The problems with computerized voting machines have been widely written about. There were suspicions that the machines had been hacked in favor of G.W. Bush in 2004. Diebold was closely connected to the Republicans and Bush. Of course nothing was proved. As noted here, the machines can be hacked without leaving a trace.
The problems of voting machines have been widely written about since the 2004 election. IEEE has published a study on this. So none of this is new.
One problem is that voting is local to a state and they independently decide what technology to use. At the local level money is always tight, so they may not use the best technology.
I find it deeply ironic that voter suppression is being blamed on Hillary Clinton’s campaign. In every case the voter ID laws and other attempts to suppress poor and minority votes have been authored by the Republicans. In every case.
Republican politicians have admitted the the voter ID laws are designed to suppress the Democratic vote.
There’s a saying that you should not assume a conspiracy when incompetence will explain the situation. The hours and availability of voting in New York State can, I think, be blamed on incompetence.
The reality of the voting in the United States is that only close elections can be stolen.
G.W. Bush lost the 2000 election on the basis of both the popular vote and the electoral college, if Florida had been counted properly.
The election strategy of G.W. Bush and Co. was to get 50% plus some small increment of the vote, enough to win. The 2004 election was also very close. In this case, I think that Bush actually won. But there are people who believe that this election was stolen, particularly in Ohio.
There are other historical examples. John F. Kennedy vs. Richard M. Nixon. Nixon believed that the election had been stolen but he decided not to contest it.
There are jokes about the dead voting in Texas border towns. Except that back in the day, this actually happened.
Lest you get all teary eyed about the shining past, in comparison to our compromised present, I’ll point out that voting was not without corruption historically. The big Midwestern and East Coast cities all had “machine voting” where political bosses could deliver blocks of votes.
Although Bernie Sanders has won some smaller states, Hillary Clinton has been winning the big states. From what I have seen, the overall vote numbers and delegate numbers show Hillary Clinton winning by a wide margin. When she reaches the convention the vote totals will not be close.
The discovery that elections can be stolen should be no surprise. Elections are run by people. People can be evil and corrupt. Voting machines can make stealing a local election easier. Computers make everything easier, including fraud. But this does not mean that Hillary is stealing the election from Bernie.