09-06-2022: VOTING MADE EASY
In June 1977, London’s Guardian attributed the following remark to reputedly anti-Communist Nicaraguan dictator, Anastasio Somoza Garćia (1896-1956), assassinated on September 21, 1956. I don’t know when Mr. García’s quote was recorded, but here it is, as though proudly spoken in Washington D.C., November 4, 2020.
“Indeed, you won the elections, but I won the count.“
If responsible citizens believe elections are important in terms of real-life consequences, and if we care about each other, maybe we can agree honest elections are important for ensuring a balance of power. Interestingly, when subversive groups want to hog power to control other people; elections become even more important—so critical in fact, they require fraud to ensure controlled outcomes. American elections have reached this level of criminality, so now we the people of Main Street MUST fix the mess we allowed to be made—because most, if not all so-called elected representatives are now fraudulently selected pawns of special multinational interests who no longer represent Main Street constituents. How can we ensure citizen ability to elect honest candidates?
♣
The answer is simpler than we are told by agendavized pundits. We might notice if we listen carefully, a tendency of so-called experts to over-complicate problem analysis. We might also notice if paying attention, this tendency of experts is often linked to covering up corruption, in this case, election fraud on a national scale.
From an engineering perspective, the honest voting fix is simple and straight forward to implement—at least if election officials aren’t covertly supporting election fraud. Here’s a few gray-haired suggestions.
♣
First of all, let’s remind ourselves of two facts.
1. Voting by mail cannot be allowed as there is no possible way to secure or verify CHAIN OF CUSTODY. Without a reliably secure chain of custody, election security is impossible. Mail-in voting is fraud-prone and logistically difficult even when implementation is honestly attempted by election officials—apparently an increasingly rare occurrence.
2. Every brand of electronic voting machine I know of CALCULATES VOTES. Why would any voting machine need calculation programming when its only job is to COUNT VOTES—NOT CALCULATE VOTES? A calculating voting device is a fraudulent device by definition. Who was it exactly that cast that 0.3 vote? The ground-up design function of a vote calculating machine is manipulation and cheating of vote counts by calculating deceit. The increased complexity of calculating software versus counting software is not justifiable and destroys integrity of honest elections. This is just common sense. Any State or County official buying and using calculators instead of counters for any step in the election tabulation process MUST be investigated for election fraud and prosecuted if evidence demonstrates criminality. I suppose gullible incompetence could be excused from criminal charges, but firing is mandatory in all cases. Of course, the calculating machine itself speaks for its built-in corruption enabling design. Today’s voting machines have no need to be hacked—they are designed to be manipulated through calculation, whether connected to the internet or not. Internet connections just enhance ability to cheat remotely from anywhere in the world while confounding electronic audit trails. Electronic voting is a proven practical tool for dependable election fraud.
♣
Eight Honest Election Protocol Suggestions:
1. VOTER IDENTIFICATION is required.
2. Voting occurs on one day. We institute VOTING DAY—not voting month and certainly not EARLY VOTING nor LATE VOTING, both ensuring maximum possible time for fraudulent planning and execution.
A. Precincts must be small enough in terms of population to enable efficient, accurate, observable vote counting of all cast paper ballots within six (6) hours of the close of poll locations.
B. With authenticated ID presented, absentee ballots, obtained personally at the County Recorder’s Office (or other officially designated office) can be allowable as in the less abusive past.
3. A verifiable, inspectable CHAIN OF CUSTODY must be provided for every ballot cast.
4. All ballots are officially printed on certified, routinely inspected ballot paper with appropriate watermarks or other visible authentication indicators. No Political Party identification ballot markers can be allowed outside closed primary elections.
5. No vote is cast, handled, or counted without unimpeded observation by a minimum of three certified observers appointed by each political party involved in the election. Five observers is even better.
6. Item 4 above eliminates electronic voting since observable verification of electronically cast votes is impossible.
A. Votes cast using paper ballots must be hand-counted per provisions of item 3 above.
7. Paper ballot marking devices unable to damage or confuse the ballot MUST be standardized within each State and provided to voters in good condition at all voting locations.
8. Elected Secretaries of State or Commonwealth (Massachusetts, Pennsylvania &Virginia), as well as Lieutenant Governors (Alaska, Hawaii & Utah) are members of political parties, therefore by definition are partisan in terms of party loyalty bias. The same holds true in States where the Secretary of State is appointed by an elected Governor or State Legislature. No conflicted office is well suited to securing fair and honest elections. Every State should have a State Elections Director appointed by a committee of Precinct Committee Persons from each party active in the State, with each Party having three PC Committee Members, each having one vote in choosing the State Elections Director—or some other appropriately less biased system.
Honest voting is this simple.
Debated alternatives to paper ballots cast in person on the same day are just the noise of distraction.