5 ms·

Pretty remarkable both-sidesism in this comment. One side _does not admit the results of the 2020 election_ and the other side says widespread voter fraud is no

Pretty remarkable both-sidesism in this comment. One side _does not admit the results of the 2020 election_ and the other side says widespread voter fraud is not happening in the United States. Being a fence-setter on this one is intellectually lazy.

wahern 4mo ago
Conservatives in multiple states looked under every rock to find voter fraud in the 2020 election and largely came up empty handed. In Arizona they even forced a quasi-legal audit with their own citizens brigade, spending weeks pouring through records, then quietly admitted there was no systemic fraud. All the cumulative fraud uncovered nationwide, most of which was mistaken registration, discovered through existing processes, and didn't even favor a single party, never amounted to enough to even to turn even a single state.
- SV_BubbleTime 4mo ago
  I don’t get this. Isn’t it weak, two point out that no one can find evidence after the fact, versus the proper alternative that no one can prove that they’re actually-secure before the fact? Let’s just say that you were a bad guy and manipulating elections, wouldn’t you be bad at your job if someone could detect it after the fact? How many people would a conspiracy even take to pull of? I don’t get the US system. The people mad at Trump and 2020 claims brush off all the ways the elections can’t be proven in favor that weeks or years afterwards no one can’t point to hard evidence.
  - ImPostingOnHN 4mo ago
    > Isn’t it weak, two point out that no one can find evidence after the fact, versus the proper alternative that no one can prove that they’re actually-secure before the fact? Isn't it weaker, to claim fraud so vast it changed a presidential election, while presenting no evidence? Then, to ask for billion-dollar changes to voting, which also suppress voting, and when asked why, to shrug and then repeat the same debunked claims? I mean, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't get it: the people mad at voting advocates and 2020 brush off proof that their claims are unfounded, yet they just repeat the same claims. At some point, it's malice, not ignorance.
    - SV_BubbleTime 4mo ago
      You people are ridiculous. Such mental gymnastics for a simple fact: no one can prove elections are secure. End of story.
      - ImPostingOnHN 4mo ago
        No need, the onus is on election deniers and voting opponents to first convincingly prove they're insecure enough to justify changing things. So far, they've tried hard a lot, and failed hard a lot. All they have left is mental gymnastics.
        SV_BubbleTime 3mo ago
        Yes, this makes sense that it’s OK that banks do not need to audited and proven that they handle money well, if I don’t know any bank robbers then I have no reason to suspect any issue! Do you seriously hear yourself? Ideologue life is crazy.
        wahern 3mo ago
        Elections are audited as a matter of course. In California every election is audited after the fact, in addition to observers (including from the different parties) wherever voting, tabulating, and auditing occurs. Here's the bill of rights for election observers: https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/regulations/current-regulations/elections/election-observations-rights-and-responsibilities https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/regulations/current-re... They have access to everything. Claims of fraud generally come from either people who have no experience with elections (and apparently don't care enough to get involved), or wish to sow uncertainty and doubt in their self-interest. Sometimes auditors make complaints, but those complaints are a far cry from the accusations thrown around in public discourse. More often election officials themselves make recommendations to improve things--usually efficiency related--but the discourse is so heated legislatures often don't want to get involved, or if they do it's to appease some political faction, not to address the mundane issues that actually need addressing. If you're so worried about election fraud, get involved. There aren't any barriers. Heck, in some places you can easily volunteer to host a voting place. Some years we get flyers to ask if we want to host, but usually the only house on our block who offers is the same one down the block. What I don't get is the conspiratorial minded folks who make accusations, but demand other people fix whatever imagined problem exists. How can you trust the new system any more if you're still a keyboard warrior? It makes no sense. The public is locked out of direct involvement with most machinations of governance, but elections are one of the few areas where you're free to get involved at almost every level with minimal, even zero friction.
what 4mo ago
Did you memory hole 2016?
- UncleMeat 4mo ago
  Did Clinton claim that she actually won?
  - the_gastropod 3mo ago
    Of course not! But both-sides guys need to make outrageous reaches like this to prove that both sides are equally bad, and that they are enlightened beyond such petty partisanship.
rcpt 4mo ago
"tsk tsk"

wahern 4mo ago

Conservatives in multiple states looked under every rock to find voter fraud in the 2020 election and largely came up empty handed. In Arizona they even forced a quasi-legal audit with their own citizens brigade, spending weeks pouring through records, then quietly admitted there was no systemic fraud. All the cumulative fraud uncovered nationwide, most of which was mistaken registration, discovered through existing processes, and didn't even favor a single party, never amounted to enough to even to turn even a single state.

SV_BubbleTime 4mo ago
I don’t get this. Isn’t it weak, two point out that no one can find evidence after the fact, versus the proper alternative that no one can prove that they’re actually-secure before the fact? Let’s just say that you were a bad guy and manipulating elections, wouldn’t you be bad at your job if someone could detect it after the fact? How many people would a conspiracy even take to pull of? I don’t get the US system. The people mad at Trump and 2020 claims brush off all the ways the elections can’t be proven in favor that weeks or years afterwards no one can’t point to hard evidence.
- ImPostingOnHN 4mo ago
  > Isn’t it weak, two point out that no one can find evidence after the fact, versus the proper alternative that no one can prove that they’re actually-secure before the fact? Isn't it weaker, to claim fraud so vast it changed a presidential election, while presenting no evidence? Then, to ask for billion-dollar changes to voting, which also suppress voting, and when asked why, to shrug and then repeat the same debunked claims? I mean, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't get it: the people mad at voting advocates and 2020 brush off proof that their claims are unfounded, yet they just repeat the same claims. At some point, it's malice, not ignorance.
  - SV_BubbleTime 4mo ago
    You people are ridiculous. Such mental gymnastics for a simple fact: no one can prove elections are secure. End of story.
    - ImPostingOnHN 4mo ago
      No need, the onus is on election deniers and voting opponents to first convincingly prove they're insecure enough to justify changing things. So far, they've tried hard a lot, and failed hard a lot. All they have left is mental gymnastics.
      - SV_BubbleTime 3mo ago
        Yes, this makes sense that it’s OK that banks do not need to audited and proven that they handle money well, if I don’t know any bank robbers then I have no reason to suspect any issue! Do you seriously hear yourself? Ideologue life is crazy.
        wahern 3mo ago
        Elections are audited as a matter of course. In California every election is audited after the fact, in addition to observers (including from the different parties) wherever voting, tabulating, and auditing occurs. Here's the bill of rights for election observers: https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/regulations/current-regulations/elections/election-observations-rights-and-responsibilities https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/regulations/current-re... They have access to everything. Claims of fraud generally come from either people who have no experience with elections (and apparently don't care enough to get involved), or wish to sow uncertainty and doubt in their self-interest. Sometimes auditors make complaints, but those complaints are a far cry from the accusations thrown around in public discourse. More often election officials themselves make recommendations to improve things--usually efficiency related--but the discourse is so heated legislatures often don't want to get involved, or if they do it's to appease some political faction, not to address the mundane issues that actually need addressing. If you're so worried about election fraud, get involved. There aren't any barriers. Heck, in some places you can easily volunteer to host a voting place. Some years we get flyers to ask if we want to host, but usually the only house on our block who offers is the same one down the block. What I don't get is the conspiratorial minded folks who make accusations, but demand other people fix whatever imagined problem exists. How can you trust the new system any more if you're still a keyboard warrior? It makes no sense. The public is locked out of direct involvement with most machinations of governance, but elections are one of the few areas where you're free to get involved at almost every level with minimal, even zero friction.

what 4mo ago

Did you memory hole 2016?

UncleMeat 4mo ago
Did Clinton claim that she actually won?
- the_gastropod 3mo ago
  Of course not! But both-sides guys need to make outrageous reaches like this to prove that both sides are equally bad, and that they are enlightened beyond such petty partisanship.

rcpt 4mo ago

"tsk tsk"