🍑
. There's a lot of talk about going back to hand counted ballots. And the Deep State is opposing this idea as firmly as it can, because hand-count, with sworn witnesses, makes it far more difficult for them to illegally influence the election.
Though I believe that is quite a contradiction. Assuming the real state is as big and powerful as you assume it is, what would stop it from taking care of those sworn witnesses by bribery and then stuffing the ballots and commit election fraud?
Election fraud is posible even if democracy is being kept as rudimentary as possible using paper and pencils to elect an official.
It is quite interesting how, on one hand you seem to oppose the use of technology to carry out the will of the people and elect a president, while on the other hand you also partake in this forum which is about technology, in this case decentralized technology.
Would you like to people vote using cryptographic keys instead of paper? Or would you still believe the deep state is powerful enough to break asymmetric protocols like the ones used to secure Bitcoin?
Also, I am pretty sure the presidential election in which Trump won, was done using machines and electronics to make the process faster and more convenient for people, am I wrong?
Contradiction? With hand counting, the Deep State has to target each counter individually. Much more work than flipping a switch on the Internet to change the votes across the board on election voting machines, don't you think?
The Deep State uses lies in the media to trick the people into believing the wrong thing, and the people make the wrong changes because of what they are tricked into believing. The globalists must act now if they want any success. Why? Because the people are using private and semi-private media to find out what the truth is. DS lies aren't working any longer.
You don't seem to understand that technology is not the focus. It's how technology is used that is the focus.
Voting by the people isn't the point. It's what the Electoral College perceives that the people want through the people-vote. Then the EC makes its decisions to elect the president of the people's choice. They better have good evidence for the way they vote, because they can be prosecuted for going against the wishes of the people of their district.
FAST voting is less desirable than accurate voting, right? Or are you one of the behind-the-scenes voting-machine controllers?