10 PM

Jan 2018

We have so many independent polls, these pollsters are the best and brightest. PA, MI, WI were blatantly stolen by republicans.

DAMANgoldberg

(1,278 posts)

6. They have also tried it with Obama...

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 04:27 PM

Jan 2018

but overwhelming support for POC in particular foiled that. 2 more recent examples is the Governor's race in Virginia and the Alabama Senate race.

GoCubsGo

(32,103 posts)

7. Might that have been sarcasm on his part?

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 04:37 PM

Jan 2018

RandomAccess

(5,210 posts)

8. I do too, and this is just one reason:

Reply to triron (Original post)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 07:46 PM

Jan 2018

PALMER: Rigged election: Donald Trump won every surprise swing state by the same 1% margin
http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/rigged-election-donald-trump-won-every-surprise-swing-state-by-the-same-1-margin/118/

The most commonly posited explanation of Donald Trump’s shocking election victory was that every professional pollster in the nation – despite each working independently and using differing methodologies – somehow managed to overlook the same pockets of Trump voters in these states. If such pockets did exist, they would have existed in varying sizes in each of the four states, thus resulting in different sized wins in each.

Ask any statistician and they’ll tell you that a reasonable distribution of the results would have been Trump winning one of the states by one percent, won one of them by perhaps three percent, won one of them by two percent, lost one of them by one percent, or something along those lines. But instead the voting tallies looked startlingly different from any natural distribution. In fact they looked startlingly the same.

According to the New York Times, the voting results broke down like this: Trump won Florida by just over one percent of the vote. He also won Pennsylvania by just over one percent. He won Michigan by just under one percent. And he won Wisconsin by precisely one percent. That’s not how numbers tend to work in the real world.

On its own, this kind of suspiciously consistent numerical dispersion across the four states that decided the election would be something that could be written off as a mere fluke. But when you put it within the context of the numerous other ways in which the voting tallies make no mathematical sense, it points to the numbers having been rigged or altered.

triron

(22,031 posts)

9. Not to mention the consistent lean toward Trump

Reply to RandomAccess (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 7, 2018, 07:55 PM

Jan 2018

in vote tally vs exit poll result (extremely improbable) (24 out of 28)

lostnfound

(16,203 posts)

10. Right, tons of proof that didnt happen... ??? Transparent as a black box inside a vault