4 ms·

Digital voting is not secure and never will be, which is the main reason it exists. Nobody really wants secure elections, they want to win elections. Look at pr

Digital voting is not secure and never will be, which is the main reason it exists. Nobody really wants secure elections, they want to win elections. Look at prop 50 for a recent example.

johnnyanmac 1y ago
Prop 50 without any context is useless. Which state, year, and why do you think it's rigged?
- notmyjob 1y ago
  It’s a proposition in the upcoming California election intended to maximally gerrymander state congressional districts to reduce the number of republican legislators at the federal level. It’s a reactionary move in response to Texas redistricting process which removed some blue team congress folks in their state. The new gerrymandered prop 50 districts will replace, at great cost to the taxpayer the bipartisan commission drawn districts which were created not long ago based on another statewide proposition as I recall, which of course was also very costly but at least done with the intention of making districts more fair, ie less gerrymandered. But even that redistricting effort was not fair, leaving republicans with about 15% representation despite being much larger proportion of voters. The new prop 50 super gerrymandered districts would reduce that 15% even further, more or less eliminating the other party. What is so bad about that, other than the wasted tax payer money (the state is currently in the red), is that this decreases California’s political power in DC. It’s in the interest of the state as a whole, even just democrats, to have representation in both parties at the national level. So not only is it wasteful, and intentionally unfair, it’s bad for everyone in the state. And, it’s being done largely to support Gavin Newsom’s eternal presidential ambitions. I think the bulk of the 300 million spent on ads is from his presidential campaign purse.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    > I think the bulk of the 300 million spent on ads is from his presidential campaign purse. Since he has no “presidential campaign purse”, not being a Presidential candidate, that is literally impossible. $2.6 million (which is, very much, not a majority of the funding) does come from his leadership PAC.
    - notmyjob 1y ago
      I may be wrong about the total raised so far, different ai responses bounce around greatly on the total raised and spent so far, and of course it’s impossible to know exactly given so much “dark money” in politics today, but even very leftwardly biased ai responses list Newsom as one of the few major backers. I suppose it’s money from his 2022 gubernatorial fund mostly but you’ll admit 2022 has come and gone? (Maybe you won’t!) And if you think Newsom doesn’t have presidential ambitions, and that his path to the White House doesn’t depend quite critically on passage of prop 50, you either aren’t paying attention to the full arc of Gavin’s career or being overtly dishonest. Edit: Indeed my total was off by about 2x, but my general point stands the proposition in detrimental to California’s political power in Washington because it reduces the state’s representation in the GOP power structure, while mostly benefitting Newsom’s presidential ambitions. If you can’t see that I don’t know how to help you.
      - johnnyanmac 1y ago
        > it reduces the state’s representation in the GOP power structure Compared to now, where the GOP power drained the reservoirs, seized the states national guard without authorization to roam the streets and then migrate to Oregon, and overall labeling the state as everything wrong with thr democratic party? How much did it cost the state or federal to pull off all those stunts? The redistricting goes back to normal during the 2030 census, and clearly the state needs to work fast against these clear oversteps in power against it. This really isn't the time to play moderatism. The GOP power hasn't these past 9 months. 300m in advertising to make sure the people know this is chump change for the 4th largest economy. ----- Now all that said, how is advertising for a ballot initiative on any way "rigged"? Even if you think it's dumb and harmful, this is going by thr books, which says the people get to vote on any amendments to the state constitution. Where's the foul play here?
        notmyjob 1y ago
        Look, most of the work of state congressional reps is getting pork approved and garnering federal funds for the state. If you cannot understand that and grasp how having representatives in both groups helps the state then I can’t help you. Prop 50 is bad for the state as a whole. It is also undemocratic but let’s not pretend that matters to those involved. Those involved in this who work for the state (people like Gavin) should care about the fate of the state they are supposedly working for more than their own presidential ambitions, no? Especially when that person has little chance of winning at the national level because they do really stupid things like prop 50.

Digital voting is not secure and never will be, which is the main reason it exists. Nobody really wants secure elections, they want to win elections. Look at prop 50 for a recent example.

johnnyanmac 1y ago

Prop 50 without any context is useless. Which state, year, and why do you think it's rigged?

notmyjob 1y ago
It’s a proposition in the upcoming California election intended to maximally gerrymander state congressional districts to reduce the number of republican legislators at the federal level. It’s a reactionary move in response to Texas redistricting process which removed some blue team congress folks in their state. The new gerrymandered prop 50 districts will replace, at great cost to the taxpayer the bipartisan commission drawn districts which were created not long ago based on another statewide proposition as I recall, which of course was also very costly but at least done with the intention of making districts more fair, ie less gerrymandered. But even that redistricting effort was not fair, leaving republicans with about 15% representation despite being much larger proportion of voters. The new prop 50 super gerrymandered districts would reduce that 15% even further, more or less eliminating the other party. What is so bad about that, other than the wasted tax payer money (the state is currently in the red), is that this decreases California’s political power in DC. It’s in the interest of the state as a whole, even just democrats, to have representation in both parties at the national level. So not only is it wasteful, and intentionally unfair, it’s bad for everyone in the state. And, it’s being done largely to support Gavin Newsom’s eternal presidential ambitions. I think the bulk of the 300 million spent on ads is from his presidential campaign purse.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  > I think the bulk of the 300 million spent on ads is from his presidential campaign purse. Since he has no “presidential campaign purse”, not being a Presidential candidate, that is literally impossible. $2.6 million (which is, very much, not a majority of the funding) does come from his leadership PAC.
  - notmyjob 1y ago
    I may be wrong about the total raised so far, different ai responses bounce around greatly on the total raised and spent so far, and of course it’s impossible to know exactly given so much “dark money” in politics today, but even very leftwardly biased ai responses list Newsom as one of the few major backers. I suppose it’s money from his 2022 gubernatorial fund mostly but you’ll admit 2022 has come and gone? (Maybe you won’t!) And if you think Newsom doesn’t have presidential ambitions, and that his path to the White House doesn’t depend quite critically on passage of prop 50, you either aren’t paying attention to the full arc of Gavin’s career or being overtly dishonest. Edit: Indeed my total was off by about 2x, but my general point stands the proposition in detrimental to California’s political power in Washington because it reduces the state’s representation in the GOP power structure, while mostly benefitting Newsom’s presidential ambitions. If you can’t see that I don’t know how to help you.
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      > it reduces the state’s representation in the GOP power structure Compared to now, where the GOP power drained the reservoirs, seized the states national guard without authorization to roam the streets and then migrate to Oregon, and overall labeling the state as everything wrong with thr democratic party? How much did it cost the state or federal to pull off all those stunts? The redistricting goes back to normal during the 2030 census, and clearly the state needs to work fast against these clear oversteps in power against it. This really isn't the time to play moderatism. The GOP power hasn't these past 9 months. 300m in advertising to make sure the people know this is chump change for the 4th largest economy. ----- Now all that said, how is advertising for a ballot initiative on any way "rigged"? Even if you think it's dumb and harmful, this is going by thr books, which says the people get to vote on any amendments to the state constitution. Where's the foul play here?
      - notmyjob 1y ago
        Look, most of the work of state congressional reps is getting pork approved and garnering federal funds for the state. If you cannot understand that and grasp how having representatives in both groups helps the state then I can’t help you. Prop 50 is bad for the state as a whole. It is also undemocratic but let’s not pretend that matters to those involved. Those involved in this who work for the state (people like Gavin) should care about the fate of the state they are supposedly working for more than their own presidential ambitions, no? Especially when that person has little chance of winning at the national level because they do really stupid things like prop 50.