4 ms·

This is a wild amount of both-sidesing in a case where one side has evidence and the other is literally an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory at a scale where yo

by Spivak 2y ago

This is a wild amount of both-sidesing in a case where one side has evidence and the other is literally an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory at a scale where you could not keep the secret. Most secure in history is (in my state) is correct. There are more pointless safeguards than have ever existed. If you were willing to go with the results of any election pre 2020 then you should be overjoyed at how much more "secure" the process is. That's the point that's being made, the amount of provable voter fraud that bypasses the checks and is only discovered after the fact is nil The article you cited is literally the system working. There's 11 million people in Ohio, the number of illegal registrations is several orders of magnitude less than the lizardman constant and they were nonetheless caught.

anon291 2y ago
Including the safeguards where observers are safely kept away from the counting! There were a lot of irregularities in 2020. The supreme Court recently said Pennsylvania should not have counted some of the ballots it did in 2020 (policy change by secretary of state vs legislature).
- gruez 2y ago
  >There were a lot of irregularities in 2020. Source? I thought all the election fraud lawsuits/investigations for the 2020 election basically went nowhere?
  - anon291 2y ago
    For lack of standing or lack of ability to relieve yes. Courts aren't going to question a presidential election. That doesn't mean we can't look at the videos of observers being banned, the facts of now-declared-illegal extra-legislative policy changes, the timings of various ballot drops etc. Opinions aren't formed on court cases. That's why in 2020, more than half of Democrats thought the election was irregular. It's remarkable to me because this is one of those issues where polling says voters of both parties agree, but the media insists that there's nothing there. That's crazy
    - gruez 2y ago
      >For lack of standing or lack of ability to relieve yes. Courts aren't going to question a presidential election. ??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore >That doesn't mean we can't look at the videos of observers being banned, the facts of now-declared-illegal extra-legislative policy changes, the timings of various ballot drops etc. My impression is that there were a bunch of "this seems sus" allegations, but all the popular ones have been discredited. What are the most credible examples (ie. of actual malfeasance going on, rather than merely "this seems sus") that you can provide?
      - mikeyouse 2y ago
        Yeah it’s just a polite retelling of the crazy Trump nonsense that was laughed out of court by every judge who looked at it and the rest is just misunderstandings from casual election observers who refuse to do one iota of research about how things work. The accusations are always vague as well since each time you zoom in on one it’s completely anodyne but you need the distance to keep up the specter of something nefarious.
        anon291 2y ago
        I guess for me personally I don't deny that Joe Biden won the contest as performed. I just question the contest themselves. After all, if made up my own election law and ran an election, and declared my candidate the winner, no one would listen to me, but that's what happened here, which we know based on scotus's interpretation of whether secretaries of state can change rules the way they did in Pennsylvania.
        acdha 2y ago
        > that's what happened here What precisely happened here? Can you specify which ruling you’re talking about and why you think it’s so significant?
        2y ago
mythrwy 2y ago
Yes drop boxes and mail in ballots with no signature verification and the counting done largely by one side of the partisan divide (county/state employees) is totally 100% secure what could go wrong? Those conspiracy nuts just don't get it.
- anigbrowl 2y ago
  They had a very long hand-counted ballot audit of the 2020 election in Arizona in 2021, and after (iirc) a few months of double and triple checking they were unable to find any irregularities.
- ytpete 2y ago
  Every polling place and every vote-counting center is open to observers from both parties, by law. Your idea that one party is shut out of this system has no basis in reality.
  - mythrwy 2y ago
    Nope. There is a lawsuit right now in Georgia over the decision by some locations to accept ballots over the weekend without GOP observers present. Counting without bipartisan observers happened frequently in 2020. Also "observers" weren't mentioned in my original post. Just because someone watches a count is irrelevant to my original points.
    - Spivak 2y ago
      You mean the one that was rejected? The lawsuit was wrong legally and morally— these are people who are eligible to vote casting their vote in a more secure manner than mailing it in, and doing so prior to election day. There's just no moral defense of rule-lawyering to throw out valid ballots or turn away voters, and judges in red and blue states alike aren't having it.
chrisco255 2y ago
Junk mail democracy is the most insecure model for an election I could possibly conceive. Other than entrusting closed source software companies with tabulating votes.
- Spivak 2y ago
  So why do red states who have every incentive to remove vote-by-mail entirely not do so? You can vote by mail in every state, lots of red states are no-excuse.
- ytpete 2y ago
  Almost every state lets you vote in person instead if you prefer. And if you do, any mail-in ballots that were sent out under your name are null and void. So if you don't trust it, just vote in person and problem solved.

by Spivak 2y ago

anon291 2y ago

Including the safeguards where observers are safely kept away from the counting! There were a lot of irregularities in 2020. The supreme Court recently said Pennsylvania should not have counted some of the ballots it did in 2020 (policy change by secretary of state vs legislature).

gruez 2y ago
>There were a lot of irregularities in 2020. Source? I thought all the election fraud lawsuits/investigations for the 2020 election basically went nowhere?
- anon291 2y ago
  For lack of standing or lack of ability to relieve yes. Courts aren't going to question a presidential election. That doesn't mean we can't look at the videos of observers being banned, the facts of now-declared-illegal extra-legislative policy changes, the timings of various ballot drops etc. Opinions aren't formed on court cases. That's why in 2020, more than half of Democrats thought the election was irregular. It's remarkable to me because this is one of those issues where polling says voters of both parties agree, but the media insists that there's nothing there. That's crazy
  - gruez 2y ago
    >For lack of standing or lack of ability to relieve yes. Courts aren't going to question a presidential election. ??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore >That doesn't mean we can't look at the videos of observers being banned, the facts of now-declared-illegal extra-legislative policy changes, the timings of various ballot drops etc. My impression is that there were a bunch of "this seems sus" allegations, but all the popular ones have been discredited. What are the most credible examples (ie. of actual malfeasance going on, rather than merely "this seems sus") that you can provide?
    - mikeyouse 2y ago
      Yeah it’s just a polite retelling of the crazy Trump nonsense that was laughed out of court by every judge who looked at it and the rest is just misunderstandings from casual election observers who refuse to do one iota of research about how things work. The accusations are always vague as well since each time you zoom in on one it’s completely anodyne but you need the distance to keep up the specter of something nefarious.
      - anon291 2y ago
        I guess for me personally I don't deny that Joe Biden won the contest as performed. I just question the contest themselves. After all, if made up my own election law and ran an election, and declared my candidate the winner, no one would listen to me, but that's what happened here, which we know based on scotus's interpretation of whether secretaries of state can change rules the way they did in Pennsylvania.
        acdha 2y ago
        > that's what happened here What precisely happened here? Can you specify which ruling you’re talking about and why you think it’s so significant?
        2y ago

mythrwy 2y ago

Yes drop boxes and mail in ballots with no signature verification and the counting done largely by one side of the partisan divide (county/state employees) is totally 100% secure what could go wrong? Those conspiracy nuts just don't get it.

anigbrowl 2y ago
They had a very long hand-counted ballot audit of the 2020 election in Arizona in 2021, and after (iirc) a few months of double and triple checking they were unable to find any irregularities.
ytpete 2y ago
Every polling place and every vote-counting center is open to observers from both parties, by law. Your idea that one party is shut out of this system has no basis in reality.
- mythrwy 2y ago
  Nope. There is a lawsuit right now in Georgia over the decision by some locations to accept ballots over the weekend without GOP observers present. Counting without bipartisan observers happened frequently in 2020. Also "observers" weren't mentioned in my original post. Just because someone watches a count is irrelevant to my original points.
  - Spivak 2y ago
    You mean the one that was rejected? The lawsuit was wrong legally and morally— these are people who are eligible to vote casting their vote in a more secure manner than mailing it in, and doing so prior to election day. There's just no moral defense of rule-lawyering to throw out valid ballots or turn away voters, and judges in red and blue states alike aren't having it.

chrisco255 2y ago

Junk mail democracy is the most insecure model for an election I could possibly conceive. Other than entrusting closed source software companies with tabulating votes.

Spivak 2y ago
So why do red states who have every incentive to remove vote-by-mail entirely not do so? You can vote by mail in every state, lots of red states are no-excuse.
ytpete 2y ago
Almost every state lets you vote in person instead if you prefer. And if you do, any mail-in ballots that were sent out under your name are null and void. So if you don't trust it, just vote in person and problem solved.