6 ms·

> The party affiliation of the owner is irrelevant to that. Yeah that's a nice thought, but it ignores a whole lot of recent evidence to the contrary.

Ancapistani 1y ago
Half the country feels the way you do. The other half felt that way for the past four years. If centralized ownership is an issue, we should all work together to fix that. If the issue is the party affiliation, then it isn't an issue at all.
- colonCapitalDee 1y ago
  Half the country is wrong. I agree that centralized ownership is a problem regardless of party, but putting on both sides blinders is not the answer.
  - gjsman-1000 1y ago
    In that case, do you agree a one-party state, run by Democrats, would be "correct"?
    - judahmeek 1y ago
      [flagged]
    - ceejayoz 1y ago
      The "correct" setup is a loyal opposition during time out of power. In the absence of that, a one-party state is probably better than a two-party state in which one party is actively trying to burn the system down.
      - TrnsltLife 1y ago
        You're talking about the mostly peaceful protesters who tried to burn down the Federal building in Portland for over 200 nights, right? Sedition and insurrection.
        ceejayoz 1y ago
        > tried to burn down the Federal building in Portland for over 200 nights If you're pissing your pants in fear of people who fail to do something 200 nights in a row, I'd argue that says a lot more about you than it does them.
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      When did HN become so bad at false equivalencies? Can I say Singletons are not recommended but also agree that there are contexts where it's an "okay enough" option? Singetons are never the "best option" in modern software, but it's not the "worst" in every case either. Now, filling your code base with incorrect calculations: pretty much always a bad idea.
    - judahmeek 1y ago
      In the context of election security, absolutely. After the wild amount of disproven claims made by republicans about election security, I don't trust them at all.
- jibal 1y ago
  [flagged]
- Spooky23 1y ago
  That’s two reductive and poor arguments. Both sides fallacy doesn’t fly in 2025. Voting machine anxiety for lack of a better term has been a presence for some time and isn’t a partisan issue. What is a partisan issue is President Trump’s baseless allegations re the election he hasn’t acknowledged losing in 2020. Party affiliation is absolutely an issue with respect to Marvel villain parody that the modern Republican Party has become. I can’t read the article because Substack, but if the new owner is in fact a MAGA guy, (and this isn’t just drama) that’s a big problem.
  - judahmeek 1y ago
    archived version: https://archive.is/xvdh0 https://archive.is/xvdh0
- zeven7 1y ago
  Did Dominion have a party affiliation? I would assume we just went from neutral party affiliation to strong party affiliation, not from one party to another.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    Dominion didn't, but it became a focus of blame by Trump for the 2020 loss, and so to MAGA it became, like all enemies, part of the Radical Left.
  - Ancapistani 1y ago
    The discussions I've seen on the right certainly indicate that they believed Dominion to be affiliated with the left. As for the reality, I can't say. I've not done the legwork to have an informed position.
    - zeven7 1y ago
      So it didn’t move from one party to another
NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
If only the other party owned intolerable influence over the machinery that counts the votes, we'd be safe!
- beej71 1y ago
  If only a neutral party had that influence.
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    What leaves first? The neutrality or the influence?

Ancapistani 1y ago

Half the country feels the way you do. The other half felt that way for the past four years. If centralized ownership is an issue, we should all work together to fix that. If the issue is the party affiliation, then it isn't an issue at all.

colonCapitalDee 1y ago
Half the country is wrong. I agree that centralized ownership is a problem regardless of party, but putting on both sides blinders is not the answer.
- gjsman-1000 1y ago
  In that case, do you agree a one-party state, run by Democrats, would be "correct"?
  - judahmeek 1y ago
    [flagged]
  - ceejayoz 1y ago
    The "correct" setup is a loyal opposition during time out of power. In the absence of that, a one-party state is probably better than a two-party state in which one party is actively trying to burn the system down.
    - TrnsltLife 1y ago
      You're talking about the mostly peaceful protesters who tried to burn down the Federal building in Portland for over 200 nights, right? Sedition and insurrection.
      - ceejayoz 1y ago
        > tried to burn down the Federal building in Portland for over 200 nights If you're pissing your pants in fear of people who fail to do something 200 nights in a row, I'd argue that says a lot more about you than it does them.
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    When did HN become so bad at false equivalencies? Can I say Singletons are not recommended but also agree that there are contexts where it's an "okay enough" option? Singetons are never the "best option" in modern software, but it's not the "worst" in every case either. Now, filling your code base with incorrect calculations: pretty much always a bad idea.
  - judahmeek 1y ago
    In the context of election security, absolutely. After the wild amount of disproven claims made by republicans about election security, I don't trust them at all.
jibal 1y ago
[flagged]
Spooky23 1y ago
That’s two reductive and poor arguments. Both sides fallacy doesn’t fly in 2025. Voting machine anxiety for lack of a better term has been a presence for some time and isn’t a partisan issue. What is a partisan issue is President Trump’s baseless allegations re the election he hasn’t acknowledged losing in 2020. Party affiliation is absolutely an issue with respect to Marvel villain parody that the modern Republican Party has become. I can’t read the article because Substack, but if the new owner is in fact a MAGA guy, (and this isn’t just drama) that’s a big problem.
- judahmeek 1y ago
  archived version: https://archive.is/xvdh0 https://archive.is/xvdh0
zeven7 1y ago
Did Dominion have a party affiliation? I would assume we just went from neutral party affiliation to strong party affiliation, not from one party to another.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  Dominion didn't, but it became a focus of blame by Trump for the 2020 loss, and so to MAGA it became, like all enemies, part of the Radical Left.
- Ancapistani 1y ago
  The discussions I've seen on the right certainly indicate that they believed Dominion to be affiliated with the left. As for the reality, I can't say. I've not done the legwork to have an informed position.
  - zeven7 1y ago
    So it didn’t move from one party to another

NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago

If only the other party owned intolerable influence over the machinery that counts the votes, we'd be safe!

beej71 1y ago
If only a neutral party had that influence.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  What leaves first? The neutrality or the influence?