[HN Gopher] How to rig elections [video]
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to rig elections [video]
        
       https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.04535
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 129 points
       Date   : 2025-08-14 12:04 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (media.ccc.de)
 (TXT) w3m dump (media.ccc.de)
        
       | echelon_musk wrote:
       | Courageous.
        
         | kwanbix wrote:
         | Very.
        
       | nonethewiser wrote:
       | Well this starts off with a bang:
       | 
       | >In germany we just saw very public rigging of an election for
       | the federal high court of justice.
       | 
       | Not familiar with that but I imagine that is going to be a
       | controversial statement.
       | 
       | Using Russia as a subject is interesting. A western audience is
       | probably a lot less defensive against the idea that Russia rigs
       | their elections. The video looks interesting.
        
         | V__ wrote:
         | It isn't. A right wind millionaire and his media outlet started
         | a fake campaign against the potential judge. Other media and
         | social media jumped on it as well and the "normal" conservative
         | party was "concerned". A lot of heel-dragging later, the judge
         | had enough and withdrew herself from consideration.
        
           | immibis wrote:
           | In Germany it's often illegal to make strong statements like
           | this unless they can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Is
           | that the case?
           | 
           | (That's partly why Germany is getting infested with Nazis
           | again. You can go to jail for calling them out.)
        
             | V__ wrote:
             | It's a civil matter, but yes. Sadly, courts are slow and
             | the whole story was "there might have been plagiarism in
             | her thesis". Even as traditional media started to explain
             | the story as baseless, social media is a different beast.
        
             | ranger_danger wrote:
             | Can you provide some sources to back up your claims?
        
         | tietjens wrote:
         | It shouldn't be that controversial a statement. It's an
         | accurate assessment of what happened this summer in Germany. A
         | judicial candidate was destroyed by false claims online. To me
         | it seemed like German politicians were reading too much US news
         | and wound up aping patterns seen there.
        
         | devjab wrote:
         | > Not familiar with that but I imagine that is going to be a
         | controversial statement.
         | 
         | I'm not sure if it's fair to call it rigging, but there was a
         | massive smear campaign against a judge nominated for their
         | constitutional court. Leading to the nomination being withdrawn
         | when it really should've been an appointment as usual. Which is
         | likely the first massive step toward Germany politicising one
         | of the foundations of their democracy, similar to how the USA
         | supreme court seems like it's red vs blue when looked on from
         | the outside.
         | 
         | I'm guessing this conference is rather left leaning, which is
         | why they'd called that rigging, but there wasn't election
         | fraud. It's an issue of course, since this means that rich
         | people can essentially buy massive influence on the German
         | democracy by clever use of social media and lies. Which may
         | seem like the norm to a lot of people on HN, but that's not how
         | it has traditionally been in Germany.
        
           | nozzlegear wrote:
           | > similar to how the USA supreme court seems like it's red vs
           | blue when looked on from the outside.
           | 
           | It's not just the outside who see it that way!
        
           | hungryhobbit wrote:
           | There's no "seeming": the current US Supreme Court is nakedly
           | political.
        
             | stronglikedan wrote:
             | Well, they're just people, so of course they are.
             | Thankfully, there are folks representing both parties to
             | keep it fair.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Thankfully??? Did I miss the /s at the end of that? Do
               | you honestly believe it is fairly representing?
        
               | MisterMower wrote:
               | I am shocked, shocked I say, at discovering the US
               | Supreme Court engages in politics! I got bad news for you
               | friend: it always has been. That, or maybe you're one of
               | those knaves who thinks it's only fair when your side
               | gets to rule.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | What part of my comment leads you to take away whatever
               | is in your head? I just pointed out that SCOTUS is not a
               | fair representation. You've clearly read somethings in
               | between the lines or are confusing other threads.
        
               | sixothree wrote:
               | I see this so often it gets old especially from a certain
               | side of the aisle. If I make an intentionally contained
               | and concise argument someone always seems to interpret it
               | as if it was part of some larger point I'm making. I used
               | to believe it was a tactic to draw you in. But more and
               | more I believe it's reading comprehension and a good bit
               | of built-in bias.
        
               | MisterMower wrote:
               | It is by definition representative and fair: Senators
               | chosen by the people approved thier nomination to the
               | court. You're not this uninformed about how US politics
               | work, are you?
        
           | stronglikedan wrote:
           | So they Kavanaugh'd him, but it actually worked!
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | If Kavanaugh has become a verb, shouldn't Garland'd be a
             | thing too when the Senate denies POTUS his constitutional
             | right?
        
               | delichon wrote:
               | Since Garland didn't even get to a vote, it wasn't
               | necessary to Kavanaugh (or Bork) him to the same degree.
               | Abe Fortus got denied a vote via filibuster in '68, so
               | you could say that Merrick Garland was Fortused.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | But a filibuster is an accepted way for the minority to
               | fight back. That's not the same thing as making up a new
               | rule and denying a vote because it's a lame duck year. To
               | equate the two is just strained logic at best.
        
               | FergusArgyll wrote:
               | Borked was the original
        
               | robterrell wrote:
               | This is the correct answer. More memorable and better
               | number of syllables. Although I'm sure he wasn't the
               | first either.
        
           | ooopdddddd wrote:
           | You are talking like this is the first time judges have been
           | blocked for political reasons. See Horst Dreier in 2008 as a
           | high-profile example.
        
           | meibo wrote:
           | Not to mention that one of the major issues in that debate
           | (for the supposedly "centrist" party) was abortion rights -
           | even though most of her views on the topic were fairly in
           | line with other sitting judges.
           | 
           | It's now alleged that this was caused by a disinformation
           | campaign targeting MPs of that party.
           | 
           | https://www.volksverpetzer.de/analyse/brosius-gersdorf-
           | union...
        
         | dathinab wrote:
         | > imagine that is going to be a controversial statement.
         | 
         | not really
         | 
         | but compared to what seems to be happened nearly daily in the
         | US it really is not a big deal
         | 
         | but compared to what is supposed to happen it was a big deal
         | 
         | which seems to be a common trend, being very pissed of about
         | what happened in German politics, then looking to the US and
         | being "they did what now!?", oh it seems things are still fine
         | here
        
           | sho_hn wrote:
           | Maybe pick a functional democracy as your yardstick?
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | Can you provide an example? Are there any left?
        
               | seadan83 wrote:
               | France, UK, Norway, Spain, Canada.. here's your list: htt
               | ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_Index
        
               | dathinab wrote:
               | France is worse in the index.
               | 
               | UK, Canada, Spain are similar ranked.
               | 
               | Norway is better ranked, sure so are most other Nordic
               | countries.
               | 
               | But the difference between a (using their terms) "full
               | democracy" and a noticeable better (in the index) "full
               | democracy" is much less noticeable then the difference
               | between a "full democracy" and a "flawed democracy".
               | 
               | The other thing is that is a more then imperfect index.
               | To be able to create such an index you need to select
               | metrics and criteria which are strongly oversimplified.
               | Weather or not this can lead to a bias. Also there is a
               | time delay e.g. 2025 stats are not yet out.
               | 
               | Anyway I'm really getting off topic. The more relevant
               | thing is, that it doesn't matter too much if there are
               | better (or worse) of countries in the index. What rally
               | matters is that you see where your country can improve an
               | try to push for it, even if it's just with voting,
               | otherwise you will stagnate improvements once you reach a
               | relative high standard.
        
       | churchill wrote:
       | Watching this brings back memories of Nigeria's 2023 elections.
       | It was (one of a series of) turning point(s) for me when it
       | slowly sank in that the country wasn't worth building a life in.
       | Working remotely & spending in a local currency meant that for
       | the past couple of years, I was insulated and could accumulate
       | savings with little effort. But, the blatant corruption pushed me
       | off the edge.
       | 
       | Quick scan of my social network just confirms the same: anyone
       | extremely agentic, intelligent, or educated I know has either
       | left, is in the process of leaving, or is considering leaving.
       | 
       | Last person out of Nigeria can turn the lights off.
        
         | adiabatichottub wrote:
         | That's very sad to hear. I've been to Lagos and I always have
         | wished I could have visited longer. As an American I found it
         | an absolutely fascinating place.
        
           | churchill wrote:
           | I'm happy (?) you found it fascinating, but only because you
           | were visiting. If you had to live in Lagos for, say, 1 year,
           | your opinion would change drastically and you'd be eager to
           | leave.
        
             | adiabatichottub wrote:
             | In many ways it seemed to be a very chaotic place, where
             | money makes the rules, and most people get by however they
             | can, some in the direst of circumstances. I can understand
             | not wanting to live there long-term. But it's also a city
             | of over 10 million people, so I can only image there's so
             | much more to it. I'm just genuinely glad I had the
             | opportunity to visit, because it made real to me the place
             | and the people that I would otherwise only hear about on
             | the news.
        
         | pastage wrote:
         | Considering the population growth of Nigeria I find it hard to
         | believe that one of the most populated countries in the world
         | will ever run out of talented people.
        
           | churchill wrote:
           | The systems eroding the country & making the educated &
           | talented leave will make any new batch raised to self-select
           | out of the country. In fact, successive generations of
           | talented kids won't even be raised (or, only at a
           | significantly reduced rate) because of poor investment in
           | education.
           | 
           | Or, to be blunt: a syndicate of evil clown politicians have
           | seized control of the ship of state, looting it of anything
           | not bolted down, and murdering anyone who challenges them.
           | 
           | Fixing it is an extremely high-cost endeavor, so leaving is
           | just the only logical option if you have a portable, in-
           | demand skill.
           | 
           | Perfect example would be 1940s China vs. modern China. Same
           | people, but went from a pre-industrial hellhole to a
           | technological superpower because the gov. deliberately
           | invested into creating a sustainable STEM pipeline and
           | creating a nation where their talented young people are happy
           | to live and work. Nigeria isn't doing any of that in any
           | significant capacity.
           | 
           | On the population angle, Nigeria's politicians have a thing
           | for fudging population numbers and realistic figures are
           | closer to 120M to 140M, vs. the 240-260m Western demographers
           | take at face value. I explained in detail in this comment
           | here. [0]
           | 
           | [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44870564
        
         | rayiner wrote:
         | This is why my dad left Bangladesh in 1989. Over the years he
         | developed hope that maybe things had turned around. For awhile,
         | the government wasn't quite so corrupt and GDP was growing at a
         | fast clip. Then the people overthrew the government and now who
         | knows. I could see that he was upset about having believed for
         | the moment in the country getting better.
        
           | churchill wrote:
           | I've been through your comment history and I can relate. If
           | you're highly placed enough as an elite, you can form a
           | counter-elite and stage a change of government.
           | 
           | But, in most cases, if you have portable, in-demand skills,
           | it's more reasonable to decamp to a better team than try to
           | fix a failing one. The ones with enough proximity to make any
           | change are usually co-opted, driven into exile, threatened
           | into compliance, or straight-up murdered.
           | 
           | Based on what I read about her and the Awami League, I think
           | removing Hasina will be a net-positive for Bangladesh. Yunus
           | is a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist and widely-respected, and if
           | they can keep AL out of power, and pacify any extremists, I
           | think Bangladesh will quickly continue growing.
        
       | clownworld1 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | Now do when your country is a democracy. Step 1 would just need
         | a few tweaks like defund public media, start your own social
         | platforms, have existing social platforms bend the knee,
         | appointing judges, appointing executive board members.
        
           | dkiebd wrote:
           | I live in a democracy, Spain, and the government controls the
           | press through subsidies and ads. All mass media is losing
           | money; our biggest media conglomerate has been in a hole of
           | almost 1 billion euros for decades. The president of the
           | country openly brags on TV about how he controls the public
           | prosecutors. A former president (of the same party) changed
           | the law so the government elects the judges directly decades
           | ago.
           | 
           | Of course you will never hear about this because we are not
           | Poland or Hungary, we did not have the audacity of voting the
           | way they did :)
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker
         | News. This subthread (and other similar ones) has nothing to do
         | with anything specific or interesting about the actual OP. That
         | makes it bad for this site. That remains true, btw, even if
         | you're 100% right about everything.
         | 
         | Since unsubstantive/indignant rhetoric tends to attract
         | upvotes, generic dross like often floats to the top of threads,
         | choking out any actually interesting discussion. Therefore
         | please don't post it.
         | 
         | From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:
         | 
         | " _Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents._ "
         | 
         | " _Please don 't fulminate._"
        
       | MisterMower wrote:
       | Wild that he even had the opportunity to ask these questions and
       | do his own investigating. The exact same issues happened in a
       | recent US election, but in ours no one was allowed to examine any
       | of the things he was able to.
       | 
       | Sounds like elections in both Russia and the US are rotten these
       | days. Curious to note which party has no desire to rectify these
       | issues.
        
       | lacoolj wrote:
       | I want to see his talk on quantum cryptography (referenced early
       | in the video). Anyone have the link?
        
         | er0k wrote:
         | https://media.ccc.de/v/why2025-217-quantum-cryptography-and-...
        
       | derbOac wrote:
       | Are there center or organizations that focus on studying election
       | fraud and manipulation and how to identify it? In a rigorous
       | nonpartisan (to the extent that's possible) way? Organizations
       | that would regularly support and disseminate the sorts of papers
       | being discussed?
        
       | reactordev wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | The funny thing is after Trump cried wolf so hard about the
         | 2020 election even if that were true no one would take any
         | Democratic attempt at an investigation seriously.
         | 
         | And Trump has even made statements which can easily be
         | interpreted as admission[0].
         | 
         | But it doesn't matter.
         | 
         | [0]https://www.c-span.org/clip/white-house-event/user-clip-
         | trum...
        
           | reactordev wrote:
           | That's right. Cry wolf, no foul, cry wolf again but this
           | time, commit foul. Cry wolf one more time for good measure
           | and unleash the military on the citizens.
        
       | esafak wrote:
       | If you'd rather read about it: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.04535
        
         | dang wrote:
         | We'll put that link at the top as well. Thanks!
        
       | arctics wrote:
       | So to summarize, people did vote for Putin, major opposition was
       | blocked, local elections are rigged.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-08-14 23:01 UTC)