Warning. With remote access to e-poll books (yes, vendors have it & I’m told they pass around a url to watch), bad actors cld track in real time how many votes they need & where to alter election outcomes. This wld NOT work w/ vote by mail. 1/
7/https://t.co/CpRzENXPON
See also "Interface" by @nealstephenson for the possible outcomes of real-time access to polling data.
— Rob Chandhok (@robchandhok) November 10, 2020
More from Jennifer Cohn ✍🏻 📢
This analogy is unfair. In 04, exit polls suggested Kerry had won, and the Bush administration itself had helped fund exit polls in Ukraine that year & supported a Ukrainian election re-do based in part based on the exit polls. In 2020, exit polls favored Biden, not Trump. 1/
2/ US State Dept commentary re the 2004 election in Ukraine and the discrepancy between the exit polls (which suggested a pro-West Yuschenko victory) and official results (which suggested a pro-Russia Yanukovych victory).
3/ The 2004 election in Ukraine was re-done and produced the opposite result, consistent with the exit polls.
4/ Exit polls in the US around the same time as Ukraine’s 2004 election suggested a solid Kerry victory. Voters had every reason to question why the Bush administration considered exit polls reliable in Ukraine but not in the US at the same time. https://t.co/SwUPeRnGtf
Discussion of Ohio 2004. 5/
In 2004, election truthers trotted out supposed statistical anomolies to try and "prove" Kerry won Ohio. It was bunk. Now some GOP folks are making similar arguments to claim Trump won the election. This is bunk too.
— Jonathan H. Adler (@jadler1969) November 28, 2020
2/ US State Dept commentary re the 2004 election in Ukraine and the discrepancy between the exit polls (which suggested a pro-West Yuschenko victory) and official results (which suggested a pro-Russia Yanukovych victory).
3/ The 2004 election in Ukraine was re-done and produced the opposite result, consistent with the exit polls.
4/ Exit polls in the US around the same time as Ukraine’s 2004 election suggested a solid Kerry victory. Voters had every reason to question why the Bush administration considered exit polls reliable in Ukraine but not in the US at the same time. https://t.co/SwUPeRnGtf
Discussion of Ohio 2004. 5/
Good news! The New York State Board of Elections voted yesterday to REJECT certification of ES&S’s ExpressVote XL all-in-one barcode ballot marking device (BMD), a glitchy & hackable touchscreen that ES&S has hoped officials would stupidly buy in lieu of pen and paper. 1/
I’m still trying to find out @NYSBOE’s reasoning, but I know one problem was that the ExpressVote XL runs on Windows 7 and can only mark ballots in English. If the XL were a person, it would be a MAGA. 2/
The XL has other problems. It runs the barcode “paper ballot” back under the printout AFTER the voter reviews it, which experts say means it could be maliciously programmed to eff with the barcode that is the only part of the “paper ballot” counted as your vote. 3/
Unfortunately, Philadelphia did choose the ES&S ExpressVote XL all-in-one ballot marking device (BMD), ignoring expert advice. I wrote about that unfortunate decision here in 2019. 4/
Here, for @NYRBooks, I also discuss problems involving the ES&S ExpressVote XL in PA in 2019. ES&S lobbyists had secretly donated to the two decision makers who then chose this system in Philly in lieu of #HandMarkedPaperBallots (pen & paper). 5/
It\u2019s official. The @NYSBOE rejected the certification of the ExpressVote XL.
— Common Cause NY (@commoncauseny) January 28, 2021
Now lawmakers should pass legislation that bans hybrid machines like the ExpressVote XL for good. https://t.co/hE83CTdgiJ
I’m still trying to find out @NYSBOE’s reasoning, but I know one problem was that the ExpressVote XL runs on Windows 7 and can only mark ballots in English. If the XL were a person, it would be a MAGA. 2/
The XL has other problems. It runs the barcode “paper ballot” back under the printout AFTER the voter reviews it, which experts say means it could be maliciously programmed to eff with the barcode that is the only part of the “paper ballot” counted as your vote. 3/
Unfortunately, Philadelphia did choose the ES&S ExpressVote XL all-in-one ballot marking device (BMD), ignoring expert advice. I wrote about that unfortunate decision here in 2019. 4/
Here, for @NYRBooks, I also discuss problems involving the ES&S ExpressVote XL in PA in 2019. ES&S lobbyists had secretly donated to the two decision makers who then chose this system in Philly in lieu of #HandMarkedPaperBallots (pen & paper). 5/
IMO, the #SAFEAct is better on election security than HR1 bc it wld ban most touchscreen voting machines currently available. HR1 wld allow them as a primary in person system bc vendors call the paper they spit out a “paper ballot.” Pen & paper is safer #HandMarkedPaperBallots 1/
I have not looked at other aspects of HR1. It addresses more than election security. The #SAFEAct shld be the starting point for election security reform in my opinion. 2/
HR1 requires that all voters have the option to mark their ballots by hand. But it does not specify that, for jurisdictions with in person voting, the hand marked (pen & paper) option must be available for in person voting (vs it only being an option w/ vote by mail). 3/
HR1 may still be a good start. But it does not go nearly far enough on election security. Here are my suggestions for election security. Maybe these could be addressed in a later bill, but we shld keep them on our radar. 4/ https://t.co/mNdHrvwHcN
The key section is 1502. IMO, it shld add the following. “For jurisdictions that offer in person voting, the option to mark a paper ballot by hand must be offered at the in-person polling location; giving this option only for vote by mail won’t suffice for such jurisdictions.” 5/
Even HR1 did not require that jurisdictions give all voters the option to mark their ballots by hand AT THE POLLS. The House has not even warned the public about the dangers of new touchscreen ballot marking devices. Pls do that NOW. TY.
— Jennifer Cohn \u270d\U0001f3fb \U0001f4e2 (@jennycohn1) April 24, 2019
Expert Report: https://t.co/I2EWvFIQEH pic.twitter.com/euekDq65mr
I have not looked at other aspects of HR1. It addresses more than election security. The #SAFEAct shld be the starting point for election security reform in my opinion. 2/
HR1 requires that all voters have the option to mark their ballots by hand. But it does not specify that, for jurisdictions with in person voting, the hand marked (pen & paper) option must be available for in person voting (vs it only being an option w/ vote by mail). 3/
HR1 may still be a good start. But it does not go nearly far enough on election security. Here are my suggestions for election security. Maybe these could be addressed in a later bill, but we shld keep them on our radar. 4/ https://t.co/mNdHrvwHcN
The key section is 1502. IMO, it shld add the following. “For jurisdictions that offer in person voting, the option to mark a paper ballot by hand must be offered at the in-person polling location; giving this option only for vote by mail won’t suffice for such jurisdictions.” 5/
More from Politics
THREAD
1)
@SidneyPowell1 reflects on #Iran’s meddling in the U.S. in a recent tweet to U.S. President Donald Trump.
This thread focuses on Iran’s dangerous influence in the U.S., especially through its DC-based lobby group
2)
Why is this important?
@DNI_Ratcliffe "told CBS News that there was foreign election interference by China, #Iran & Russia in November of this year [2020]."
All Americans should be informed about how Iran & its lobby group NIAC are meddling in the
3)
#Iran has been increasingly aiming to interfere in U.S. elections specifically through NIAC.
DNI John Ratcliffe had previously shed light on this vital
4)
NIAC is a lobby group in the U.S. pushing Iran’s talking points.
Listen to this Iranian regime insider explain that NIAC was established by @JZarif, the foreign minister of
5)
@tparsi is the official founder of NIAC in the U.S.
Listen to how Trita Parsi parrots Zarif’s talking
1)
@SidneyPowell1 reflects on #Iran’s meddling in the U.S. in a recent tweet to U.S. President Donald Trump.
This thread focuses on Iran’s dangerous influence in the U.S., especially through its DC-based lobby group
Dear @realDonaldTrump
— Sidney Powell \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8\u2b50\u2b50\u2b50 (@SidneyPowell1) December 23, 2020
#China and #Iran stole this election from the #American people
who voted for you in a world-record landslide!
We must expose all the corruption and restore the Republic now
There will never be a free and fair election if we don\u2019t end the rigging now \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 pic.twitter.com/2t707xN0ar
2)
Why is this important?
@DNI_Ratcliffe "told CBS News that there was foreign election interference by China, #Iran & Russia in November of this year [2020]."
All Americans should be informed about how Iran & its lobby group NIAC are meddling in the
3)
#Iran has been increasingly aiming to interfere in U.S. elections specifically through NIAC.
DNI John Ratcliffe had previously shed light on this vital
4)
NIAC is a lobby group in the U.S. pushing Iran’s talking points.
Listen to this Iranian regime insider explain that NIAC was established by @JZarif, the foreign minister of
5)
@tparsi is the official founder of NIAC in the U.S.
Listen to how Trita Parsi parrots Zarif’s talking
39.1% of Democrats think that it's wrong to negatively stereotype people based on their place of birth... AND that Southerners are more racist. https://t.co/yp1hviLuBB
65.2% of Republicans think that people shouldn't be so easily offended... AND that Black Lives Matter is offensive. https://t.co/znmVhqIaL8
64.6% of Democrats think that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body... AND that selling organs should be illegal.
48.5% of Democrats think that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body... AND that prostitution should be illegal.
57.9% of Republicans think that people should be free to express their opinions in the workplace... AND that athletes should not be allowed to sit or kneel during the national anthem. https://t.co/ds2ig1NJFr
Democrats: Men and women are equal in their talents and abilities. Also, women are superior. https://t.co/bEFSmqQguo
65.2% of Republicans think that people shouldn't be so easily offended... AND that Black Lives Matter is offensive. https://t.co/znmVhqIaL8
64.6% of Democrats think that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body... AND that selling organs should be illegal.
48.5% of Democrats think that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body... AND that prostitution should be illegal.
57.9% of Republicans think that people should be free to express their opinions in the workplace... AND that athletes should not be allowed to sit or kneel during the national anthem. https://t.co/ds2ig1NJFr
Democrats: Men and women are equal in their talents and abilities. Also, women are superior. https://t.co/bEFSmqQguo
You May Also Like
I like this heuristic, and have a few which are similar in intent to it:
Hiring efficiency:
How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?
What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?
How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:
* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work
How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.
(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)
How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
Here's how I'd measure the health of any tech company:
— Jeff Atwood (@codinghorror) October 25, 2018
How long, as measured from the inception of idea to the modified software arriving in the user's hands, does it take to roll out a *1 word copy change* in your primary product?
Hiring efficiency:
How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?
What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?
How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:
* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work
How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.
(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)
How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
