From article seems she hacked website announcing results. Not the voting or tabulation systems, or the voter file. That’s a problem bc it can make ppl doubt the corrected results. But it’s diff than the votes themselves, and less of a prob in 44 states that have paper ballots /1
Obviously important to secure these voting systems, & I’m not new to the issue. I wrote a piece in 2004 arguing that voting machines should be produced by a public entity. And I pointed out a few days after the Wikileaks dump the big issue was hacking /2 newrepublic.com/article/135472…
But it’s also important we get things right. I regularly see libs/progs suggest the vote was hacked for Trump. There’s no evidence for it. And if there was, wouldn’t Dem campaigns be all over it? Big campaigns have sophisticated models & targeting, & would probably catch… /3
…any attempt to change votes for a presidential or even US Senate race. But insecure machines are prob more vulnerable to losing votes, mayhem, just not working, etc. In most states tabulation is too decentralized & not connected to be altered without getting caught. /5
As long as there are paper ballots—and almost every state has them—there’s a chance to get accurate results. There are numerous things that should be cofmdified to ensure a good process for voting & making sure it was accurate, & too few places do everything they should… /6
…and there’s a huge danger of small local elections being rigged via technology and going undetected. But bc systems are so unconnected, I think tabulstionnis a lower risk for manipulation than are voter files, which could keep people from voting. There’s also… /7
…simple destruction; imagine if machines were hacked to turn off on Election Day. Anyway, I think technology isn’t as significant as the rules, protocols, & laws, & the use of paper ballots.
And the campaigns themselves are possibly a more vulnerable & damaging target /8
And the campaigns themselves are possibly a more vulnerable & damaging target /8
