5 ms·

Yes it's unsettling that public figures in the current and previous administration have publicly expressed their belief that the 2016 and 2020 elections, respec

Yes it's unsettling that public figures in the current and previous administration have publicly expressed their belief that the 2016 and 2020 elections, respectively, were stolen. I wish that could be changed.

turtledove 4y ago
That's a false equivalence, however. In 2016, stolen meant "gerrymandering, winning the popular vote but losing the electoral college, voter suppression" - real and measurable impacts to the outcome. In 2020, stolen meant conspiracy theories about people cheating at the polls with absolutely zero evidence that anything untoward had happened. In both cases, "stolen" is the wrong word, but to casually lump them together is also incorrect.
- skizm 4y ago
  There absolutely was evidence for the 2020 election of Trump telling state officials to "find the votes" and giving them an exact number of votes he needs them to "find" for him to win.
- eschulz 4y ago
  I think many public figures, including Karine Jean-Pierre, pushed the narrative that Russia helped Trump cheat in 2020. But yes, the gerrymandering issue is also at play. Using the term "stolen" is very serious, and people in authority certainly must understand the power of their words.
- macilacilove 4y ago
  Keep in mind that from a European perspective the US has the _least secure_ elections among the countries that are considered democratic. Even some of the non-democratic countries have better elections.
  - mywittyname 4y ago
    This sounds like bullshit to me. US elections are regularly audited and recounts often produce the exact same result. The USA has low election participation, generally, inadequate polling locations in populous areas, the design of their senate is straight up stupid, and the electoral college should have been abolished a century ago. But the actual elections themselves are as secure as they can be.
    - pjc50 4y ago
      There's been significant worries over insecure or inadequate voting machine systems for years, all the way back to the "hanging chad" of 2000. However those have not been proven to affect any outcome yet.
    - macilacilove 4y ago
      Lack of photographic voter id in certain states, Mail in voting/drop off boxes, Transporting of Votes to counting locations, and other issues that raise security concerns. These are some of the bad practices that are generally rejected by countries that present themselves as democratic. Edit: also, how is it "their senate" this time, but "our democracy" in one of your previous comments? Have you lost your US citizenship in the last 2 hours?
      - Ekaros 4y ago
        Yeah, it's exactly kind of stuff that would be criticised in banana republics. And it is somehow okay in USA... Then again CIA did have huge hand in those republics, so it is reasonable to expect they might have used similar tactics at home... You never known, specially knowing how much the mainstream political machine hated the democracy.
      - turtledove 4y ago
        Your concerns just aren't based in facts. There are roughly 1 to 2 credible allegations of in person voting fraud per year. [1] Meanwhile, over ten percent of the country doesn't have a photo id. To date, there has been zero credible evidence that voter ID laws prevent meaningful fraud, and zero credible evidence that the fraud you are describing occurs. Mail in ballots, likewise, have no credible evidence of being used to commit fraud. They are widely used in North America and Europe, with forty countries allowing vote by mail. [2] It's perhaps slightly more likely batches of ballots could go missing, but the mail in systems allow you to validate that your ballot has been received. And counting locations is perhaps the most absurd concern. Ballot counting takes time and space and dedicated staff. Should the voting shut down libraries, schools, and all the distributed places where people vote for potentially weeks? The ballots are locked and transported securely and there's tons of oversight on them. Nothing about those is considered "bad practice" or unusual. [1] https://pages.ucsd.edu/~zhajnal/page5/documents/voterIDhajnaletal.pdf https://pages.ucsd.edu/~zhajnal/page5/documents/voterIDhajna... [2] https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/PDYRWL https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi...
  - tomjakubowski 4y ago
    What is so unsecure about US elections compared to European ones?
hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
Equating the responses to the 2016 and 2020 elections is nonsense, most specifically because the loser in 2016 conceded. Yes, she may have blamed a host of other people besides herself, but she conceded, and the previous administration assisted with the peaceful transfer of power. Compare that with the 2020 election, where the loser is still going on national tours saying how the election was stolen and rigged after trying to get the result overturned, and many in his party believe him, and worse, many leaders in his party privately comment that this is all bullshit but publicly are silent or support his narrative.

turtledove 4y ago

That's a false equivalence, however. In 2016, stolen meant "gerrymandering, winning the popular vote but losing the electoral college, voter suppression" - real and measurable impacts to the outcome. In 2020, stolen meant conspiracy theories about people cheating at the polls with absolutely zero evidence that anything untoward had happened. In both cases, "stolen" is the wrong word, but to casually lump them together is also incorrect.

skizm 4y ago
There absolutely was evidence for the 2020 election of Trump telling state officials to "find the votes" and giving them an exact number of votes he needs them to "find" for him to win.
eschulz 4y ago
I think many public figures, including Karine Jean-Pierre, pushed the narrative that Russia helped Trump cheat in 2020. But yes, the gerrymandering issue is also at play. Using the term "stolen" is very serious, and people in authority certainly must understand the power of their words.
macilacilove 4y ago
Keep in mind that from a European perspective the US has the _least secure_ elections among the countries that are considered democratic. Even some of the non-democratic countries have better elections.
- mywittyname 4y ago
  This sounds like bullshit to me. US elections are regularly audited and recounts often produce the exact same result. The USA has low election participation, generally, inadequate polling locations in populous areas, the design of their senate is straight up stupid, and the electoral college should have been abolished a century ago. But the actual elections themselves are as secure as they can be.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    There's been significant worries over insecure or inadequate voting machine systems for years, all the way back to the "hanging chad" of 2000. However those have not been proven to affect any outcome yet.
  - macilacilove 4y ago
    Lack of photographic voter id in certain states, Mail in voting/drop off boxes, Transporting of Votes to counting locations, and other issues that raise security concerns. These are some of the bad practices that are generally rejected by countries that present themselves as democratic. Edit: also, how is it "their senate" this time, but "our democracy" in one of your previous comments? Have you lost your US citizenship in the last 2 hours?
    - Ekaros 4y ago
      Yeah, it's exactly kind of stuff that would be criticised in banana republics. And it is somehow okay in USA... Then again CIA did have huge hand in those republics, so it is reasonable to expect they might have used similar tactics at home... You never known, specially knowing how much the mainstream political machine hated the democracy.
    - turtledove 4y ago
      Your concerns just aren't based in facts. There are roughly 1 to 2 credible allegations of in person voting fraud per year. [1] Meanwhile, over ten percent of the country doesn't have a photo id. To date, there has been zero credible evidence that voter ID laws prevent meaningful fraud, and zero credible evidence that the fraud you are describing occurs. Mail in ballots, likewise, have no credible evidence of being used to commit fraud. They are widely used in North America and Europe, with forty countries allowing vote by mail. [2] It's perhaps slightly more likely batches of ballots could go missing, but the mail in systems allow you to validate that your ballot has been received. And counting locations is perhaps the most absurd concern. Ballot counting takes time and space and dedicated staff. Should the voting shut down libraries, schools, and all the distributed places where people vote for potentially weeks? The ballots are locked and transported securely and there's tons of oversight on them. Nothing about those is considered "bad practice" or unusual. [1] https://pages.ucsd.edu/~zhajnal/page5/documents/voterIDhajnaletal.pdf https://pages.ucsd.edu/~zhajnal/page5/documents/voterIDhajna... [2] https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/PDYRWL https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi...
- tomjakubowski 4y ago
  What is so unsecure about US elections compared to European ones?

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

Equating the responses to the 2016 and 2020 elections is nonsense, most specifically because the loser in 2016 conceded. Yes, she may have blamed a host of other people besides herself, but she conceded, and the previous administration assisted with the peaceful transfer of power. Compare that with the 2020 election, where the loser is still going on national tours saying how the election was stolen and rigged after trying to get the result overturned, and many in his party believe him, and worse, many leaders in his party privately comment that this is all bullshit but publicly are silent or support his narrative.