Politically High-Tech
A podcast with facts and opinions on different topics like politics, policy, technology especially AI, spirituality and development! For this podcast, development simply means tip, product and/or etc. can benefit humanity. This show aims to show political viewpoints and sometimes praises/criticizes them. He is a wildcard sometimes. For Technology episodes, this show focuses on products (mostly AI) with pros, cons and sometimes give a hint of future update. For Development episodes, the podcast focuses on tips to improve as a human spiritually, socially, emotionally and more. All political, AI lovers and haters, and all religions are welcome! This is an adult show. Minors should not be listening to this podcast! This podcast proudly discriminates bad characters and nothing else.
Politically High-Tech
287-Securing Democracy Through Technology with Christopher Baum
Christopher Baum shares his expertise on voting technology and election integrity systems designed to ensure fair and accurate vote counting for all citizens.
• Vote Right is developing mobile and precinct voting systems currently pursuing federal certification
• Mobile voting technology will enable secure, verifiable voting from phones with multiple security layers
• Precinct systems will operate offline with triple redundancy for each ballot and support up to 22 languages
• Hand-counting ballots is prohibitively expensive, costing an estimated $659,000 for Shasta County's 53,000 primary ballots
• Human counting is inherently flawed and susceptible to both unintentional errors and potential manipulation
• Low primary turnout (typically 7-8% of eligible voters) gives disproportionate power to partisan extremes
• Winners of elections have little incentive to reform systems that elected them, while losers lack the power
• Media fragmentation contributes to information bubbles and decreased trust in election processes
• Early voting and accessible systems help increase participation and make elections more inclusive
• Technology that supports voters with disabilities ensures everyone's voice can be heard in elections
Visit www.votrite.com for more information about election technology and voter resources.
Voter resources
https://voterite.com/voter-resources/
Follow your host at
YouTube and Rumble for video content
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUxk1oJBVw-IAZTqChH70ag
https://rumble.com/c/c-4236474
Facebook to receive updates
https://www.facebook.com/EliasEllusion/
Twitter (yes, I refuse to call it X)
https://x.com/politicallyht
Welcome everyone to Politically High Tech. With your host, elias, I have a newcomer. I like it actually getting a lot of newcomers. I feel like I was relying on the reoccurring guests a bit more. Maybe that's just me. It was probably like 20% reoccurring guests. Maybe that will drop, it doesn't matter to me. I reach out to them if they want to come back. Some answer, some don't. Hey, everybody's busy. You can't be entitled. I mean, you want me to wish that I could pull a gun and go through the screen and threaten them to come. Well then, you got a crazy imagination. I wish I could do that too, but I can't, and it's probably for the better that you can't do that. Let's just say that it's for the better. This is why I say things are not allowed, okay. So I have a new guest here and he's gonna get into the technical, the technical parts.
Speaker 1:This is stuff that I don't talk about a lot. I talk about the news, about what the left is saying, what the right is saying and sometimes the center or the libertarian, if I got time. Or just debating the guests, not debate. When I'm saying interview, the most we've interviewed a few times has been debates. That's where I feel like if we establish the first base, I just think you gotta establish a rapport first. That's how I normally roll. I'm not gonna just say, hey you, you're a stupid MAGA or you're a progressive socialist dummy. No, that's just me wanting to start a fight. Right, I've tried bringing them together. I've tried bringing some camps together. I don't care about the far left and the far right, that much you all lost your minds already. I'm not gonna bother with you. Maybe far right, that much Y'all lost your minds already, I'm not going to bother with you. I you know. Maybe, if you want to think, maybe I got to channel my spirituality, maybe something will change there. But at the same time, it's free will, and free will is the other person has to be ready too. They're not ready. You got to keep moving. You got to keep moving. But we're going to take a dig. Technical voting tech. This is stuff that most people don't talk about unless they feel like there's fraud. Election integrity is tainted. You know all of that and so far has come from.
Speaker 1:I'll say one more according to the mainstream media let me just frame it that way, because the left talks about it too, but they're all on the job. But the mainstream media points to the right doing, especially with the 2020 elections. Look, I'm just'm just going to say like it is. It was a weird, it was flawed, but I still believe Joe Biden is a legitimate winner and I'm no fan of Joe Biden. I'm going to stand by the facts. I'm not a fan of Joe Biden. I vote for neither candidate, but I stand by the fact that he won.
Speaker 1:Okay, and there are certain people certain people on the social media left I'm going to call them said that, oh, the election was stolen for Kamala. But you see, that's not Democrat party. I was just a few people who think the election is stolen. Give me the receipts. Give the people the receipts, right, take it to court.
Speaker 1:Okay, do things like that, don't just spew it out on social media. You sound no better than the MAGA people who said that, oh, trump is going to be president. Oh, biden is going to move the side in a few months. No, you're crazy, and I was being spewed for a while. I think election integrity is very important. I don't care where you lean, that's not. I don't care about that as much. We just want elections to be fair and secure. I'm sure everybody could agree with that. Unless you're anarchist and you want to overthrow america, I will be more than happy to actually debate you and probably shut you down or even humiliate you from there. If you're extremist and I'll be more than happy to debate you, because you may shout, you may go crazy, but you're not smart and that makes me confident. To debate you make you look stupid. But anyways, enough of my random monologue here. We gotta set things straight, okay, and let's introduce christopher bomb. I said the last name, right yes, you did sir okay, very good, look, I don't mind correction.
Speaker 1:I don't mind it. It's not about my ego and if and like. This is why I say people, before the true fires of misinformation, you have to be willing to be corrected. Sometimes you're going to be spreading misinformation that you're not even realized. Okay, and I just you know you have to put your ego aside. If you think you're right all the time, there's something clearly wrong with you. Okay, but I'm not going to get into that. This is not development. We're not going to talk about how we could tackle those kind of issues. We're going to talk about the voting tech and whatever else happens from here. So let's start with this very easy question what do you want the listeners and the viewers to know about you?
Speaker 2:What I want the visitors to know about me and the listeners to know about me is that I am dedicated to making sure that elections are fair and that the people who vote have their votes counted, and counted exactly, correctly and exactly once. And I'm trying to beat the record for the shortest intro.
Speaker 1:Wow, I think that might be the winner. I got to really check and do an analysis, but I think that's a gold medal already, if I'm if I'm being a little humble there. Yeah, that is a not even a freaking minute man. It's like barely 10 seconds there. I don't know. We wanted to do a reward for a service intro and I think this is a winner here. I don't know if you want to compete with that. I recommend you don't. But you know, free will, free will, right. You think you could challenge? You think you want to just say if you just say just your name, that doesn't count, you just said his name.
Speaker 1:A very clear, concise, short mission. That's all that's needed. Those are your rules. Okay, for future guests or returning guests, I force you to be short about it because they kind of know who you are. We can link the previous episodes, yeah, so they kind of know who you are. We can link the previous episodes, uh, yeah, so I I kind of treat you not as good from there when it comes to intro. All right, enough of my um yammering. Uh, a lot of the partnership. I see there are new york based and I'm sure there is probably larger than that um. Correct me if I'm wrong, do you? You just do local and state um election.
Speaker 2:we are bringing a couple of systems to market. We're going through the process right now for certification to handle national elections as well and private elections, because people forget how many private elections there are. But you got union elections and home ownership association elections and stuff like that, and all of those have to be accurate, for people have said it's unfair and rigged.
Speaker 1:You know we try to ensure that it's not unfair or rigged Right. That'd be the exact opposite.
Speaker 2:So anything else you want to add, no, that's basically what we do, I mean at Vote Right. We're bringing a new kind of technology and very interesting stuff. Technically, my background is in government technology. I've been working in that area for more than 30 years. Well, you've seen my bio and it's something that's important to me on a personal level because I got involved in it early. Back in the late 19s, I was working with a consulting firm and we were helping governments around the world get ready for Y2K and one of the things that I started looking at very early was, hey, election systems aren't designed to handle this kind of volume and these kinds of issues. They're old systems. They're not designed for four-digit years. A lot of them at that point had been developed in the 90s and 60s. You're probably not old enough to remember this, but you probably read about the Bush-Gore elections in 2000 with the hanging chads. Yeah, I've got one of those voting systems in my basement, so I've been doing this a long time.
Speaker 1:He says you know, veteran, I'm going to call veterans of life. I refuse to use the word elder, I don't think that's even good enough. The veterans of life, vlf for short. It sounds funny. Oh well, but we need to come on a new tour. I just think elder has some to me. This is just me, particularly me, I'd say. It has like a certain connotation. I expect it to be kooky and crazy and a bit delusional, detached from reality, all that. So this is a nice way of saying that I avoid using old on someone to be obnoxious about it. You know that's easy for me, but elder is, I think it's a harder change for society.
Speaker 2:Or I just call them just simply veterans. I don't see any reason, you know, not to be unhappy that I haven't died yet.
Speaker 1:Very true. You see, this is a spiritual part of it Appreciation. I don't care what higher power you believe in, you just got to be grateful for this to be alive, you know. So we just forget the simple stuff.
Speaker 2:I definitely believe in a higher power. And she's in the next room. Figure that out.
Speaker 1:I'm not going to spoon feed the answers. Listeners and viewers Figure that out. You got the comment section to guess that? Okay, you got the comment section just for that. But no, that's good. You already answered, actually, the next question. I have you expanded this to the national and federal level? That touches that? What states are you currently running right now with this technology?
Speaker 2:We have not had federal certification yet, so we're not in any states yet and we're going with two very different directions at the same time, which complicates things. But one is a mobile system You'll be securely able to vote from your phone and have it be verifiable and not cheatable. And the other is your typical precinct system, but it's different than most also because it's got multiple redundancies and it's not networked to anything. So if you go in and vote on a system, you're voting on that system, not a whole network of systems. But you can vote in up to 22 different languages, depending on the jurisdiction. You can vote. You can change the display.
Speaker 2:If you have some kind of color blindness or you need to change the font size, or if you are hearing impaired, you can see everything spelled out. If you're visually impaired, you can have it in audio all on the same system. It's even designed so that, if your jurisdiction allows it, the voting system can be moved outside so somebody can vote from their car if they can't come in. And it's all done on a regular system. When you vote you get to see it, depending on how the jurisdiction sets it up. It can be either printed, but either way it's triple recorded randomly but with a unique identifier so they can be tied back together but not tied to the voter. So I have three separate secured recordings of each vote, triple redundant, stored in separate places. So they all have to be altered. On a non-network system. It doesn't get any better than that.
Speaker 1:Wow, my mind is actually blown. This is security. Forget on steroids. This is actually blown. This is security. Forget on steroids. This is like security. We got security with other securities. Make sure that we don't have.
Speaker 1:You know, some people theorize dead people voting or voting two or three times. You know that's fraud, right there. Right, we don't have to get into the legal technicalities or even debate. There's no debating, right, all right, especially if you could prove it. You can't just say it either. You know, like hearsay or whatever term they use I'm not a legal buff, disclaimer but you know we should know crime, especially when it's basic, blatant and obvious. You know, that's all I'm going to say. I think that's very impressive. Mobile phone and obvious. You know, that's all I'm going to say. I think that's very impressive. Mobile phone and address. And see, this is a democracy that I'm trying to just see, a very inclusive, accessible democracy, even those with various disabilities that you already pointed out, which hearing impaired, visual impaired, and you also have languages, depending on the jurisdiction. New York will have a lot of languages for sure once it's implemented there, as opposed to somewhere like Kansas where it could just be English if by miracle.
Speaker 2:You'd be surprised where there are, because what's happened is different groups have come over at different times and they've settled in different parts of the country. So you get places where you have a large Haitian population, or you know where I went to high school in Millville, new Jersey large Ukrainian population. It just happened. Nope, true, true.
Speaker 1:You see, right there, I was about to just double. I was not double down, I was about to just continue it, but then, out of instinct, okay, I'm going off course, you got to be sensitive to that. This is how someone's really trying to fight misinformation. I'm just going by what I think. I know you have to be willing to be corrected. This is a good example right here. Because he nodded his head. No, hey, what did I say? Instead of just, oh, this guy here, who the heck you think he is? I could just, you know, enforce my ego, whatever, make myself feel good, but no, you know, you'll just click this podcast, just so, you know, demonstrate what a train wreck it is. Just for cheap laughs and clicks and maybe a cheap fame for me, infamy, really. Also. Look at this unhinged podcast. Oh, this egos through the roof, man. But no see, this is, I will say, very good example of me being true to my word combat misinformation. I unknowingly would have spread it. That's a good thing. How to be sensitive. So it's true, you never know, because I check upstate.
Speaker 1:Let me just use an upstate New York case, not as diverse, but Spring Valley. The Haitian and the Mexican population are huge, yep, huge in that area, day rate outnumbered, I would say, caucasians, you know, in some parts I mean, I was just shocked just to see that. So I thought upstate would just be, I would just assume, from the city, 99% white people and I'll be lucky just to find a minority. Oh, the minority was actually very easy to find. Yeah, that was to my shock and I was just like, okay, there was a lot, there was Haitians and Mexicans. Now, you're not New York City, we ain't no. New York City's diverse. That's well established, overly established. I'm talking about parts of upstate New York, that's, you know. It's not even being considered in a mainstream consciousness. They just think all of New York is in the city.
Speaker 2:It's funny and it is strange to me. I've had the privilege of being in a lot of places around the world and in a lot of states. The second best Thai food I ever had in my life was at the airport in Bangor, maine. Turns out that there was a family, had moved there and saw an opportunity. They had come over from Thailand and opened up a Thai restaurant. Figured you know, if they were in the airport they'd get a bigger and it was wonderful. It's like I did not expect to find a great type restaurant in banger, maine. You'd be surprised.
Speaker 1:That's what's so good about traveling, right? It just opens up so much horizons. It's I cannot stress it enough that you'll be shocked. You know, sadly, tv has brainwashed a lot of us, including me. I'm not immune to it. Just because I'm a host does make me special. We just think the world is, you know, perceived a certain way. We just go with that because we don't have anything to replace. But once you go in there, your experience is like this is interesting. Some things may be worse than you expect, some things can be better than you expect, some things can be pleasantly surprising. Let me just say that you know, and some places are, and you know some places would be more diverse than you know, than you think you know, and states like I like to visit Maine at one point, but you know you just can't go by.
Speaker 1:What TV tells you is such a limited respect. It's good, I'll say it's a good starting point. But traveling, they were really just enrich the experience. Unless, I don't know, you want to just stay home and just be addicted to the computer, burn your eyes out, just be a troller, or all that. Look at that part. I would just leave. I would just leave. Look, I want to go get some clean air. We human beings, we are social animals. We got to do more than just be on the computer.
Speaker 2:But we want them to stay on their computers and devices long enough to see your podcast, exactly.
Speaker 1:That's the only hypocrisy I will obviously accept.
Speaker 2:No, that's not hypocrisy, that's honesty. That's not hypocrisy, that's honesty.
Speaker 1:That's true, that's honesty. See, I'm self-deprecating here. You know, you listen along the way, you don't have to watch me. Look, I know I'm handsome. You listen along the way and you know, and of course, watch me. You know, that's the only exception, of course, and I'll say other good podcasts would be nice. There's other great ones out there that I like to listen to and some of the I always shout out to this one.
Speaker 1:I think this one's really good putting the left and the right together. They debate, they're passionate, I would say sometimes provocative, which is fine, but they always maintain some level of civility. It gets heated but they don't go. You know they don't go. I would say go to antagonistic bully it just I. I mean they sometimes really good ideas. I think that's the most is gone. But I would say I always give a shout to left, right and center. I think it's a very good show and people should really check them out. I know we don't put on another podcast, but I'll say that's a very good one to improve political discourse. You know I decide sometimes the center holds. Sometimes I think he's a little biased on the right, some issues was I think he's a little buyers on the left and some issues. But hey, no, I could be perfect, but otherwise I think he does a great job facilitating conversation that I cannot take away from the sector.
Speaker 2:And I think that's important. I mean, when I was taught economics in college, it was team taught two guys One was a conservative and one was a communist and they team taught economics.
Speaker 1:Wow, that's. That's great. Yeah, because you have. I'm sure economists have their way of thinking and the conservatives got their way of thinking. In fact, they was able to work it together. See, that's amazing. So you can debate ideas. You pass your ideas. I don't love the person's idea. You don't say oh, you're economists, don't want to take everything away, don't be a conservative. Oh, you selfish conservatives. You just you, selfish conservatives. You just want to run rampant and you don't care about other people. You're too cold. Those are normal. You know target points for opposing groups.
Speaker 2:I will say let's bring that back to elections, because I think the reason why we have become so divisive in the United States is the way that elections are run, and again we're going to talk about process here. The current process in most areas is that you have a primary election where the candidate is selected, and then a general election where the candidates face off. The problem is that in many areas not New York this time, but in many areas people don't show up for the primaries. Who shows up for the primaries? The hardcore. So the people who win the primaries are the people who appeal to the hardcore. Now, turnout in general elections is still relatively low, but turnout for primary elections is generally even lower. So you're looking at a lot of times is generally even lower. So you're looking at a lot of times. Seven to eight percent of the entire voting population are turning out to the primaries one or the other, generally in a two-party system and they are the people who are selecting the candidates who are ultimately going to win the election. Because of the way we vote now, it's very difficult for people to get out to the primaries and then get time off to vote in the generals as well. It's difficult to get information about the primaries now you just can't find it the way that we used to have.
Speaker 2:You know, there were certain advantages to only having three television stations, because they had to be unbiased and they weren't typically owned by conglomerates. You had your broadcasting systems, but you had local ownership. That model is gone. What we do have is direct communication. This particular form of technology didn't exist in the 70s and 80s. There was no one-to-one communication other than by telephone or one small group. It was one to many.
Speaker 2:When you have to have that, you have a responsibility, and at that point it was a legal responsibility to have fair and unbiased presentation of news. Now, it didn't always happen, of course. You still had white males delivering it, and I want to be forthright about this I'm a white male, so I don't want any, because some people listen to the audio only and they won't know that. But it's an important consideration, you know. So, by being able to be more inclusive in the voting process at the primary level and there's a lot of things that help with that more access and easier access to voting the experiment that New York City is running right now in ranked choice voting is an important inclusion Makes a difference in helping more people get involved in the primary process and that changes the candidates that we see in the general elections.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you said something very important and that is a huge problem. On general speed, I call it. I'm going to paraphrase here the primary problem where the most extremists are picked and the turnout, I'll say, is the lowest of the low compared to all the town should be the other way around. I would say local and state should have definitely more participation, especially votes, because those laws going to impact you, I would say, to a greater degree than even federal laws, but you just vote federally because that's what's? That's what mainstream media pushes more than any. Yeah, they push governor, they push them in terms, but nothing gets coverage, like the president, nothing, and I think that drives it up.
Speaker 1:But back to the primary point, yeah, I agree, that's why some of them that did well in the primary some lose because they just realize okay, the other, the opposite party, maybe as vague and generic as I can have, someone who's more sensible, more moderate, will be an extremist candidate in some cases there's cases be an extremist candidate in some cases. There are cases where the extremist candidate won is why we have more extremes, especially in the House of Representatives. I think it's pretty notable there. We could disagree or agree with that. On the Senate, I will say there are a little more sensible.
Speaker 2:And there's a reason for that too, because if you're a representative, if you are in the House of Representatives, you are constantly running. You are constantly running because you only have a two year term and the election cycle is really 18 months, so you get six months off and then you're running again, and they got to do whatever they can.
Speaker 1:Yeah, they always. I'll say that's the most hustling. I always call them the wild children because they really got to keep going and going and going and going. The Senate they really chill, I would say, for like probably four to six years and then they campaigned the next two. And the Senate I would say the Senate is a good position. I would debate even. At times it's better than the president. I have term limits, my terms are longer and of course they're represented by the state Right. So I think they have to moderate their positions a bit. You know, like the house representative, you just represent that particular area and then, if you think, if your cockamamie ideas are popular enough, you'll make it through the house, but you might be filtered up on a second.
Speaker 2:So you believe in those space laser crap.
Speaker 1:Hey, do not disrespect the space lasers. Oh yeah, oh yeah. All right, haters, use the comment section. Express your anger right now. Say whatever, I don't care, youtube will censor you, not me. And don't worry, I'll put this on Rumble eventually, where you could say crazy crap with, I would say, almost zero consequence. Okay, I try to be 1A. I can't believe I have to emphasize that, but here we are. I'm not attaching a race to that, but you know what I'm talking about. You know what I'm talking about and I mean, I thought she was a bit of looting myself, but I say well, she don't represent my area, she wouldn't survive a local New York election with that kind of, but I think a part that she represents in Georgia they find her good enough. I guess Not all of state Georgia, but I think that particular that's true.
Speaker 2:Go ahead. I want to suggest that these days, you use a different word than, or a different phrase than, surviving an election.
Speaker 1:Yeah, well, you suggest I'm open, Well, I don't know.
Speaker 2:Well, we might want to talk about that later, but that's that. That might be a trigger point Again. A bad phrase on my part.
Speaker 1:But we got to say you know, I'm going to be honest with some of you listeners. I sometimes when I think if you're being emotionally silly, I don't, I don't care as much, I care about resolving the issue. If I'm going the wrong direction, feel free. There's a comment section right there, okay.
Speaker 1:Just express it All right. And if you think me and the guests is not, if you think me and the guests is awesome, I'll just say we awesome. I don't like a specific reason why, why? Or the opposite point why are we not great? Just give me one. I'll just say you suck. Okay, who cares? I'm just going to brush up that, I'm just going to skip that comment. But yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2:I'd like to bring up a topic that has been surfaced in a lot recently, and that's about hand counting ballots. You know, we ought to go back to the old ways, where people you know made a mark on a ballot and then the ballots were counted by hand. The reason why that's the old way is because it doesn't work. People can't count. Because it doesn't work, people can't count. Now, elias, how many in rough figures, how many purchase transactions of any kind have you made in the last week?
Speaker 1:roughly. Oh yeah, I have to go roughly. I got to be a super nerd, so we're going to have to give you exact. I will probably say 20.
Speaker 2:Okay, how many of them involved cash? Only two, okay, all right, so for 90% of your transactions.
Speaker 1:You don't trust paper? Yep, and I will add it's more convenient not to do with paper.
Speaker 2:Okay, so you've. I don't want to make this assumption. You live in the city. Do you drive a?
Speaker 1:vehicle. Simple answer would be no, it's very rare Okay.
Speaker 2:But you have. Yes, okay, I was driving on the Atlantic City Expressway today Want to guess how many? And that's a toll road because I'm in Jersey, so I had to pay tolls six times three there, three back, guess how many times I actually stopped and paid a toll.
Speaker 1:You seem rational. You don't seem like one who's had road rage or anything like that. I'll probably say one out of six.
Speaker 2:Nope, none. I've got E-ZPass on my car right, All electronic.
Speaker 1:I should have said zero, but I didn't listen to my gut there.
Speaker 2:And even when I paid for parking at the destination there used a credit card. So we are not a cashless society yet, but we're going, we're getting there. Here's something that a lot of people don't know. You go to a teller in a bank. You give her a hundred dollar bill and ask for five twenties and change. She counts them to you, you count them back. You've got five twenties in your hand. You walk outside to the parking lot Remember, you're in view of cameras this entire time and you notice in the sunlight that one of those 20s looks funny. You take it back into the teller and they check it and sure enough, it's counterfeit. Who's liable? Does the bank?
Speaker 1:give you another 20? I mean, if I catch it early enough. But you leave the building, it's yours.
Speaker 2:Not only that, they are obligated to take it from you and they don't replace it, so you walk out with $20 less than you walked in.
Speaker 1:I got 20 is fake, so I walked out with 80. Yep, I was going to say yeah, yeah, if I catch it, I should say catch it before getting off the, getting off the bank.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you have to getting out of the bank. That's a different story, right? But you walk out to the parking lot and you walk back in. Nope, even though you're you're constantly surveyed the entire time and that's important.
Speaker 1:That is important. It's a good that they caught one time that that I actually I almost got out the building but I said, wait, one of them looked a little funny and it felt a little funny. I want somebody. So can you know, my exchange is 20. But thing is, I unknowingly dodge liability because I, I didn't even know this. I was like like the banks is always liable, but this is good to know.
Speaker 2:So we don't trust paper in any other part of our society. We don't. Now, the way that ballots are supposed to be hand counted are. There is one person from each of the major parties there and one person in charge of handling the ballots and one person who's a recorder. So it takes four people to count each ballot.
Speaker 2:All right, now what makes a paper ballot valid is that it does. The choices of the voter are clearly marked, but there are no other marks on the ballot to make it distinguishable. Ok, so you go to the polling place and you mark your ballot properly and you get the bottom and you're a proud voter. You sign your name at the bottom. That ballot doesn't count. All right, how about this case? You go in, you mark your ballot and you want to be careful about it. So you're looking down the ballot, make sure that you voted the right time, right way in each race, and you're putting the little pen dot next to each one. As you're going down. You know, like you do on a checklist, that ballot is now invalid. It has a distinguishing mark, ok.
Speaker 1:So anything like a heart symbol, my own name or any cursive or shapes or whatever, any distinctions from where it's right, it's no good, doesn't count.
Speaker 2:You only fill in the block a little bit, you know you don't color it and you put a checkmark. That's not subject to interpretation. Now let's say that you are one of the people counting ballots and you know you've got two different parties. We'll call them purple and green. Now there's really a green party. We'll call them purple and green. Now there's really a green party. We'll call them purple and orange. Okay, all right.
Speaker 2:Trouble is, you live in an area where it's 90% orange, so somebody volunteers to count for the purple party, but they're really not a purple party member, so they have to pretend to be. Now, they can be an honest person, and probably are, but they're going to be looking at that ballot through a certain lens and if there is a distinguishing mark, yeah, okay, I'm sorry, this is a spoiled ballot, it can't count. Or let's say that that person is nefarious, all right. So I'm counting the ballots and I'm wearing nitrile gloves because I don't want to be handling all that paper that other people have handled right, want to be handling all that paper that other people have handled right and I take a little marker and I mark the side of my thumb with that marker and every time there's a ballot that I don't like. I hold it a certain place and I just roll my thumb a little bit. Now there's a mark on that ballot and everybody's going to see that there was a mark on that ballot, because when I hold it up it's going to say hey look, there's a mark on this ballot.
Speaker 2:People were stealing elections a long time before we had voting machines. In fact, the whole reason why voting machines were invented was to prevent this kind of thing from happening. People are bad at counting. Now let me give you a different example. I want you to count for me. Okay, from 101 backwards, by threes go.
Speaker 1:All right, so 101, 98, 95, 92.
Speaker 2:What time is it? 8.42. Okay, what's the next number, please?
Speaker 1:Oh God, I don't know, it was 92. Yeah, oh goodness. Yeah, we get distracted very easily. We lose track. Yep, make us bad counters.
Speaker 2:And I was just asking you to count one thing. Yeah, you're looking at a ballot where you've got 17 races and you've got five. You've got your two main parties, but you've got three other parties. You've got your Green Party, your Libertarian Party, your whatever party, and your write-in votes. We can't do it, we're just lousy at it.
Speaker 1:So, math majors, do you feel offended yet?
Speaker 2:Math major Debate alert debate alert, but I have actually an arts degree in mathematics which qualifies me to paint by number.
Speaker 1:I have a beautiful number one, a number two for the American flag. There you go.
Speaker 2:These make math interesting, I guess. So voting on paper is a bad idea, particularly for a big election. It's a bad idea, particularly for a big election. Now it's a pretty good validating choice because it doesn't take very many ballots at least selected ballots to certify that the whole thing is okay Statistically. I can show you that. You know you got 800 ballots and I need a good statistical sample with. You know plus or minus, I can put that in the calculator and say all right, this is the amount of ballots that we need and we'll count them. And we'll count them three times and hopefully we'll get the same answer three times. You don't usually.
Speaker 2:The other thing is people forget how expensive it is to have that kind of labor. Like I said, we've got a situation. Shasta County, california, looked at doing a full hand count of the 2024 presidential primary and estimated to count the 53,000 ballots would cost $6,590. I'm sorry, $659,000. More than half a million dollars to count the ballots from the primary. Yikes. Okay, so I'm going to guess that there were more than 23,000 ballots cast in the mayoral primary. Yep.
Speaker 1:Well, you say we're bad at math. I never say that we're math majors. I don't feel offended, I'm more of a history major. So, dang, I could get away with it. I could count blocks and all that, but that's it barely. But on a serious note, it was. I will say at least if I was just scanning through it, it was more than 300,000. But that was preliminary data. I'm sure it's more than that.
Speaker 2:So, and I'm going to guess no disrespect to our brothers and sisters out in Shasta County that labor rates in New York City are higher than they are in Shasta County, california.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I would say a few, you know, but I'm trying not to add immediate twists and all that because it would exaggerate some of these claims?
Speaker 2:Yeah, but let's assume that they're the same, right? Okay, we're looking at more than a half a million dollars to count. The other thing is is that they were looking at having to add 575 more people to the staff, and isn't that the cost can go up exponentially just for the staff increase? Yeah, it's expensive and we're not good at it, so maybe that's a good reason not to do it.
Speaker 1:Anyone with a rational brain could agree to that.
Speaker 2:So what we're looking, then, is technology to make it more inclusive, make it better for the people who are going there. Now, one of the systems that's popular now and that we use in my home county of New Jersey is a system that marks the ballot and then you hand carry it to another device that counts the ballot, so you have an opportunity to look at the ballot before you do okay. Interesting problem with that system is and this happened to people that I know the way it was set up in my county in New Jersey for the primary election was the back of the ballot printed first and then the front of the ballot. Problem is there wasn't anything on the back of the ballot. That was a blank page. So the way the system works is that it prints one side of the ballot, it comes almost all the way out and then goes back in, and the other side is printed. Okay, you ever see a printer do a two-sided print like that?
Speaker 1:Yes, I have.
Speaker 2:Okay, voter training was not particularly good, so a lot of people grabbed it when it came out the first time. So they now have their ballot, but it's completely blank, so their vote doesn't count. Yep.
Speaker 1:And this is not in this fair race. This is just what poor training.
Speaker 2:It's poor training and people not looking at the consequences of the decisions that they're making.
Speaker 1:Yeah, being not careful, being careless, it just, I don't know, being impatient, she or whatever it is. It's like, oh, ok, it's done. Or assumptions, really Right. It's like the election was you, you know, it's just. This is why I always say about some election, I'm sure, I'm sure processes have been flawed and this is just a case of flawed process. Wasn't you know hack? I'm sure hack happened and change election results, but I don't really see that unless, hey, you want to come to my show and debate that I invite you, no problem, right, but I haven't seen that yet. I'm sorry, go ahead.
Speaker 2:I think I was wrong, but that's the point I wanted to make. So what we need are systems where there is less handling, but still ensure verification and make sure the machines could count. Machines can count because the people can't, and there are elections right now where people are saying well, the machines are tampered with. The machines are tampered with. Ok, we've got the ballot information from those machines. We can get another machine from the same manufacturer. There is a golden what's called a golden copy of the ballot which can be verified independently. And then you put the systems through and say, all right, identical machine handled by different people, same software, same file, same results. And you can do it for a whole lot less than a half a million dollars.
Speaker 1:Effective and well cost effective and just simply better right, and it could save us some.
Speaker 2:Well not, and it increases. It increases the faith in the integrity Right, and then you do a statistically correct sample to make sure that those results are valid too, and now you show good chain of custody all the way through with the information. That's how you run an accurate election, but the key to the process at the end of the day is making it easier for people to get involved, and the problem with that is that force has to come from the people themselves. Losers of the election have little power. Winners of the election generally have no reason to change it other than to secure their position in the future and that of their affiliated, and that's why change is difficult and the simplest way to put it because winners have no incentive to change.
Speaker 1:They want to secure and maintain that power as much as they can, and the losers, well, they don't have power. I mean the reason I'm repeating that because I just think it's so basic, but so fundamental and so profound. We need someone to say why things are difficult, not just, oh it's difficult, ah, I give up. Things are difficult. Now just say, oh it's difficult, I give up. You should at least know why. Now I have some points, because you know, hey, there's things I'm willing to debate, but it's so profound and true I'm just gonna shut up and just take it. I know it sounds wrong to some of you people. Get out of the gutter. Just absorb that information, absorb that wisdom instead of just challenging everything it's good to challenge. Just be use your better judgment is all I'm saying.
Speaker 2:And you can be courteous about it. I'm not going to go to the term respectful, because in my world people have to earn my respect, but they deserve courtesy until they prove otherwise.
Speaker 1:Fair enough. I mean, I was raised with that, but a lot of people challenge it. But I'm not going to get into a whole personal story about that. But yeah, I think respect must be earned and to me it makes sense because someone could just come in and act the fool. They'll argue to death that the sky is orange. You know it could be. I just checked. It's not. I mean it could be if you throw puff and smoke and all that, but that's a very rare occurrence. Sm that, but that's a very rare occurrence. Smoky blue, it's covered with clouds and even rarely red or pinkish if the sun's in a certain angle. But that's more like the. You know the light and all that.
Speaker 1:I'm not a scientist, but people argue with that. I said, well, that person shouldn't be respected. Maybe I should just pity that person and just not argue with them, because once you argue, an idiot, you become an idiot. So that's why I say don't challenge everything that that person believed the sky is orange and just carry on with your day. You have better things to do anyways. Take care of your mom, your spouse, whatever, okay, or just do well your job. You got bigger fish to fry to just trying to see, you know, change that person's mind that the sky is okay so what were you hoping to talk about that we haven't discussed yet?
Speaker 2:No, I think you already covered a lot.
Speaker 1:You already gave some very good examples about nefarious or unintentional errors. I think a lot of it's unintentional. I would think, unless you want to, you know, debunk that otherwise, which I don't mind because I'm not an expert here. The only question I think I have is have they had any hacking, any real hacking, that have drastically altered the election results?
Speaker 2:We have not had any examples that I have seen of system hacking that have affected things at a national level. Now there have been manipulations, but that usually comes in terms of vote by mail, destroying drop-off boxes for early voting, stuff like that. I'm not saying it's impossible that it's happened. There are documented cases where it's happened that can affect a local elections, because when you're dealing with, you know, 300 voters instead of 3 million voters. A small change makes a big difference and typically that involves things like not maintaining a chain of custody, not technical issues about hacking the voting systems themselves.
Speaker 1:So the reason why I'm asking there's some people that believe that that nefarious manipulation, and I think it's true. If it's like a count I don't know, counting 300 votes, 150, 150, just flip one, there's a winner and a loser, right there. Right, okay, I'm a little okay at math. 150, 150, they're going to split. Even you flip that one vote. Okay, there you go, that tie. Well, it's no longer a tie, it's been manipulated, it's been tampered with. The person won. How did that happen?
Speaker 1:And of course I can't understand people being suspicious. I don't want suspicion without backing up with facts and documentation and credible theories. And that's been pushed a lot, would say, you know, from multiple people, and I don't care what campaign come from. I've heard some of this from the left-leaning people. I've heard some of the right-leaning people, so I can see that being true for a small by, probably small town election, probably with 300 to a thousand votes, as opposed to a city with million. Well, I'll say a hundred, I'll say a hundred thousand to a million votes, because everybody doesn't vote. So I got to use more conservative numbers, sound a little more realistic, but I think I'll be harder to hack and I like that. There is work on that so we can restore faith in elections. I don't care what party you're in, we just want to restore the faith in the process.
Speaker 2:Exactly Faith in the process, and you do that through transparency, chain of custody and education.
Speaker 1:I think education needs to redo. That's just me, because the reason why? To find, I think, to find good information, and I like what you said. I'm just going to get back to the fractured media versus central media, because even me well, I grew up 90s and all that this is when the fracturing was really starting to happen. So just the three main stations, I mean, and they had to have more fair coverage. I mean, I watch, I'm kind of a historian, so I got to dig into the older stuff and I only could study from an academic point of view, I can't say, oh, I actually been there. Oh, walter, congrat, you know, whatever his name is, I can't pronounce his name. This is embarrassing. I'm keeping this anyways, cong, you know what you say for me. Walter Cronkite, cronkite, there, cronkite, thank you. You see, I don't mind being correct.
Speaker 2:This is, and I believe that it's Dutch that adopted the term for a news broadcaster as Kronkiter. That's how famous and trusted that person was.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So that era, as we all know or you've been half awake is dead. It's so fractured. You got your left wing version, your right wing version, your centrist version of it. Let's give one example each. You know MSNBC left wing. You know I'm going to give a little more newsmax right-leaning. And then we got NewsNation more to the center. So we have people, we have consumers, fractured, going to different. I think the NewsNation wants a little more. I'll say a little more fair, but that's just me being a centrist bias. But the point is everybody's getting fractured and all that Everyone's tuning in. So oh, no, no, no, msnbc says this. I believe that because they support my point of view.
Speaker 1:Confirmation bias echo chamber and all that, more than that, newsmax. Oh, now that Trumpers and the ones oh yeah, well, whatever they say, it's not true, but people say crazy stuff like that and that has made, I would say, election information much more difficult, because they've got to trust their team, whatever they believe in, more than what is fact. And all of them got parts of the truth. Okay, but they don't. They don't got the the the more unbiased boring truth, because it's boring truth is boring. People just love slanted things. That just supports their narrative. So confirmation bias is on steroids, hence making it much more difficult. And that's the era that I grew up in. I've just seen that just gets more splintered as time goes on. Some, some medias go, some emerge, everybody all got their bias and so I got to go to all sides, go to ground news people. So I'm plugging that in 40-40, all of that so you can see what bias covers. You have like a good snapshot of how much the right is covering us, how much the left is covering us, how much the center is covering Each main headlines has gotten a lot of people's attention. So I'm plugging that in because we need to combat this tribalistic nonsense.
Speaker 1:In my honest opinion and you know I pay attention to this guy here you know I'm going to link he has a lot of voter resources. I checked him out quite good and I know some things, but I'm going to expand it. I mean, ballotpedia is where I got a lot of my sources, especially to talk about different state elections and propositions and all that, and that's one of the sources I use and a lot of it's good stuff and I'm going to link all that in the description. I'm going to link just the website, even the voter resources. I just think the more information generally, the better it is. And I'm going to do filtering out the junk for you. I'm not going to put CNN, I'm going to put Fox News, because I'll be a hypocrite, but if they're part of that conglomerate, well, I'll be ground news and all that. Just know that their coverage slants to the right or to the left, whatever, okay, and we need to combat that.
Speaker 1:You can have your opinions. I'm not against your opinions. Or you think it's better. It's just being your own echo chamber and just treating like a sports team or I don't know, a tribal war conflict. It's not helping this country, it's destroying it and we need to get back to at least debating, debate ideas and see which one comes out top, or maybe it'd be a mesh of the two parties. Whatever, we need to get back into that.
Speaker 1:I'm happy I didn't talk that much, because I normally like to talk that much when there's a guest here. I want the guests to talk because I'm doing that return and I got plenty episodes where I can talk. That's why I don't feel insecure to keep rambling, rambling, rambling. I could ramble, but what point is it going to serve? You can just clip and make fun of me and create memes. If you just clip and make fun of me, create memes, I mean it's a good laugh, but you know that's not serving a hype, that's not serving a purpose. Try to put purpose and value to these things.
Speaker 1:I don't mind laughs, you know I can make fun of myself, I have a good sense of humor, but that's just good, cheap comedy. At best that's like a five second. You feel good for like five seconds and then you're back to being miserable, miserable board or whatever. You know, just be more empowered. You know, I don't care. You left, right, center, you know green, libertarian, whatever the heck you are. Just learn yourself, learn processes. And you know, if I join organizations that are fighting for change, like me, I'm joining Unite, ny, because we're trying to make New York primaries open and independent. Like myself, can't vote unless it reaches it to the general election. And to be a Democrat or Republican to vote in a primary, let's face it. Most of them are Democrat. Okay, you can check any stat. Democrats hold a super majority. Okay, especially the city of New York and definitely Rochester and Buffalo, those other upstate cities. Okay, just that's all.
Speaker 1:That's what I'm going to say I can speak a lot more, but get yourself more sober minded. At least understand the other side. I'm not telling you to change your mind. Do 180. So just understand where the other side is coming from. That's the most minimalistic ask. Just understand the other side, understand where they're coming from. But you know they're extremists. Just walk away from them, because there's something that's going on there that they need professional help and nine out of 10 times you don't got the skills to deal with that. So just walk away from them.
Speaker 1:You don't need everybody. You don't need to talk to everybody, but you should talk to anyone who has at least a rational mind or some level of maturity to engage with you. Okay, not kooky, crazy people, not the far left, the far right, the far whatever is my enemy? Most people are sensible, from left and the right. Let's get together and that's you know. Just have a discussion.
Speaker 1:You know and I'm going to plug this Brave Angels it's a great organization that try to bring the left and the right together, and sometimes within the tent too, because some debates are within the tent of the party Progressives and moderates and Democrats. They clash a lot. You think they're two different parties and sometimes it's right the conservatives and the neocons. They clash a lot. So sometimes it's intra party conflict as well, and you know, I kind of thought of that, but I couldn't articulate as well, so I'll talk to the priest. Okay, yeah, because they're big tents, they fight among each other, some things like war. War is an issue where there's a split within the party. Nothing does it like war, for sure. So that's what I'm going to say. I think you're actually answering all my questions Actually more efficient than I thought, which I don't mind you going on. To be honest, I'm for it. So you know your answer. Anything else you want to add before I wrap this up?
Speaker 2:No the only thing that I'd like to add is I want to say thank you. This has been a great opportunity for me. I think that you're sending a good message to people and I appreciate that. I do want to encourage people to please vote in the primaries, even if it's not on one of my systems, but get out and let's show the world that we're rational.
Speaker 1:And set an example. I'm sorry, go ahead.
Speaker 2:I was going to say and thank you, and you know, maybe we'll do a follow up and we'll see what comments come up.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and I know I love the comments. You know the lovers, the haters, the skeptics, the critical thinkers or the friendly ones. Well, I'm just adds value to the conversation. There's a comment section for that. Ok, I do welcome your comments. I'm actually serious about that. You know, sometimes I have fun with you or be juggling me. But seriously, I value your comments and especially it was constructive feedback. It's not oh, you're great or you suck. I don't value that how am? I great. How am I laying right, be more specific? That that's feedback.
Speaker 2:I would value it and that's all I could say for that and I said at the beginning that I would end with a plug, and our website is wwwvoterightcom.
Speaker 1:Yep, not just that website is going to be in the description, I'm just going to put even the voter resources as well.
Speaker 1:That's linked from that website, because I just think more. Or you can just ask me questions about what you should look at if you don't have time to decipher through everything. That's why I have, you know, brief sources, like I'll say like ground news, again concise, I'll say, I'll even put it on the new paper, and new paper is great. They're just short, straight to the point. You know the longest reason, like five minutes, and then you filter out. If you don't care about the stocks, you skip that. You care about politics, you read on that more. You care about tech or culture, read in those sections more. But they're short, straight to the point. I know everybody's busy, I get that Everybody's busy. So you want to even ask me questions about that. I would definitely encourage you to ask the guest, because he's the expert here. You know I'm just more of a facilitator, guiding the conversation at best, but I'm willing to learn on them as well. If I can answer it, I'll definitely answer it with confidence and then, if it's a lot of good questions, I'll definitely bring the guests back. But it's basic stuff like where do I vote? Well, where do you live? I like simple stuff. I can answer, bro. If it's about technical, advanced questions. That's beyond my pay grade. Unless you pay me more by subscribing to me, then I'll look into that. But oh, that that's super shameless. Plug it. Oh, I'm gonna get some nasty comments on that. Oh well, so be it. I'm brutally honest about. I'd rather, be shamelessly honest, be portrayed as a villain rather being a phony hero, if I want to pick the two. But whatever, enough of that. Yep, so go to his website. Go there. It's going to be a link in the description and you just click on it. It will take you there. Because I, because I just this is important. This is very important. This is not I don't know what example come with. This is not about which celebrity sleeps with who. Who cares, it doesn't affect your life, that's just gossip for you and your friends. This is important. This has impact, massive impact, especially local and state elections. Federal elections are important too, I would say elections, federal elections are important too, I'll say local and state elections even have more consequences, more impact in your life. So I definitely I want to encourage you to vote in the primary general election, especially in local and state. I'm not pushing federal as much because I think they got enough voters, but I will not argue if it gets more voters. But I just think you need to pay attention more in the local and state level, because that's where the turnouts are even lower, especially local elections. It's so low, like the mayor race, I think. For mayor de blasio at one point it was like a very low percentage that voted and that was just disgusting. I said this guy should have won the second term. That's my opinion, but he did. That's a low turnout. Um, prior to rank choice voting, of course, which I'm for. And I've got one more thing I want to add Early voting is so important too.
Speaker 1:I think early voting has made it more accessible too, because you know race. If you have to take off from work, you know. I think that does that, and some people are arguing against that. I said no, no, no, no. I'm for early voting, I'm for whatever makes democracy accessible and more inclusive.
Speaker 1:I don't sign left-wing to you on that issue, but I don't care. I just care about democracy being more inclusive. That's a true democracy. Not democracy for a few, that's oligarchy, plutocracy, all the other go, or technocracy, whatever you want to throw in there. No, we want democracy, okay, not all these other, you know not oligarchy, anarchy, all these other forms of government. We want democracy and it I would say it shouldn't require people as optional. We should be able to. Will the people push for these change? The characters expect change to happen, all you know, randomly. We need more people for change that part.
Speaker 1:I won't emphasize that again, because that's very important, very, very important. I cannot emphasize that enough. Oh, um, not I. You know he's humble with the plugins. I mean, I guess I plug in five things and that's fine with me. I don't really care. I encourage plugins, but I'm going to do my shameless plug. I got multiple things and normally the host is humble here. But no, I'm not that humble.
Speaker 1:Join Podmatch, okay, great. Great to organize, it's great to connect with me and it's a little more organized for me. But I've learned how to use other websites and learn how to be not lazy and read through the emails, sift through the emails. But I always say join PopMatch. That's that's product I use to find guests. This particular guest is not from PopMatch, but that's OK. He's still a great guest nonetheless, because I read through people and all of that and, trust me, there's a lot of them that weren't great. Some were just nonsense. I try to respond to them but they're both engaging so I gotta just drop them. But he's an exception to the rule, him and a few others. That's not PopMatch I say. They provide great insight regardless.
Speaker 1:I gotta branch out a bit more because after a while that pool gets a bit. You know the pool dries up and you gotta find other sources. At one point I'll say join PopMatch. You have your one page. Everything's set up right there. You can link your sites. If you don't like chains of emails back and forth, then PopMatch is a great solution for you and you can try it for free too. I've got my unique link right there. And then for donations recurring $3 a month You'll be your access to my embarrassing old content.
Speaker 1:I didn't know what the heck I was doing and so I got better at this thing. Come on, five years, a podcast should be doing better. At this point I'm more focused on the mission. These are random stuff and stale and I got my own opinions of that. But if you want to bring gamers, you're welcome to come. Maybe I'll change my mind if you convince me, but as of now, not that important for me right now. That's why I talk about technology, ai. I think that's a greater impact and it affects games as well.
Speaker 1:And what else I'm gonna say yeah, now the youtube. Now to use your youtube rumble stuff like comment, subscribe, share, you know, use the comment section. You need to express yourself. Just know that you may be open to censorship and embarrassment. If you're brave, feel free to do so, but in Rumble, your possibilities of being censored is a lot lower than YouTube's. I'm just being brutally honest. But I encourage you just to do both If you feel you know. If you want to do it quick, it's YouTube. Always go YouTube first and eventually it'll be the Atlanta Rumble, okay. So that's all I'm going to say about that. And then, final, final, the audio.
Speaker 1:People only Go to Buzzsprout, go to Apple Podcasts. That's the only reviews I read. Give constructive feedback, say why it's great, why it's not so great. Give an honest four, five-star or even lower than that. I mean it's okay. I'd rather have an honest review rather than that perfect five star. Come on, you know that's, that's nonsense. You know that's a lie right there. Okay, and we got five stars, all that. No, I think they did something there. I could go on the conspiracy theory route there, but I'm not going to. I'd rather have an honest, honest rating. And I already got one, one star without saying anything shady person but I and one four-star.
Speaker 1:She couldn't even spell properly. I said you know, I'm happy you just gave me four stars. You should probably, you should probably have misclicked. You know, maybe she got a dyslexic moment. I think I'm so disabled, I don't know, I'm just making fun of her, not you. Look, he got tools for you, know, for your impairments, and look, that's being inclusive. We got to include those people as well, because they they have a mind, they can voice their opinions. Ok, so I'm tryingI-N-D-E-C-E in common language, but not these politically correct terms. I don't care about that. But, all right, I think I said enough with this crazy heat. I think the heat's getting to my brain. That's why I'm keep yammering like a crazy person. Okay, this is time for me to stop, because everything else that come out from there is not. So I want you to complete this audio or visual journey. You have a blessed day, afternoon or night.
