question: How do foreign nations manipulate a country’s elections?
comment: It’s a war of misinformation, not physical ballots. Make 10000 Facebook bots. Have them share and like “x just voted for ____. Don’t let this happen” or “Will x stop lying about _____”. Always make it seem like the viewer is losing something important unless they support y. Repeat for all major social network platforms, then pay off some journalists to cover the story and give a “2-sides” perspective, even though 1 side is completely fabricated. Form a lobbying group and ~~bribe~~ gain influence over Politicians. Contact disenfranchised groups in the country and promise them power/representation.
passages: Foreign electoral intervention
  
  Foreign electoral interventions are attempts by governments, covertly or overtly, to influence elections in another country. There are many ways that nations have accomplished regime change abroad, and electoral intervention is only one of those methods.
   Section::::United States elections.:2016 (Russia, Ukraine, Gulf states).:2016 election (Saudi Arabia, UAE).
   Section::::Specific methods.:Artificial results.
  
  In particularly corrupt regimes, the voting process may be nothing more than a sham, as officials would simply announce whatever results they want, sometimes without even bothering to count the votes. Such practices tend to draw international condemnation, but voters typically have little recourse, as there would seldom be any ways to remove the "winner" from power, short of a revolution. In Turkmenistan, incumbent President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov received over 97% of votes in the last election; his sole opponent, who was seen as pro-government, was in fact appointed by Berdymukhamedov.
  
  Section::::Vote fraud in legislature.
   Also in 2012, Shulman and Bloom theorized a number of distinct factors affecting the results of foreign interference:
  
  BULLET::::- Agents of interference: each with a descending effect on resentment caused by their intervention, these being nations, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, and finally individuals.
  
  BULLET::::- Partisanship of interference: whether foreign actors intervene to affect institutions and process broadly, or intervene primarily to favor one side in a contest
  
  BULLET::::- Salience of interference: consisting of two elements. First, "how obvious and well-known is the interference", and second, "how clear and understandable is the intervention?"
   Theoretical and empirical research on the effect of foreign electoral intervention had been characterized as weak overall as late as 2011; however, since then a number of such studies have been conducted. One study indicated that the country intervening in most foreign elections is the United States with 81 interventions, followed by Russia (including the former Soviet Union) with 36 interventions from 1946 to 2000—an average of once in every nine competitive elections.
  
  Section::::Academic studies.
   Examples of sham elections are the [[Elections in Italy|elections]] held in [[Kingdom of Italy|Fascist Italy]] in [[1929 Italian general election|1929]] and [[1934 Italian general election|1934]], [[Elections in Nazi Germany|elections]] in [[Nazi Germany]], the [[1958 Portuguese presidential election]], most [[Communist state|communist]] and [[socialist state]]s ([[Elections in East Germany|East Germany]], [[Elections in the Soviet Union|the Soviet Union]], [[Elections in China|China]], [[Elections in North Korea|North Korea]], etc.), and [[Ba'athist Iraq|Ba'athist]] [[Elections in Iraq#History|Iraq]].
   Section::::Elections.:Vietnam.
   Immigration law may also be used to manipulate electoral demography. For instance, Malaysia gave citizenship to immigrants from the neighboring Philippines and Indonesia, together with suffrage, in order for a political party to "dominate" the state of Sabah; this controversial process was known as Project IC.
   Section::::Specific methods.:Electorate manipulation.:Division of opposition support.
  
  Stanford University professor Beatriz Magaloni described a model governing the behaviour of autocratic regimes. She proposed that ruling parties can maintain political control under a democratic system without actively manipulating votes or coercing the electorate. Under the right conditions, the democratic system is maneuvered into an equilibrium in which divided opposition parties act as unwitting accomplices to single-party rule. This permits the ruling regime to abstain from illegal electoral fraud.
  
  Preferential voting systems such as score voting, instant-runoff voting, and single transferable vote are designed to prevent systemic electoral manipulation and political duopoly.
   BULLET::::- 2018 Bhutanese National Assembly election 15 September and 18 October 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Maldivian presidential election 23 September 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Afghan parliamentary election 20 October 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Taiwanese local elections 24 November 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Bangladeshi general election 30 December 2018
  
  Section::::Middle East.
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Lebanese general election 6 May 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Iraqi parliamentary election 12 May 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Iraqi Kurdistan general election 20 October 2018
  
  BULLET::::- 2018 Israeli municipal elections 30 October 2018 and 13 November 2018 (runoff)
  
  BULLET::::- Bahraini general election, 2018 24 November and 1 December 2018
  
  Section::::Europe.
   [[Gerrymandering]], exclusion of opposition candidates from eligibility for office, needlessly high restrictions on who may be a candidate, like [[ballot access]] rules, and manipulating thresholds for electoral success are some of the ways the structure of an election can be changed to favor a specific faction or candidate.
  
  Section::::Characteristic.:Difficulties with elections.:Interference with campaigns.
  
  Those in power may arrest or assassinate candidates, suppress or even criminalize campaigning, close campaign headquarters, harass or beat campaign workers, or intimidate voters with violence. [[Foreign electoral intervention]] can also occur with [[Russia]] being the main culprit in recent years.
   BULLET::::- Liberia: National Elections Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Libya: High National Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Malaysia: Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Mexico:
  
  BULLET::::- Federal Electoral Institute
  
  BULLET::::- Federal Electoral Tribunal
  
  BULLET::::- Moldova: Central Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Myanmar (Burma): Union Electoral Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Nepal: Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- New Zealand: Electoral Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Nicaragua: Supreme Electoral Council
  
  BULLET::::- Nigeria: Independent National Electoral Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Norway: Norwegian Directorate of Elections
  
  BULLET::::- Pakistan: Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Palestine: Central Elections Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Philippines: Commission on Elections
  
  BULLET::::- Once a winner is proclaimed, only these tribunals can rule on election matters:
  
  BULLET::::- Presidential Electoral Tribunal (entirely composed of the Supreme Court)
   BULLET::::- 2017 Turkmen presidential election 12 February 2017
  
  BULLET::::- India: 2017 Uttarakhand Legislative Assembly election 15 February 2017
  
  BULLET::::- 2017 Indonesian local elections 15 February 2017
  
  BULLET::::- 2017 Jakarta gubernatorial election 15 February and 19 April 2017
  
  BULLET::::- Malaysia: 2017 Tanjong Datu by-election 18 February 2017
  
  BULLET::::- India: 2017 Manipur Legislative Assembly election 4 and 8 March 2017
  
  BULLET::::- 2017 East Timorese presidential election 20 March 2017
  
  BULLET::::- Japan: 2017 Chiba gubernatorial election 23 March 2017
  
  BULLET::::- China: 2017 Hong Kong Chief Executive election 26 March 2017
  
  BULLET::::- 2017 Myanmar by-elections 1 April 2017
   Show elections are a common event in [[Dictatorship|dictatorial regimes]] that feel the need to feign the appearance of public [[Legitimacy (political)|legitimacy]]. Published results usually show nearly 100% [[voter turnout]] and high support (typically at least ~80%, and close to 100% in many cases) for the prescribed candidate(s) or for the [[referendum]] choice that favors the [[political party]] in power. Dictatorial regimes can also organize show elections with results simulating those that might be achieved in democratic countries.
   In addition, national legislatures of countries often permit domestic observation. Domestic election observers can be either partisan (i.e. representing interests of one or a group of election contestants) or non-partisan (usually done by civil society groups). Legislations of different countries permit various forms and extents of international and domestic election observation.
   Sometimes only one government approved candidate is allowed to run in sham elections with no opposition candidates allowed or opposition candidates are arrested on false charges or even without any charges before the election to prevent them from running.
  
  Section::::Show election.:Examples.
  
  [[File:Wahlzettel-3.-Reich.jpg|thumb|right|A ballot from the [[1936 German parliamentary election and referendum|1936 elections in Nazi Germany]].]]
   Section::::Specific methods.:Vote buying.:Examples.:Africa.:Kenya.
   Section::::Elections.:China.
   BULLET::::- Colombia: National Electoral Council
  
  BULLET::::- Costa Rica: Supreme Electoral Court
  
  BULLET::::- Democratic Republic of the Congo: Independent National Electoral Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Egypt: High Elections Committee
  
  BULLET::::- Ethiopia: National Election Board
  
  BULLET::::- France: Constitutional Council
  
  BULLET::::- Ghana: Electoral Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Guyana: Elections Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Haiti: Provisional Electoral Council
  
  BULLET::::- Hong Kong: Electoral Affairs Commission
  
  BULLET::::- India: Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Indonesia: General Elections Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Iran: Guardian Council
  
  BULLET::::- Iraq: Independent High Electoral Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Israel: Israeli Central Elections Committee
  
  BULLET::::- Jordan: Independent Election Commission
  
  BULLET::::- Kenya:
  
  BULLET::::- Interim Independent Electoral Commission (since 2008)
  
  BULLET::::- "Electoral Commission" (defunct since 2008)
   Section::::Elections.:Gabon.
  
  According to Mim Kelber, "in Central Africa, all it takes for a man to cast a proxy vote for his wife is to produce an unwitnessed letter mentioning the name of the person to whom the voting power is delegated." The Gabon respondent to an Inter-Parliamentary Union letter commented, "It has been observed that this possibility was exploited to a far greater extent by men than by women, for reasons not always noble."
  
  Section::::Elections.:Guyana.
   BULLET::::- Brazil, Sociedade Anonima
  
  BULLET::::- Bulgaria, Aktsionerno Druzhestvo.
  
  BULLET::::- Canada, Corporation and Company
  
  BULLET::::- Chile, Sociedad Anonima
  
  BULLET::::- People's Republic of China, Gufen Youxian Gongsi
  
  BULLET::::- Republic of China (Taiwan), Ku-fen Yu-hsien Kung-szu
  
  BULLET::::- Colombia, Sociedad Anonima
  
  BULLET::::- Costa Rica, Sociedad Anonima
  
  BULLET::::- Cyprus, Public Limited Company
  
  BULLET::::- Czech Republic, akciová společnost (or a.s. or akc. spol.)
  
  BULLET::::- Denmark, Aktieselskab
  
  BULLET::::- Ecuador, Sociedad Anonima or Compania Anonima
  
  BULLET::::- Egypt, Sharikat Al-Mossahamah
  
  BULLET::::- El Salvador, Sociedad Anonima
  
  BULLET::::- Estonia, Aktsiaselts
  
  BULLET::::- European Economic Area/European Union, Societas Europaea
  
  BULLET::::- Finland, Julkinen Osakeyhtio/Publikt Aktiebolag
  
  BULLET::::- France, Societe Anonyme
  
  BULLET::::- Germany, Aktiengesellschaft
   Non-governmental entities can also interfere with elections, through physical force, verbal intimidation, or fraud, which can result in improper casting or counting of votes. Monitoring for and minimizing electoral fraud is also an ongoing task in countries with strong traditions of free and fair elections. Problems that prevent an election from being "free and fair" take various forms.
  
  Section::::Characteristic.:Difficulties with elections.:Lack of open political debate or an informed electorate.
   In 2018, Jonathan Godinez further elaborated on Corstange and Marinov's theory by proposing that interventions can be specified as "globally-motivated intervention", where "a country intervenes in the election of another country for the interests, betterment, or well-being of the international audience," and "self-motivated intervention", where "a country intervenes in the election of another country to further the interests, betterment, or well-being of themselves."
  
  Godinez further theorized that the vested interest of an intervening country can be identified by examining a "threefold methodology": the tactics of intervention, stated motivation, and the magnitude of the intervention.
   In the executive model the election commission is directed by a cabinet minister as part of the executive branch of government, and may include local government authorities acting as agents of the central body. Countries with this model include Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia. In the United States, elections for federal, state, and local offices are run by the executive branch of each state government - see, for example, the Division of Elections of the Florida Department of State.
  
  Section::::Electoral models.:Judicial model.
   BULLET::::- 2015 Tanzanian general election
  
  BULLET::::- November 2015 Turkish general election
  
  BULLET::::- 2015 Myanmar general election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Ugandan general election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Republic of the Congo presidential election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Djiboutian presidential election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Chadian presidential election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Equatorial Guinean presidential election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Gabonese presidential election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Hong Kong legislative election (See 2016 Hong Kong LegCo candidates' disqualification controversy)
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Romanian legislative election
  
  BULLET::::- 1946 Romanian general election
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Serbian parliamentary election (results disputed by opposition)
  
  BULLET::::- 2016 Zambian general election
  
raw_presuppositions: A foreign nation would have difficulty manipulating a country's elections by ballot.
raw_corrections: A foreign nation manipulates a country's elections by spreading misinformation, not by manipulating ballots.