3 ms·
Is it really difficult to believe that a group of people in charge of something may be biased? Calling it a "conspiracy" theory is just dismissive slander at t
by allovernow 7y ago
Is it really difficult to believe that a group of people in charge of something may be biased?
Calling it a "conspiracy" theory is just dismissive slander at this point. People have conspired successfully to achieve far greater and more malicious goals.
- hcknwscommenter 7y agoThat would be an awful lot of work for such a tiny gain. And it doesn't scale. AT ALL. What moron would go to the trouble? Iowa picks corn, not presidents.
- allovernow 7y agoWhat hard work? How many devs do you have to pay off to write a handful of lines of code manipulating a secret ballot, especially when they may be willing because of personal bias? We know electronic voting in its current implementation is severely vulnerable to tampering, both external and internal.
- asdff 7y agoGood thing Iowa used paper ballots then. This was a tally tool, not a voting tool, luckily. I think Georgia might be the most notorious for the behavior you describe.
- allovernow 7y ago>I think Georgia might be the most notorious for the behavior you describe. I don't know if you're baiting me but personally I don't think corruption is limited to Democrats. Particularly if both sides start to believe the other is secretly cheating. It feels like the American system works when a critical majority are playing with good faith - and that good faith is increasingly lacking.
- nl 7y agoCalling it a "conspiracy" theory is just dismissive slander at this point. Aren't you literally proposing that there is a conspiracy? And since there is no evidence then isn't that a theory? What do you think it should be called? "conspiracy speculation"/"conspiracy hypothesis"/"possibility of a conspiracy"?