4 ms·

You are using one local example to bolster claims of fraud across at least four states, if not the entire nation. Trump lost by what, 8 million votes? Does di

by kmbfjr 6y ago

You are using one local example to bolster claims of fraud across at least four states, if not the entire nation. Trump lost by what, 8 million votes? Does dirty shit happen? Absolutely. Was it in this election? Yep. Was it enough to sway the outcome? No freaking way.

throwaway33292 6y ago
I posted in a sibling thread but there is evidence that it was enough to sway the election. Check out the Navarro Report, for instance, which provides several dimensions of evidence for this claim. The cheating only really needs to occur in a handful of key urban counties to sway a national election, so it doesn’t actually need to be wide spread.
aksss 6y ago
Context is important - I was responding to someone asking for local experience(“go work at a polling place”). But examples seem all too easy to find. A better response is to consider what concessions in the control structure can be made to restore confidence. You may have faith that everything is okay, but that does little to satisfy those with experience of fraud or hearing stories of fraud. One can see a local example and easily (and not irrationally) imagine that the systems work similarly in the neighboring city, county, or state. Whether your intention or not, it’s easy for your attitude to come across as accepting of deficiency - and an endorsement that may run out when the tables turn (and in American politics, they always do). The unending cycle of dismissal by each side to the other’s sincerely held concerns is getting us nowhere but a bad place.
- sjg007 6y ago
  Maybe take a course in statistical analysis then.
  - aksss 6y ago
    I think you are not seeing the problem set for what it is. Your attitude seems to be: “there is no issue with the integrity of the number summmary.” Let’s say the problem at this point has nothing to do with who won - the problem at this point is that a great many of your countrymen are convinced they cannot trust the system. Your hope is they get over it. I can only tell you that from observing politics for a long time that the concerns over election integrity are getting worse in this country with each iteration, not better. In the face of this we are relaxing the control structure, not strengthening it. The result of continuing down this path should be easy to perceive.
    - dogwhistle111 6y ago
      What you describe is indeed the problem, but SHOULD it rightfully be the problem? Or should we really be concerned about the truth of who won, and leave it at that? The mistrust was fueled entirely by Trump. Prior to Nov 3, more Republicans than Democrats expressed confidence in the integrity of the system. So if you dont dispute the election result, then the problem would seem to lie entirely with Trump lies, and all who choose to believe them over evidence. You know Mccarthyism was a thing? Was it because there were systematic issues at the time making our Congress susceptible to a Communist majority, or was it because of a demogogue, lies lies lies, and willfully ignorant believers?

by kmbfjr 6y ago

throwaway33292 6y ago

I posted in a sibling thread but there is evidence that it was enough to sway the election. Check out the Navarro Report, for instance, which provides several dimensions of evidence for this claim. The cheating only really needs to occur in a handful of key urban counties to sway a national election, so it doesn’t actually need to be wide spread.

aksss 6y ago

Context is important - I was responding to someone asking for local experience(“go work at a polling place”). But examples seem all too easy to find. A better response is to consider what concessions in the control structure can be made to restore confidence. You may have faith that everything is okay, but that does little to satisfy those with experience of fraud or hearing stories of fraud. One can see a local example and easily (and not irrationally) imagine that the systems work similarly in the neighboring city, county, or state. Whether your intention or not, it’s easy for your attitude to come across as accepting of deficiency - and an endorsement that may run out when the tables turn (and in American politics, they always do). The unending cycle of dismissal by each side to the other’s sincerely held concerns is getting us nowhere but a bad place.

sjg007 6y ago
Maybe take a course in statistical analysis then.
- aksss 6y ago
  I think you are not seeing the problem set for what it is. Your attitude seems to be: “there is no issue with the integrity of the number summmary.” Let’s say the problem at this point has nothing to do with who won - the problem at this point is that a great many of your countrymen are convinced they cannot trust the system. Your hope is they get over it. I can only tell you that from observing politics for a long time that the concerns over election integrity are getting worse in this country with each iteration, not better. In the face of this we are relaxing the control structure, not strengthening it. The result of continuing down this path should be easy to perceive.
  - dogwhistle111 6y ago
    What you describe is indeed the problem, but SHOULD it rightfully be the problem? Or should we really be concerned about the truth of who won, and leave it at that? The mistrust was fueled entirely by Trump. Prior to Nov 3, more Republicans than Democrats expressed confidence in the integrity of the system. So if you dont dispute the election result, then the problem would seem to lie entirely with Trump lies, and all who choose to believe them over evidence. You know Mccarthyism was a thing? Was it because there were systematic issues at the time making our Congress susceptible to a Communist majority, or was it because of a demogogue, lies lies lies, and willfully ignorant believers?