News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A used voting machine from the 2016 election. Parent comment

Re:A used voting machine from the 2016 election by rdtsc on Friday July 20, 2018 @06:03PM (#17579357)
So have both?

> One person committing voter ID fraud can feasibly vote a handful of times.

But a bus full of people driven around committing voter ID fraud can alter voter totals.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A used voting machine from the 2016 election by crooked-v on Friday July 20, 2018 @06:14PM (#17579419)
> But a bus full of people driven around committing voter ID fraud can alter voter totals.

...unless you make even a single mistake in your assumption of who will keep the secret or who will not vote so you can vote in their place.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A used voting machine from the 2016 election by masonic on Saturday July 21, 2018 @04:20AM (#17581227)
But it's essentially risk-free. A false voter has left behind no identification, and video at the polling place is not allowed. Even if the affected genuine voter eventually casts a successful provisional ballot, the fraudulent ballot is also counted and included regardless.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A used voting machine from the 2016 election by Redoubts on Saturday July 21, 2018 @07:58AM (#17581710)
> Even if the affected genuine voter eventually casts a successful provisional ballot, the fraudulent ballot is also counted and included regardless.

That seems incorrect.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A used voting machine from the 2016 election by masonic on Saturday July 21, 2018 @08:04PM (#17584545)
It is correct. Think about it. How would you pull that ballot back out of the system to invalidate its votes? Those votes are by definition secret.
[ Parent | on HN ]