this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024

440 points (98.9% liked)

News

23258 readers

2796 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

Blackbeard@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

440

Scheme to cast votes on stolen mail ballots thwarted by Colorado election officials. (coloradosun.com)

submitted 3 days ago by Dot to c/news@lemmy.world

70 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 234 points 3 days ago (6 children)

They go out of their way in the article to not cast any partisan aspirations on the scheme. But it is the same county where Tina Peters used to be the county clerk, and is now in jail after being convicted of election shenanigans for Trump. And it looks like it had the complicity of at least one judge.

Watch this one, folks. The details sadly won't come out until after the election, but when they do I think we will find that Republican talk about election fraud is also projection, like all their other complaints.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago

Every accusation is a confession

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 76 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's so fucking disgusting. The Republicans have 252527171 ways to try to win this, and we have 1.

Kamala needs to be perfect and Trump could walk on stage with nothing but a shit filled diaper, do the Hitler salute and somehow gain in the poles... It's infuriating.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Harris and Trump have very different bases.

If Trump went to New York and shot a black person, his base wouldn't care whereas if Harris did, the Democrats would be in an uproar.

However, if Trump went to New York and gave people COVID shots, now his base would be fucking furious.

Both candidates are appealing to their base. It's just the Democratic base is a bunch of sane and rational people.

[–] Red_October@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I call bullshit on Trump's base not caring if he just openly shot a black person. They wouldn't ignore that, they'd love it.

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

It was an IMMIGRANT ( i.e. former slave descendant )

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

And the republican base think the greatest part of America was the confederacy.

Maga indeed.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

republicans would NEVER

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

IDK about projection, but if you convince people that a system is corrupt, they're much more likely to cheat.

[–] 418_im_a_teapot@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago

A little of column A; a little of column B.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (4 children)

You're probably right but I don't really get it. Mesa County is so red that Trump won by 28 points in 2020. What was this person trying to achieve? For that matter, what was Tina Peters was trying to achieve? I just don't understand how either of them could have made a difference when, in 2020, Trump won by over 25K votes out of a total of 91K votes cast and 107K registered voters.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Perhaps they wanted it to be caught, where it wouldn't make a difference if it wasn't, in order to shore up their future claims that more of the same occurred in more competitive districts. As well as undermining faith in the election as a whole.

[–] 418_im_a_teapot@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago

That’s actually a very insightful theory.

But if I had to bet on it, I’d still put my money on outright stupidity.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

the county totals don't matter for president, it is counted statewide.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] alquicksilver@lemmy.world 108 points 3 days ago (5 children)

“We don’t know the motive,” she said.

Really? You don't know the motive? I'd give anyone on the internet three guesses, and the first two don't count.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago

They were trying to, uh... outspit god for scrump. No wait, that's not it, uh... emit cod for gump? That doesn't sound right either... OH, I think I get it: they were trying to commit fraud for Trump.

[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 13 points 3 days ago

I would bet the house on the motive and who they voted for.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] gargamel@leminal.space 46 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

However, three ballots were counted before election officials could pull them from the process because they passed through the signature verification process. Those votes cannot be remedied or removed.

What? So the person whose ballot was stolen now has their vote cast for trump (let's be real there is a 99.99% chance it was a trumper who did this even they are being coy about it) and there is nothing they can do about it? WTF?

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

They will likely revamp the process. The problem is, once the ballot is counted, the vote is separated from the voter, so there's no link to who the person was and who they voted for.

It's a process meant for privacy. That someone was able to accurately forge signatures enough to pass verification (which is handled by trained humans) is a bit on the "this was creepy/planned" side, which is likely how the outlier event happened.

America isn't there yet, but cryptographic hashes anonymizing but connecting a vote to a voter, so the vote could be anonymously recalled for an attack like this would likely be the best privacy-preserving process.

[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

99% of Congress is too old to understand a word you just said... Someday it'll all be zoomers, and then maybe tech will start to help us

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Maybe.

Millennials, zoomers and even gen alpha likely won't be much different. There's a difference between understanding how to use technology and understanding the intricacies of technology, understanding how to regulate or use different functions of it. The majority of boomers know how to use a modern phone. They don't know how to properly take care of the phone nor do they understand how it functions, but they know how to use it. A lot of younger people aren't much different.

[–] DokPsy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Idk about that majority of boomers know how to use a modern phone. Make calls, text, play candy crush, and go on Facebook, sure but that's hardly knowing how to use it beyond surface level.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] mipadaitu@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wait, how exactly could a crypto hash connect a vote to a voter and still be anonymous...

[–] plerwf@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Can identify one way, from voter to vote. If a voter for some valid reason has to re-vote, the hash-id could be used to only count the person's vote with the last timestamp.

[–] diffusive@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

What would you hash, though? The name? The SSN? These are all know plaintexts…

If you want to de-anonymise a vote with any of these you just make a rainbow table of all voters.

Do you add salt? But now salt becomes a secret… how does the secret is picked? Someone centrally? Back to rainbow table. Everyone picks one? Then the voters has to write the hash… at that point there is no benefit with an unique id that is not really anonymous

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

It could go a number of ways.

An attempt to stuff a ballot box for their preferred candidate
An attempt to invalidate voting by mail by conducting obvious fraud, then publicly blame vote by mail
An attempt to vote for an opponent to claim the opposition is conducting fraud

[–] Silentiea@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Further down it states:

All of the voters affected by the Mesa County fraud will be offered a new ballot.

So does that mean those voters are counted twice? One fraud and one real, or...?

[–] SuperEars@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

That's how I interpreted it, yes. The criminal(s) succeeded in getting 3 illegal votes into the count beyond retrieval. The victims of stolen ballots need not lose their votes.

[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 49 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Those three ballots represent 0.003% of the total ballots cast in the county in the last presidential election year.

Or put another way: 25% of the known fraudulent ballots got through.

I hope they catch the perpetrator(s) and inflict maximum justice.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 32 points 3 days ago (1 children)

0% would have gotten through if the judge had done their job.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

With less than 100k voters in the county, there is a non-zero chance that the margin will be within 3 votes, and now this scheme has given both sides a legitimate excuse to hold up certification if the margin is close. Even if it's not within 3 votes, we know there is shady shit going on.

Now, it does look like this county is heavily Republican. But the State will probably go to Harris, so any delays might endanger the casting of CO's 10 Electoral Votes .

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

Technically there's a non-zero chance of the margin being within three votes for any population of voters.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

“We don’t know the motive,” she said.

are you fucking serious?

[–] Throw_away_migrator@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I think it's a poor phrasing. A more accurate statement would have been, "We have not been able to confirm a motive at this time" or similar. Basically leaving room for the idea that we all more or less know what the motive was, while acknowledging that's it has not (yet) been proven conclusively.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 35 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Griswold said she also couldn’t discuss the “political implications” of the case, meaning whether the person or people behind the scheme had a political motivation and what candidates they voted for on the stolen ballots.

“We don’t know the motive,” she said.

Hmm, can we place bets on which party the fraudulent votes supported? And maybe taking a look at that would give a clue to the motive?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 3 days ago

If they were a Democrat, we would "know the motive."

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (14 children)

It will be important to publicize which side is implicated ASAP - and do so clearly with an authoritative voice.

load more comments (14 replies)

load more comments