Voting Machines Switched Votes in PA Judges Race !!!, 4237

Good evening, I’m still reporting on the coup.

Pennsylvania voting machines are having a few problems in today’s off-year elections for the Pennsylvania Superior Court.

The problem seems to be confined to Northampton County, Pennsylvania where voting machines are switching votes in what’s called a retention race – that is, a race to see whether certain court judges will be retained or not for another 10-year term.

In the Pennsylvania system, when a judge finishes his 10-year term, but seeks another, voters can either vote “Yes” or “No”. The problem seems to be that the machines are switching the votes of who you voted for and against in the Superior Court Judges race.

The Northampton County Election Office instructed polling stations in an impossible to understand text:

“[Poll workers] are to instruct voters before the voter enters the voting booth that there is an issue with the recording of their vote … [and] that the paper receipt will record their selection ….”

So what does this mean? Does it mean that the vote on the paper receipt is their actual vote, or the incorrect one? Are voters supposed to retain the paper receipt, or rely on the election judges to accurately sort that out? Are the election judges on site asking them to verify which way they voted? If so, then why not just mark a paper ballot and sign it.

As you can see, when a voting machine goes off the rails it is very difficult to straighten it out – especially on election day. In election 2020, one idea was to have voters sign their ballots, essentially. Then a machine would scan to see if their signatures matched ones on their driving license. However, election officials in some states lowered the signature match standards to the point where any mark would do. In other words, it made computerized signature matching irrelevant.

No, the only way to do this honestly is to have voters show a state or federal verifiable I.D. and the name and address must exactly match the name and address on a physical list of voters. Then, and only then would the voter be given a paper ballot to mark with an indelible ink pen – a mark which could not be erased. From that point on your name becomes detached from your vote. Only your sequential number sticks with your ballot. If the voter makes a mistake, they can tear up the old ballot in front of an election judge and be given a new ballot with a new sequential number.

Once the voter’s identity has been verified and then the voter hand-marks a paper ballot, it is run through a tabulator/scanner and your sequential voting number is printed over your ballot with a large watermark that cannot be erased – voter #365 just voted at 14:30. To election officials, only the voter’s sequential number and time the vote was cast would be visibly connected to the actual votes they cast that day.

Military absentee ballots would be handled in the exact same way. Those outside of the U.S. would still have to physically appear before the same sort of election officials, using identical vote-scanning equipment. Yes, we may have to send a thousand of these into the field each year, but that’s a small price to pay to fix this.

What about the disabled folks in the U.S.? Same thing. They would have to make their way into a balloting place, or large facilities could sponsor their own certified crew of a handful of election judges and this one, single piece of hardware, the ballot scanner. If you want to go on your European vacation on election day, tough luck. Ya gotta vote in person at your normal polling place. If you get into a car wreck on the way to vote, better ask the ambulance driver to swing by the polls.

At some point you have to cut it off – that is, the ability of the government to go seeking out every single voter who wants to vote but doesn’t want to be bothered or capable of finding a nearby place to vote. Statisticians are good at making those sort of cost/benefit analyses. That way, everyone knows the rules and you line up your way to get to the polls in advance. Zero tolerance for vote harvesting! And voting is only on one day – election day - 6am to 8pm, period! No exceptions!

After you’ve done your part, we expect government to do its part.
All votes must be tabulated and available to the entire world over the internet by one minute before midnight local time. No exceptions! Very difficult to mount a lawsuit disputing such a system.

I’m still reporting from just outside the citadel of world freedom. Good Day