Just ask anybody responsible for ensuring faith in our elections, and they’ll tell you those electronic ballot counting contraptions are the bomb diggity.

We’ve seen more than a few incidents where these digital watchdogs of the secret ballot didn’t do the job and by a significant margin. But if you dare bring up something like vote-flipping, they’ll tell you it’s a fairy story even when it keeps happening.

Just like what happened in Cherokee County, Kansas. Just a human error, technical glitch, or “we caught it in time”

Excuses we’ve been hearing every single time.  

Cherokee County, KS’s election was held last Tuesday on August 2nd.  During a post election audit, they discovered that the thumb drives used in the election flipped the votes cast for District 1 County Commissioner Myra Frazier and instead gave them to her opponent, Lance Nichols, who was initially declared the winner.

Here’s what ‘KSNF Joplin’ reported:

“Upon discovering the improper programming, I immediately contacted representatives of Atchison, Kansas-based Lockwood Elections, who is responsible for programming the thumb drives used in our elections.  The company recognized their error, and my office has since re-tabulated the ballots by a hand count audit, which resulted in Commissioner Frazier retaining her party’s nomination for the November General Election later this year.  The Commission race was the only one impacted by the company’s error and I have already visited with both candidates impacted,” said County Clerk Rebecca Brassart.  

“This is a good example of why we verify the accuracy of election results by conducting a post audit of election results, regardless of what the unofficial election night numbers might indicate.  I again want to assure the citizens of Cherokee County how important election accuracy is to me and reiterate my commitment to ensuring every valid vote is properly counted,” she concluded.

The software was improperly programmed, and the machine just gave votes for one candidate to another. A simple coding error that, it seems to me, can appear anywhere it is wanted.

As for that screw-up in Kansas? State law requires poll workers to audit certain races based on the type and year of the election.

And since the only race alleged to be impacted by this questionable explanation of a “compromised thumb drive” was a county commissioner race, it is a pure fluke that that was one of the races selected to be audited.  Had any other race been selected, the results of this race would have gone unaltered and entirely against the will of the People of Cherokee County, KS.  Much like Antrim, where it was picked up the next morning by a local constituent who voiced his concern.  Or Dekalb, where it was only caught because the candidate showed zero votes in her own precinct.  Or Williamson, TN where a poll worker was keeping a tally of the ballots counted on a pad of paper and realized the tabulator tapes at the end of the night were way off.

More from ‘The Gateway Pundit‘:

Another words:  How many races go unchecked?  How many races have one of these “human errors” or “glitches” and somehow slides under the radar?

And perhaps the most relevant question of all, especially with the lawsuits in Colorado regarding the 53% adjudication in El Paso during the recount:

How did these machines pass the Logic and Accuracy Test?

Well, according to KOAM News:

Officials say the drives worked properlyduring testing, however, the malfunction was detected after the voting process.

Can these machines be programmed to act appropriately during a Logic and Accuracy Test?  Last week, we saw a small county in Michigan have major discrepancies with the ballots.  It was, once again, chalked up as <insert lame excuse here>.  But the real question that should have been asked, and should be asked in all these examples:

How do they pass the Logic and Accuracy Test?

Or is the L&A test just smoke and mirrors to give us a warm gooey feeling that the machines are doing exactly what they should be.

If these “machines” are so reliable, why do we keep encountering these issues, like an entire election flipped because the machine stole votes for one candidate and gave them to another? A flip that doesn’t happen unless someone tells the machine to do that.

And more importantly, much like what they are doing to public health, who gains by ensuring that the institution is so corrupted that (inevitably) no one trusts it?

Sources: TheGatewayPundit, MSN, KOAM News

About The Author

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.