Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> One possibility is that procedures vary across the state, as some other comments here might indicate. Another is that the system the author participated in isn't actually as immune to fraud as he thinks.

Some other possibilities might be that primary elections use a different process and/or undergo less scrutiny than general elections, or that procedures have changed since 2016.

As you said, it'd be an interesting exercise to go through exactly what DeMuro did and figure out whether what happened then would or would not work now.

Incidentally, it seems the author might have had to deal with a similar situation:

> The other event came when a discrepancy developed between the number of votes recorded by the machine and the number of voters tallied in the books: one vote was recorded in the books that was not recorded by the machines. We ultimately concluded that someone had just walked out of the polling place after they were handed their ballot, never casting their vote on the machine. Other possibilities which we ultimately ruled out were election board error, or that the voter voted in the wrong division after receiving their ballot. The redundant records — the index card, the registration book, the list of voters — helped to narrow down the possible causes. In the end, there was nothing we could do about it.

So there's an argument to be made that what DeMuro did (ringing up votes on the machine) could have been caught.



Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: