Session 13 May 2017

[Gwelan (too)]

Well, I also did assist in a big city of the Paris suburb and the procedures were exactly the same. We have to figure out that, as vote is concerned, in France, there is no big cities or small villages, there are only polling stations with just more stations in a big city, that’s all , but all counts are made by station in a way that everybody can verify everything during and after the process.

There are six security levels : 1/ validation of ID, 2/validation of the inscription on the list, 3/ opening of the urn which is normally closed to prevent any bulletin to be put in it before the identity and the inscription of the voter has been validated. 4/the bulletins are in a closed enveloppe to prevent anyone to know for who you did vote 5/The urn which is sealed by a bailiff before arriving to the station, gets an automatic counter (which cannot be desactivated) which counts the number of times the urn has been opened, 6/The voter must also sign the list after the vote is made. There are at least three different counts that have to fit together (the urn counter, the signatures on the list, and the number of bulletins.

It might be different in other countries, but in France, the whole process is also permanently watched, by a lot of pairs of eyes of political ennemies, and all that makes the best guaranty for it

So, I’m not only educated to think that it’s reasonably impossible : I can testify by experience that the slightest dysfunction is already an object of scandal. I don’t even dare to imagine what could happen in the case of any voluntary fraud in front of so much witnesses.

I'm open. I just thought the matter was strange enough to start a discussion about it.

 

[zak]

In view of what has been happening to this planet for generations, and to see that the real ruling forces are capable of maintaining the status quo, I am a little more doubtful about the flawless procedure for the counting of ballots.
Unlike the stuff about education and being open, or I wasn't personally addressing you in particular, now I would like to ask you if you don't believe that Macron was elected by universal suffrage, but if he was elected without fraud?
Here a video in french of electoral fraud in Switzerland or in the end their conclusion is "In France it's worse than in Switzerland":

An other link to more links (the most in french) on Presidential: a massive electoral fraud?:
Présidentielle : une fraude électorale massive ? - Eurolibertés

Well, I also did assist in a big city of the Paris suburb and the procedures were exactly the same. We have to figure out that, as vote is concerned, in France, there is no big cities or small villages, there are only polling stations with just more stations in a big city, that’s all , but all counts are made by station in a way that everybody can verify everything during and after the process.

There are six security levels : 1/ validation of ID, 2/validation of the inscription on the list, 3/ opening of the urn which is normally closed to prevent any bulletin to be put in it before the identity and the inscription of the voter has been validated. 4/the bulletins are in a closed enveloppe to prevent anyone to know for who you did vote 5/The urn which is sealed by a bailiff before arriving to the station, gets an automatic counter (which cannot be desactivated) which counts the number of times the urn has been opened, 6/The voter must also sign the list after the vote is made. There are at least three different counts that have to fit together (the urn counter, the signatures on the list, and the number of bulletins.

It might be different in other countries, but in France, the whole process is also permanently watched, by a lot of pairs of eyes of political ennemies, and all that makes the best guaranty for it

So, I’m not only educated to think that it’s reasonably impossible : I can testify by experience that the slightest dysfunction is already an object of scandal. I don’t even dare to imagine what could happen in the case of any voluntary fraud in front of so much witnesses.

I was reading again your post, and the only thing comes to me;
Do you still believe in Santa Claus ?

 

[Gwelan (too)]

No, I do not believe in Santa Claus any more, I’m not as stupid as that : I realised long ago that it’s the storks which bring presents.

The procedures of vote in Switzerland have nothing to do with those which are used in France, if only because over there, it is almost 100 % of people who vote by correspondence. And contrary to what is implied in the video, the electronic vote in France is an extreme minority which only concerns 82 communities the list of which has been published by the Home Office.

Thus, I am willing to hear that it's worse in France, but I would appreciate a minimum argumentation about the ways, methods and techniques that could be used to this end and at which level. It seems to me that it is the duty of the one who speaks, to present argued, documented words.

Until now, on the internet I only saw rather vague commentaries mixing « unregistered » with « banned « or « badly- registered (which is a very weird notion because we we can only be registered or not).


I do not consider myself as a believer. I even make it a duty not to believe ; the only thing I want is to know. I can hear proposals which would abort reaches of zeteticians, but I‘m used to confront these proposals with the reality of facts, according to various levels of reading, since he ultimate reliable reference to which give up our discernment is unfortunately not available for now.


Such was my questioning towards these surprising declarations of cassiopeans about the french elections: what is the appropriate level of reading?

Now,since you ask my opinion about Macron, I would say in a general way, that our elections are a huge parody of democracy which allows a well-sponsored unknown to become President of the country with only 16% of real support of the citizen

The problem is obviously in our founding texts which authorize it. I think Etienne Chouard is right about this.