The Voting Machines Need to Go

 

The voting machines America is currently using need to go.  They breed mistrust, and there’s a reason for that: They are not trustworthy. They are also inherently undemocratic.

No, I’m not talking about 2020–well, not as such.  I’m talking about all the past elections since we started using these machines, as well as all the future ones until we come to our senses.

These Machines Are Antithetical to Democracy

YARN | You wouldn't understand. It's a secret. | The Office (2005) - S04E04 Dunder Mifflin Infinity (Part 2) | Video gifs by quotes | 8a64b9d5 | 紗

Let’s do the second problem first.  Here’s a question that pretty much answers itself:

Can a system be democratic if the people are not permitted to know how their votes are counted?

It’s not a democratic system unless the people have freedom to vote and have some understanding of how their votes are counted. So why are we using machines that have secret coding to count the votes?  That’s one reason why the voting machines need to go: Their coding is kept secret. Get rid of those machines, and replace them with paper and pen, or with machines that use open-source software.

A related question also pretty much answers itself:

Can a system be democratic if the people are not even capable of knowing how their votes are counted?

Again, it’s not a democratic system unless the people have freedom to vote and have some understanding of how their votes are counted. Under the current system, only people with years of training in just the right areas of computer science are even capable of understanding how votes are counted.  So why are we using machines that use fractions to count votes, instead of just simple arithmetic?

And why are we using machines that condemn us to ignorance about how a vote-count is going until the software is updated?  Why are we using machines that guarantee an election cannot be run smoothly unless election workers are properly trained in the new technology?  These aren’t online Trumpy conspiracy theories, mind you–this is the New York Times!

And why are we using machines where you can’t know how your vote is being counted–or understand much of what anyone even says about how they’re counted–without understanding what a router is, whether it’s connected, what a LAN is, what a firewall is, what a batch is, what packets are, what packet captures are, what an IP address is, what logic and accuracy tests are, what a client is, what a server is, what domain controls are, what computer logs are, and how to read those logs?

April 2022: Scooby-Doo - MorphicThat’s another reason why the voting machines need to go: Their workings are an inherent mystery to the voters.

Get rid of those machines, and replace them with paper and pen, or maybe with machinery no more complex than the Scantron machine you remember from high school.  Use open-source technology that doesn’t need a lot of software updates, doesn’t require any fancy training, and isn’t a mystery to anyone–or, at a bare minimum, that isn’t a mystery to your neighbor, uncle, or friend who at least knows computers and engineering enough to program a machine to countI don’t know how to do that, but it makes a big difference that people I know can understand such technology.  But no one I’ve ever met knows what’s going on inside these voting machines.

They Are Not Trustworthy

To some extent, you need only read the above.

To a greater extent, the massive untrustworthiness of these machines is best understood by carefully reading what Dominion Voting Systems actually says about their machines, reading an important report from a committee in the Michigan State Senate, and letting G. K. Chesterton remind us what sanity looks like.

Hath it not been said by Dominion Voting Systems?

Voting systems are, by design, meant to be used as closed systems that are not networked (meaning not connected to the Internet). It is technologically impossible to “see” votes being counted in real-time and/or to “flip” them.

Were the machines incapable of online connectivity, would Dominion not simply say that?

Well, many vote-counting machines really do have online capabilities, including some but not all Dominion machines and not only Dominion machines; see this NBC News story, for example.  But, more importantly, see page 22 of this report from a committee of the Senate of Michigan:

A report from the Michigan Senate Oversight Committee:

Upon completion of the election, tabulators print the final results on paper. Clerks then connect a modem and transmit by secure, cellular connection or transfer by flash drive the unofficial results to the county clerk.

The Report then says the second-most important thing I’ve ever read about voting machines, consigning it to a footnote in miserably small font size: Voting machines (not including Dominion products in Michigan, apparently) have internal modems, but don’t worry:

…they are not turned on until the polls are closed and tabulation has concluded.

G.K. ChestertonSo first the machine counts the votes, then it prints the results on paper, and only after that is it allowed to access the internet for the fast, electronic reporting of provisional results.  Or, for some of the machines, to be accessed by a USB drive for the same purpose.

In other words, the technology is secure if we keep all the modems off till the right time.  Our elections are secure if we use the technology correctly.

Hence some wisdom from Father Brown, G. K. Chesterton’s mystery-solving priest in a book named after his wisdom, is the most important thing I’ve read about voting machines.  Father Brown is explaining “The Mistake of the Machine” in a story bearing that name, and he says this:

“You always forget,” observed his companion [Father Brown], “that the reliable machine always has to be worked by an unreliable machine.”

“Why, what do you mean?” asked the detective.

“I mean Man,” said Father Brown, “the most unreliable machine I know of.”

The voting machines are not safe if they are not used properly.  The only way for them to be used properly is for there to be safeguards in place–starting with something on the order of rules in 50 states saying no such machine may be used to count votes until poll observers from both parties plus government officials swear in writing that the modems are switched off.

If those rules were in place, we’d have had their existence and important drummed into our skulls by every fact-checking punk from CNN to the state governments.  But that hasn’t happened. Therefore, the voting machines are not trustworthy.

We should listen to the feds–if only just this once.  Specifically, we should listen to the Election Assistance Commission, a US government agency, laying down VVSG 2.0 standards–“Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0”–right here.  Those rules require “systems to be air-gapped from other networks and disallows the use of wireless technologies.”

That’s right–not only do voting machines with online connectivity exist, but even the feds recognize that this is a problem, and they tell us we should get rid of them.

A broken clock is once twice a day, and once if it’s a federal government clock on military time that broke down in the afternoon.  But now is that time.

Published in Elections
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 85 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Has anyone here ever used a Scantron grading machine? I could read my entire class’s exams in 5 minutes. If there’s an error, you can run it again with the same ballots. You can audit it easily.

    I think pushing for simple scanners is a reliable method, and it will be easier to persuade people that a simple scanner is superior to our current system rather than paper ballots counted by hand. From a human factors standpoint, people are not as good as machines at this kind of precise work.

    Also, make the specifications for the ballot scanner public domain.

    I have to say, I think even before the election, the argument was that revealing the program would make it hackable so it had to remain secret. Made sense at the time.

    Maybe to the… unfamiliar? But the best way to make something unhackable is for it to have no online connection. At all. Ever.

    I’m surprised at the number of people I encounter who don’t think a computer could ever possibly count wrong. As if it couldn’t possibly be programmed specifically to do so.

    Beat me to it!

    Using USB devices to carry records around isn’t foolproof either.  USB devices – not just cables, but devices! – have interface chips in them that can be “hacked” to do other things.

    • #61
  2. W Bob Member
    W Bob
    @WBob

    Haven’t read all the responses, but I’d like to know what type of voting machines others on this thread find themselves voting on during elections.

    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other type of voting machine. I live in a large metro-suburban type area in a purple state.

    SA, is this the type of machine you are talking about in your post? Is this the type of machine Dominion makes? If not, can you describe the type of system you are talking about? What exactly does the voter do to cast a vote on the type of machine you’re describing?

    • #62
  3. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Haven’t read all the responses, but I’d like to know what type of voting machines others on this thread find themselves voting on during elections.

    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other type of voting machine. I live in a large metro-suburban type area.

    SA, is this the type of machine you are talking about in your post? Is this the type of machine Dominion makes? If not, can you describe the type of system you are talking about? What exactly does the voter do to cast a vote on the type of machine you’re describing?

    I know next to nothing. Since 2012 I’ve been mailing absentee ballots to Galveston County. I do remember entering votes on a computer screen in Waco and/or Dallas in the old days.  I’ve forgotten what it was like voting in GA in 2010 and the 2012 primaries.

    Machines I’m talking about in the post are the ones I’m talking about in the post–above all, any that connect to the internet. Follow the links if you want examples or further details.

    • #63
  4. W Bob Member
    W Bob
    @WBob

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Haven’t read all the responses, but I’d like to know what type of voting machines others on this thread find themselves voting on during elections.

    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other type of voting machine. I live in a large metro-suburban type area.

    SA, is this the type of machine you are talking about in your post? Is this the type of machine Dominion makes? If not, can you describe the type of system you are talking about? What exactly does the voter do to cast a vote on the type of machine you’re describing?

    I know next to nothing. Since 2012 I’ve been mailing absentee ballots to Galveston County. I do remember entering votes on a computer screen in Waco and/or Dallas in the old days. I’ve forgotten what it was like voting in GA in 2010 and the 2012 primaries.

    Machines I’m talking about in the post are the ones I’m talking about in the post–above all, any that connect to the internet. Follow the links if you want examples or further details.

    I suppose it’s possible that the machines I’ve always used also count votes  in fractions and connect to the internet, thereby calling their integrity into question. But they are based on paper ballots. 

    • #64
  5. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Haven’t read all the responses, but I’d like to know what type of voting machines others on this thread find themselves voting on during elections.

    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other type of voting machine. I live in a large metro-suburban type area.

    SA, is this the type of machine you are talking about in your post? Is this the type of machine Dominion makes? If not, can you describe the type of system you are talking about? What exactly does the voter do to cast a vote on the type of machine you’re describing?

    I know next to nothing. Since 2012 I’ve been mailing absentee ballots to Galveston County. I do remember entering votes on a computer screen in Waco and/or Dallas in the old days. I’ve forgotten what it was like voting in GA in 2010 and the 2012 primaries.

    Machines I’m talking about in the post are the ones I’m talking about in the post–above all, any that connect to the internet. Follow the links if you want examples or further details.

    I suppose it’s possible that the machines I’ve always used also count votes in fractions and connect to the internet, thereby calling their integrity into question. But they are based on paper ballots.

    A first line of defense. But not enough all by itself.

    Every state and county government would do well if they implemented VVSG 2.0 standards.  But they would do better if they did more. 

    • #65
  6. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Haven’t read all the responses, but I’d like to know what type of voting machines others on this thread find themselves voting on during elections.

    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other type of voting machine. I live in a large metro-suburban type area in a purple state.

    SA, is this the type of machine you are talking about in your post? Is this the type of machine Dominion makes? If not, can you describe the type of system you are talking about? What exactly does the voter do to cast a vote on the type of machine you’re describing?

    This is the kind we voted on for many years, up until 15-20 years ago. Now it’s the little scanners that you describe.

    What does it take to run an election? | WITF

    • #66
  7. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Django (View Comment):
    And, no, I don’t want to hear that the company might need to update the software after the machines have been certified. 

    Back in the 80s when I interviewed for a job in the pharmaceutical industry, they didn’t do updates until they had been certified (by the FDA, I think).  The only OS and app software that was used was that which had been certified.  There was no installing of updates just because they were the latest.  I don’t know if that changed for the pharmaceuticals since then, but it would be a good policy for election equipment (minus the FDA involvement, of course).  

    • #67
  8. W Bob Member
    W Bob
    @WBob

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Haven’t read all the responses, but I’d like to know what type of voting machines others on this thread find themselves voting on during elections.

    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other type of voting machine. I live in a large metro-suburban type area in a purple state.

    SA, is this the type of machine you are talking about in your post? Is this the type of machine Dominion makes? If not, can you describe the type of system you are talking about? What exactly does the voter do to cast a vote on the type of machine you’re describing?

    This is the kind we voted on for many years, up until 15-20 years ago. Now it’s the little scanners that you describe.

    What does it take to run an election? | WITF

    I remember this from when I was a kid, like in the 70s. I’d go in the voting booth with my mom or dad. You set the selectors where you want them, then pull a lever which causes a punch card to be punched. 

    My question is, are there voting machines being used today where there’s no paper ballot or record? Like punching your selection on a video screen? I’ve never personally seen one like that. 

    • #68
  9. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    What does it take to run an election? | WITF

    Pittsburgh, 1976?

     

    • #69
  10. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    W Bob (View Comment):

    My question is, are there voting machines being used today where there’s no paper ballot or record? Like punching your selection on a video screen? I’ve never personally seen one like that. 

    I’ve voted that way in Texas several times. I think the only paper ballots I’ve used in Texas were the dumb absentee mailing ones.

    It’s been more than 10 years, but I doubt there are fewer machines now.

    • #70
  11. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):
    And, no, I don’t want to hear that the company might need to update the software after the machines have been certified.

    Back in the 80s when I interviewed for a job in the pharmaceutical industry, they didn’t do updates until they had been certified (by the FDA, I think). The only OS and app software that was used was that which had been certified. There was no installing of updates just because they were the latest. I don’t know if that changed for the pharmaceuticals since then, but it would be a good policy for election equipment (minus the FDA involvement, of course).

    Not the same thing, but I’m familiar with a defense contractor who’s policy was “security patches/releases WILL be installed within 14 days of release.  If they break something, you can fix it after the fact.”

     

    • #71
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    • #72
  13. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Well, well.

    • #73
  14. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    kedavis (View Comment):

    The YT headline is not accurate. It didn’t ban anything as far as I can tell.

    The YT content is good.

    The Newsweek article is terrible. They wrote a story about Mike Lindell, barely mentioned the actual news, and didn’t even link to the ruling as far as I could determine. Pathetic leftist stupidity.

    • #74
  15. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Django (View Comment):

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Has anyone here ever used a Scantron grading machine? I could read my entire class’s exams in 5 minutes. If there’s an error, you can run it again with the same ballots. You can audit it easily.

    I think pushing for simple scanners is a reliable method, and it will be easier to persuade people that a simple scanner is superior to our current system rather than paper ballots counted by hand. From a human factors standpoint, people are not as good as machines at this kind of precise work.

    Also, make the specifications for the ballot scanner public domain.

    I have to say, I think even before the election, the argument was that revealing the program would make it hackable so it had to remain secret. Made sense at the time.

    How does one hack a computer that is supposed to run standalone with no network connections? And if it has internet access, why? And, no, I don’t want to hear that the company might need to update the software after the machines have been certified.

    Before there was Internet voting machines were hacked using USB devices. Since OSes run whatever a USB device presents to them as device driver software with system privileges, it was very easy. If you had physical access.

    • #75
  16. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Paper ballots are the way to go. I believe France does this, and gets election results in a reasonable time frame. If the media has to wait, too bad.

    We have them in California as well.  I’ve voted on paper ballots my whole life, I didn’t realize this was uncommon.

    • #76
  17. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):
    Before we started using all this computerized technology to count the votes, we’d get results the same night.

    Did we, though?  Did we get official results the same night?  The networks made a call and announced a winner, and often the losing candidate gave a concession speech, but counting may have gone on in the background for days or weeks with no one paying any attention.

    Partly this was just an artifact of fewer close elections: Mondale didn’t exactly need to wait until every vote was counted to realize he’d lost.

    Then there’s the famous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline, so the problem of news media reporting election results prematurely dates back at least to the 1940’s.

    • #77
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):
    Before we started using all this computerized technology to count the votes, we’d get results the same night.

    Did we, though? Did we get official results the same night? The networks made a call and announced a winner, and often the losing candidate gave a concession speech, but counting may have gone on in the background for days or weeks with no one paying any attention.

    Partly this was just an artifact of fewer close elections: Mondale didn’t exactly need to wait until every vote was counted to realize he’d lost.

    Then there’s the famous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline, so the problem of news media reporting election results prematurely dates back at least to the 1940’s.

    I think newspapers had much earlier deadlines then too.

    • #78
  19. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    W Bob (View Comment):
    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it.

    Same here.

    W Bob (View Comment):
    My question is, are there voting machines being used today where there’s no paper ballot or record? Like punching your selection on a video screen? I’ve never personally seen one like that. 

    Neither have I.

    • #79
  20. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):
    The only type of voting machine that I think I’ve ever used over many decades in a number of different localities is a paper ballot filled out by filling in an oval with a pen, then you personally feed the ballot into a machine that sucks it in and reads it.

    Same here.

    W Bob (View Comment):
    My question is, are there voting machines being used today where there’s no paper ballot or record? Like punching your selection on a video screen? I’ve never personally seen one like that.

    Neither have I.

    Many places these days have kind of a two-way system where you use a touch-screen to make selections which are then printed onto a ballot sheet, that then gets read by another computer for counting.

    • #80
  21. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):
    Before we started using all this computerized technology to count the votes, we’d get results the same night.

    Did we, though? Did we get official results the same night? The networks made a call and announced a winner, and often the losing candidate gave a concession speech, but counting may have gone on in the background for days or weeks with no one paying any attention.

    Partly this was just an artifact of fewer close elections: Mondale didn’t exactly need to wait until every vote was counted to realize he’d lost.

    Then there’s the famous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline, so the problem of news media reporting election results prematurely dates back at least to the 1940’s.

    Newspapers go to print early.

    They still figured out that Truman won that same night.

    • #81
  22. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Percival (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine:

    Hath it not been said by Dominion Voting Systems?

    Voting systems are, by design, meant to be used as closed systems that are not networked (meaning not connected to the Internet). It is technologically impossible to “see” votes being counted in real-time and/or to “flip” them.

    Were the machines incapable of online connectivity, would Dominion not simply say that?

    Say it? They should be ready, even eager, to demonstrate it.

    How many states have purchased these machines? Were security audits conducted? (And if they weren’t, why weren’t they?)

    The noises those bozos make about their software being proprietary is just too funny. It’s tabulating software; it counts things!

    18 likes, and well deserved.

    • #82
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine:

    Hath it not been said by Dominion Voting Systems?

    Voting systems are, by design, meant to be used as closed systems that are not networked (meaning not connected to the Internet). It is technologically impossible to “see” votes being counted in real-time and/or to “flip” them.

    Were the machines incapable of online connectivity, would Dominion not simply say that?

    Say it? They should be ready, even eager, to demonstrate it.

    How many states have purchased these machines? Were security audits conducted? (And if they weren’t, why weren’t they?)

    The noises those bozos make about their software being proprietary is just too funny. It’s tabulating software; it counts things!

    18 likes, and well deserved.

    I guess I neglected to mention it on this thread, but a surprising number of people seem to believe that computers are simply incapable of counting wrong, even if deliberately programmed to do so.

    • #83
  24. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Electronic Fraud in the 2020 Election: More Likely than Not

    • #84
  25. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Election 2020 Top-Ten Question Countdown

    • #85
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.