To detect/deter electronic vote tampering between the precincts & the central tabulators, CAMPAIGNS should place observers at each precinct (after polls close) 2 photograph the poll tapes (paper summary of vote totals) from each machine. @HarleyRouda@BetoORourke@staceyabrams 1/
I don't believe most campaigns are already doing this. I contacted the Ohio Dem party to discuss poll observers b4 the #OH12 election. They referred me to O'Connor's campaign manager who DIDN'T KNOW & transferred me to the Election Protection Hotline, which also didn't know. 2/
If campaigns don't have capacity to put poll observers at each precinct, they shld coordinate w/ @ACLU about this. I have noticed that the @ACLU is training poll observers in some states. I don't know if they know the importance of photographing poll tapes after polls close. 3/
This is what the poll tapes (vote total summaries from touchscreen machines at the precincts) look like. As indicated by @MarilynRMarks1, pictures of the poll tapes in Georgia have revealed major issues, like MISSING RACES. 4/
@MarilynRMarks1 has alerted election integrity activists & others in Georgia about the importance of photographing poll tapes. Because we cannot clone Marilyn for other states, we must learn from her work there and implement similar strategies elsewhere OURSELVES. 5/
Many states don't allow photographs DURING VOTING. Most don't prohibit taking pictures of the poll tapes (vote total summaries) AFTER polls close. But unless poll tapes are posted publicly (in many places they aren't), u will need 2 be trained as a poll observer to get access. 6/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Study shows that people of all political persuasions are willing to modify their beliefs based on corrective info from reliable sources, but “subjects ‘re-believed’ the false info when retested a week later.” 1/ news.northeastern.edu/2018/06/18/tir…
2/ The author of the article says It may help to warn people in advance that they are likely to forget the correction bc “this helps them mentally tag the bogus information as false.”
3/ It’s also “important that the corrective information be repeated as frequently, and with even greater clarity, than the myth.”
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but elections have been electronically suspect starting long before the Trump/Russia scandal. This article is lulling folks into a false sense of security, which is dangerous. Domestic hackers & insiders were always an equal threat. 1/
I agree, tho not enuf time (and 0 political will) to do this in Nov. Wish it were different. For now I hope to stop states from doubling up on electronics w/ touchscreen ballot markers. Using electronics to count votes is bad enuf. Having them mark our ballots too is nuts. 1/
Nuts except for those who are unable to hand mark their ballots. Once you have hand marked paper ballots they can be either scanned or hand counted (my preference) or both. 2/
Any time u put a machine between the voter and the paper record of voter intent there is an opportunity for programming mischief. Here is just the latest example.: 3/
I’m hoping some of the cyber experts who signed the letter about the risks of using cellular modems to transfer election results can answer this question. Thx! @philipbstark@SEGreenhalgh@rad_atl@jhalderm
Seeing as no one has answered yet, I will say that even if the cellular modems CAN be configured to bypass the internet, we should not have to blindly trust that vendors or whoever else is hired to set them up will do that.
Kathy Rogers, the face & voice of @ESSVote, which has installed CELLULAR MODEMS in tabulators in WI & FL, is cozying up to @DHSgov which refuses to advise states to remove the modems despite a letter from 30 cyber experts & EI groups stating it should do so. #CorruptElections 1/
The notion that cellular modems affect only “unofficial” results is bogus bc, among other reasons, in certain jurisdictions, unofficial results become the official results once added to absentees & provisionals—sometimes w/o ever comparing them to the precinct results tapes! 1/
And Wisconsin doesn’t even require that counties publicly post the results tapes so that the public itself can make this comparison! (I don’t know about Florida, Michigan, & Illinois.) 2/
Thus, we must simply trust that someone trustworthy is conducting this due diligence. In Johnson County, Kansas, the County acknowledged that it does NOT conduct this basic due diligence. 3/