4 ms·

There is no evidence of fraud because our institutions are unwilling to investigate allegations of fraud. If you ask why they aren't willing to investigate frau

There is no evidence of fraud because our institutions are unwilling to investigate allegations of fraud. If you ask why they aren't willing to investigate fraud, there's an excuse for that. Then, any attempt to audit or secure the election process is shot down with another excuse. Then you start to wonder, how long has this been happening for? No wonder there is zero confidence in this system - it's all corrupt. Then they gaslight people into thinking that the mere discussion of fraud in public is causing people to lose confidence in our democracy. Amazing times we live in.

pyronik19 4y ago
Precisely, the fraud is so prevalent and grotesque gaslighting is the only mechanism to deal with it.
shadowgovt 4y ago
Actually, there's plenty of evidence of fraud. This article is an announcement of the prosecution of some of it. What's lacking is evidence of widespread fraud sufficiently coordinated and systemic to sway the results of a national Presidential election, which we aren't seeing because the system is already set up to monitor for it. 2020 wasn't the US's first time to the election roe-day-oh, and there's been 200 years of infrastructure put in place to detect and punish fraud, malfeasance, and attempts to infringe, dilute, or steal people's right to vote. That's why the claims one candidate made are extraordinary (and they failed to pass a smell test, much less bring actionable claims or evidence that would withstand legal scrutiny). Most claims we see bandied about online are so risibly ignorant of the existing process that anyone with basic knowledge of how elections work does not take them seriously. They're equivalent in credibility and grasp of the system's machinery itself to saying foreign agents can compromise your computer by infiltrating the 1-bit. To be clear: I'm excited that people are interested in the process (welcome to the club! There are literally t-shirts!). But I'm disheartened how many people come to the conversation thinking they already know how it works when, no, they don't; like many large and old systems, it has non-obvious quirks and Chesterton's Fences, and common sense doesn't always match up with the how or why of the system. Screaming "fraud" every time one sees something one doesn't understand isn't how one learns; it's how one guarantees continuation of ignorance.

pyronik19 4y ago

Precisely, the fraud is so prevalent and grotesque gaslighting is the only mechanism to deal with it.

shadowgovt 4y ago

Actually, there's plenty of evidence of fraud. This article is an announcement of the prosecution of some of it. What's lacking is evidence of widespread fraud sufficiently coordinated and systemic to sway the results of a national Presidential election, which we aren't seeing because the system is already set up to monitor for it. 2020 wasn't the US's first time to the election roe-day-oh, and there's been 200 years of infrastructure put in place to detect and punish fraud, malfeasance, and attempts to infringe, dilute, or steal people's right to vote. That's why the claims one candidate made are extraordinary (and they failed to pass a smell test, much less bring actionable claims or evidence that would withstand legal scrutiny). Most claims we see bandied about online are so risibly ignorant of the existing process that anyone with basic knowledge of how elections work does not take them seriously. They're equivalent in credibility and grasp of the system's machinery itself to saying foreign agents can compromise your computer by infiltrating the 1-bit. To be clear: I'm excited that people are interested in the process (welcome to the club! There are literally t-shirts!). But I'm disheartened how many people come to the conversation thinking they already know how it works when, no, they don't; like many large and old systems, it has non-obvious quirks and Chesterton's Fences, and common sense doesn't always match up with the how or why of the system. Screaming "fraud" every time one sees something one doesn't understand isn't how one learns; it's how one guarantees continuation of ignorance.