The below is the opinion of the author, while truth is key and the author should still cite sources, it is important for us to let readers know that the information below is not meant to be presented as news.
So the GA “audit” started at 9am this morning.
Per the Sec of State, this wasn’t requested by any candidate and is being done of their own choosing.
During yesterday’s press conference the Sec of State finished by saying “This is an audit, not a re-count, re-counts are handled under a different section of the law. What we are doing is an Audit with a hand re-talley.”
So I decided to take a look at what an “Audit” constitutes.
An audit is purely to ensure that the machines counted 0-whatever number, correctly. It is a functionality test of the machine and not a re-count of the vote.
So why does that matter? Because during this Audit, there will no checking the validity of the ballot. There will be no checking to make sure the dates are correct, that the person the vote represents is alive, is an actual resident. This is merely a check to make sure a machine can count from 0 to a number.
While an “Audit” sounds official, and will certainly put to rest a few of the concerns, it does absolutely nothing to put to rest the majority of issues that half the population has. For instance, if a tray of 1000 votes comes in, all with the same signature or is dated as being received prior to the date it was mailed to the voter, then those votes are not going to be identified, they will be counted 0-1000 by the voting machine and will be 100% ok because that’s all the Audit is looking for.GA state law grants any candidate in a race that is within 1% to call for an actual re-count of the vote, which is the process in which the votes are the actual center of attention and not the machines counting ability.
The Sec of State hedged this in his comments yesterday stating, without any context, that if the Audit comes back close, then the need for a re-count is baseless.
The state’s willingness to Audit the machines while decrying the need for an actual re-count all while note actually explaining the difference to the citizens of the state, puts into focus the lack of honesty and transparency that has, and should have, members of both parties asking what the fuck is actually going on.
The use of digital voting systems is still rather new in a lot of places. It uses technologies that are complicated and for the most part covered by patents and claims of company secrets. These are systems that are being used by intelligent, dedicated, but still, human operators that for the most have just enough of a technical background to run the system they have specifically been trained on, with no understanding of the underlying technology.
Like Diebold came under fire in the 2000 elections when serious questions of the fair and correct operation of their machines came under question, Dominion Software has come under question in this election. Noted, verified, and consequential “Glitches” have occurred in their systems during this election. From vote switches of thousands of votes to a “Glitch” that saw a candidate concede his election, just to find out the next day he’d actually won.
The very notion of the secret ballot, the bedrock of our voting system, requires that we trust that once we have placed that vote it will make it to the talley. That our vote counts exactly as much as the citizen beside us, that our stake in the country is all equal.
The downside to that is that tracking that vote once it leaves your hand is extremely hard to do. Once it leaves your hand, it is but a vote, separate from you, untraceable to you.
We have got to ensure that system is correct. That each vote, regardless of party, counts. This year the Republicans are in the courts, next election it could just as easily be the Democrats. If we allow, without question, a system to be used, then any deficiency in that system will be used by those in power without thought and we will quickly watch our control of our master watered down to nothing.
No state is constitutionally required to act on certification until Dec 12th. On that date, the EC electors will be sat from each state and a president will be named. The rush to “certify the vote” prior to that is dishonest and questionable. What is served by not allowing investigation when nothing is served by certifying early?
I don’t care who you voted for, who wins. What I care about is that we never become complacent to a media and political class that do not have our be interest at heart