4 ms·

Voter ID, removal of hackable voting machines, and hand count of votes are not disenfranchisement. You may have been told by the media that it is, but it's not.

Voter ID, removal of hackable voting machines, and hand count of votes are not disenfranchisement. You may have been told by the media that it is, but it's not. Many advanced democracies have such things in place.

jariel 6y ago
This is completely false. The machines are not hacked, and the voter rolls are legitimate. There is zero evidence of systematic fraud, therefore, there is no 'disenfranchisement'. To suggest that 'maybe one day, someone could mess with our election' is not 'disenfranchisement'. "You may have been told by the media" - Rudy Giuilani and the President clearly failed to make a case or provide any evidence - moreover, they lied, lied and lied through the process and have no credibility. The election was fine - Trump's claims of fraud are completely fabricated.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  > The machines are not hacked, and the voter rolls are legitimate. > The election was fine - Trump's claims of fraud are completely fabricated. Their capacity to claim fraud is _because_ of these weaknesses that make such a claim possible. Regardless of what the truth is, there are millions of people who think the election was rigged. If we don't placate those people and fix the issues, it could continue to escalate.
  - jariel 6y ago
    This is upside down. We don't investigate innocent people for murder to placate an angry mob. What we do is implement a communications strategy to get the mob to realize the random person is not guilty of murder. The President is using the authority of his position to lie and misrepresent the issue, so we'll have to stop that somehow and get the proper message out. There are no fundamental weaknesses in the system to the point wherein any organized attempt could flip the election - other than in the known grey areas which we fight about in public such as 'voter rolls' and how we purge them etc. There is ambiguity there. But the voting itself is actually really credible. The 'voting machines' and ballot counting is probably the most impossible to defeat system. Russians wanting to throw the election would have far more effect using Twitter and FB to incite crowds and to divide Americans, which is exactly what they have shown to be doing.
  - TheGRS 6y ago
    Do we placate them by refusing to acknowledge an obvious win? I'm sorry but it went way too far. The president and everyone who went along with his BS were writing checks they couldn't cash and so their followers go all worked up because of it.
- ivnubinas 6y ago
  There is a lot of evidence of voter fraud. I'm not sure if enough to turn around a presidential election but it can change local ones. https://youtu.be/ZD1-dBrP4Pw https://youtu.be/ZD1-dBrP4Pw
  - TheGRS 6y ago
    No one is saying there's zero fraud, it happens every election on very small scales, but its only ever at the scale to affect elections that are within a few hundred votes. None of the states were anything close to that.
- stefantalpalaru 6y ago
  > There is zero evidence of systematic fraud, therefore, there is no 'disenfranchisement'. "This study applies Benford’s law to detect anomalies in county-level vote data for the 2020 US presidential election. Most prominent distribution violations are observed with Republican vote counts in blue states, all vote counts in states won by the Democratic candidate, and Democratic vote counts in swing states. Distributions are anomalous in swing states won by the Democratic nominee and not anomalous in swing states won by the Republican nominee." - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3728626 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3728626
quotemstr 6y ago
Yep. One side is screaming "No fraud! You're bad for even considering the possibility!" while simultaneously being against every single transparency or robustness measure that might actually convince the other side that there was no fraud. Hmmmm...
- manicdee 6y ago
  One side is insisting on so-called transparency and accountability measures which make fraud much easier. Hmmm... In the meantime it’s not the vote counting system that is the problem so much as the single candidate seats, winner takes all style representation along with the electoral college. The people who actually are underrepresented would be far better off with multiple electorates being merged and represented by multiple representatives, and switching to something like Hare-Clarke voting (single transferable vote).
dogwhistle111 6y ago
They have hand counted in Georgia, turning up results that matched the machine count. Did that stop the machine conspiracy theory? Nope.

jariel 6y ago

This is completely false. The machines are not hacked, and the voter rolls are legitimate. There is zero evidence of systematic fraud, therefore, there is no 'disenfranchisement'. To suggest that 'maybe one day, someone could mess with our election' is not 'disenfranchisement'. "You may have been told by the media" - Rudy Giuilani and the President clearly failed to make a case or provide any evidence - moreover, they lied, lied and lied through the process and have no credibility. The election was fine - Trump's claims of fraud are completely fabricated.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
> The machines are not hacked, and the voter rolls are legitimate. > The election was fine - Trump's claims of fraud are completely fabricated. Their capacity to claim fraud is _because_ of these weaknesses that make such a claim possible. Regardless of what the truth is, there are millions of people who think the election was rigged. If we don't placate those people and fix the issues, it could continue to escalate.
- jariel 6y ago
  This is upside down. We don't investigate innocent people for murder to placate an angry mob. What we do is implement a communications strategy to get the mob to realize the random person is not guilty of murder. The President is using the authority of his position to lie and misrepresent the issue, so we'll have to stop that somehow and get the proper message out. There are no fundamental weaknesses in the system to the point wherein any organized attempt could flip the election - other than in the known grey areas which we fight about in public such as 'voter rolls' and how we purge them etc. There is ambiguity there. But the voting itself is actually really credible. The 'voting machines' and ballot counting is probably the most impossible to defeat system. Russians wanting to throw the election would have far more effect using Twitter and FB to incite crowds and to divide Americans, which is exactly what they have shown to be doing.
- TheGRS 6y ago
  Do we placate them by refusing to acknowledge an obvious win? I'm sorry but it went way too far. The president and everyone who went along with his BS were writing checks they couldn't cash and so their followers go all worked up because of it.
ivnubinas 6y ago
There is a lot of evidence of voter fraud. I'm not sure if enough to turn around a presidential election but it can change local ones. https://youtu.be/ZD1-dBrP4Pw https://youtu.be/ZD1-dBrP4Pw
- TheGRS 6y ago
  No one is saying there's zero fraud, it happens every election on very small scales, but its only ever at the scale to affect elections that are within a few hundred votes. None of the states were anything close to that.
stefantalpalaru 6y ago
> There is zero evidence of systematic fraud, therefore, there is no 'disenfranchisement'. "This study applies Benford’s law to detect anomalies in county-level vote data for the 2020 US presidential election. Most prominent distribution violations are observed with Republican vote counts in blue states, all vote counts in states won by the Democratic candidate, and Democratic vote counts in swing states. Distributions are anomalous in swing states won by the Democratic nominee and not anomalous in swing states won by the Republican nominee." - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3728626 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3728626

quotemstr 6y ago

Yep. One side is screaming "No fraud! You're bad for even considering the possibility!" while simultaneously being against every single transparency or robustness measure that might actually convince the other side that there was no fraud. Hmmmm...

manicdee 6y ago
One side is insisting on so-called transparency and accountability measures which make fraud much easier. Hmmm... In the meantime it’s not the vote counting system that is the problem so much as the single candidate seats, winner takes all style representation along with the electoral college. The people who actually are underrepresented would be far better off with multiple electorates being merged and represented by multiple representatives, and switching to something like Hare-Clarke voting (single transferable vote).

dogwhistle111 6y ago

They have hand counted in Georgia, turning up results that matched the machine count. Did that stop the machine conspiracy theory? Nope.