Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.0K

What we see, over and over, in US elections is a mysterious and large influx of "found" votes that come in in the small hours of the morning to flip a race (typically towards a Dem candidate).

This seems to happen when those rigging the vote can see the progress of the count and then determine how many "votes" they will need to "find" to get their desired result. To prevent this, rather than counting the votes for each candidate as the night progresses, all votes should just be counted (a total number of votes). Only once there are no more votes to be "found" should the actual tabulation of votes for each candidate begin. Once that point has been reached, there can be no additional votes added, and the total votes can be checked against the expected total number of votes. This approach does not require trust from any one party. Obviously, there would be issues such as invalid ballots, or miscounting (deliberate or accidental) that would still need to be taken into account, but the possibility of several hundred thousand votes, falling 95% to one candidate, being "found" at 3am is removed.

Alternatively, and possibly more simply, the cutoff for mail in ballots must be before in person voting even starts. Then you know the number of mail in ballots (which remain uncounted for the candidates until after voting has finished). You can also quite easily keep a count of in person votes, so at the end of in person voting, you have a total number of votes and the possibility of additional votes being added is removed.

Another measure that might help could be a form of voir dire for all poll workers, who are selected through sortition (like jury duty). Any who have a specific party affiliation, or who have worked on a political campaign would be excluded. Partisan people should not be counting votes, they cannot be trusted.

There are practical measures that could easily be taken that would not impact significantly on the cost or time required to conduct an election, but would significantly improve the integrity of the results. Whatever measures are put in place, they should always be based on zero trust on any party involved. Neither party seems willing to do anything like this, though the Dems would fight it to the death.

What we see, over and over, in US elections is a mysterious and large influx of "found" votes that come in in the small hours of the morning to flip a race (typically towards a Dem candidate). This seems to happen when those rigging the vote can see the progress of the count and then determine how many "votes" they will need to "find" to get their desired result. To prevent this, rather than counting the votes for each candidate as the night progresses, all votes should just be counted (a total number of votes). Only once there are no more votes to be "found" should the actual tabulation of votes for each candidate begin. Once that point has been reached, there can be no additional votes added, and the total votes can be checked against the expected total number of votes. This approach does not require trust from any one party. Obviously, there would be issues such as invalid ballots, or miscounting (deliberate or accidental) that would still need to be taken into account, but the possibility of several hundred thousand votes, falling 95% to one candidate, being "found" at 3am is removed. Alternatively, and possibly more simply, the cutoff for mail in ballots must be before in person voting even starts. Then you know the number of mail in ballots (which remain uncounted for the candidates until after voting has finished). You can also quite easily keep a count of in person votes, so at the end of in person voting, you have a total number of votes and the possibility of additional votes being added is removed. Another measure that might help could be a form of voir dire for all poll workers, who are selected through sortition (like jury duty). Any who have a specific party affiliation, or who have worked on a political campaign would be excluded. Partisan people should not be counting votes, they cannot be trusted. There are practical measures that could easily be taken that would not impact significantly on the cost or time required to conduct an election, but would significantly improve the integrity of the results. Whatever measures are put in place, they should always be based on zero trust on any party involved. Neither party seems willing to do anything like this, though the Dems would fight it to the death.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (49).
[–] • 3 pts (edited )

I think there might be a way around this problem but even it likely could be rigged as well.

1) On Jan 1st, PURGE all the voter rolls. Everyone who wants to vote in that year must register. Say Registration Season is Jan 2 to March 31. Typically no elections happen in that time frame.

2) Only people who paid NET into the Federal income tax system in the prior year can vote. So no more of these degenerates filling out a tax return on jan 2 and getting $10,000 from the government for not working. They don't get to vote. You want the right to vote, you invest in the system with your taxes. Period.

3) Voter ID strictly enforced. Anyone voting who shouldn't be gets sent to a work camp. Second offense is execution.

4) Repeal 26th amendment. No one under 25 should be voting. Brain doesn't stop developing until that age. Everyone under the age of 25 is a dumbass. Prove me wrong.

5) Active service military CANNOT vote. When you sign the dotted line to enlist, you are waiving essentially the rights under the Bill of Rights. Besides, voting for the Commander in Chief is a conflict of interest. Also, those with active employment with any alphabet agency (CIA, FBI, etc) are not eligible to vote. Neither are felons.

6) Speaking of the military, guess who gets TWO votes? Yep. Those whom have served and were honorable discharged.

7) ..and who will be counting the votes (at least in Federal elections)? If you said the military you'd again be correct. The military operates under the Judge Advocate General system and you don't fuck around with those people.

8) All voting is to be done ON SITE. The only exception will be the elderly and infirmed whose aliment does not allow easy movement but are still of sound mind. Military units assigned to voting detail will travel to those locations.

Of course my idea is a working idea where the bugs need to be ironed out, but this is the general model of what needs to be done to fix this shit.

[–] • 0 pt

guess who doesn't pay in "net" the elderly / retired / disability. So no worries about them see number 8. By your own rules they get no say, which might be fine.

[–] • 0 pt

I hadn't thought much about retired persons. They should be allowed to vote but figuring out who worked all their lives and retired vs a lifetime welfare parasite and now they are "retired" might require research on the backend.