[nl]

Yes, that's the most defensible position to take on what "hacking the election" could mean.

There are plenty of other possible meanings, and people feel differently about the many possible definitions.

The word "Hack" does not just mean "illegal intrusion of a computer system"

I quite enjoy the irony of pointing this out on HackerNews...

[mc32]

The other piece of irony is that leading up to election night "our voting systems are secure", "we have taken steps to ensure your vote is not tampered", etc., etc. since Hillary was predicted and landslide, no one bothered to care. But after the upset, now all those assurances are disbelieved.

[nl]

The other piece of irony is that leading up to election night "our voting systems are secure", "we have taken steps to ensure your vote is not tampered", etc., etc. since Hillary was predicted and landslide, no one bothered to care.

Only if you weren't paying attention! There was plenty of noise around about the attacks at the time, if you looked for the signs.

In August 2016 The Federal Government made some moves to designate the election machines and systems as critical infrastructure so they could protect them[1]. Predictably, this was opposed[2].

After the election, Obama did it anyway[3]. As it turns out many states had asked for assistance securing their systems[4].

[1] http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/election-cyber-securit...

[2] http://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2016/08/some-swing-stat...

[3] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/01/why-t...

[4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/02/politics/cyber-hacking-rus...