politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Regarding your points:
That would be a difficult discussion, yes, but the difference between now and then is that there are red flags that should, at the least, warrant a recount. Unlike 2020, we're not saying it's rigged, but rather that a recount is needed to validate and verify.
The same way you would try to prove anything else like this, you put facts out in front of people, bring in experts, and attempt to bring the truth to light. If there was something nefarious uncovered then we present it, otherwise it shows that things are working correctly.
Yes and no. It means that tabulation machines are manipulatable and that we need improved security there. Hand counting ballots is still secure as the red flag here is a digitally inflated count, which is what a physical recount would prove or disprove.
You didn't read the letter, or at least didn't understand it. They're not talking about fradulent physical ballots. There's no reason for anybody to be looking at them for multiple reasons. Secondly, the letter states that swing states are the ones specifically that need to be looked at.
5/6. We know that a good portion of the population that is eligible to vote doesn't. We also have historical data that gives us the averages for when voters only vote for the president and nothing else. That range is 2-5%. Seeing that number jump above 10% is eye catching and can be indication that something is wrong. So again, it's not a claim that things are rigged, but a warning that the numbers indicate that they need to be looked at closer and be recounted to ensure they are correct.
Claiming out elections are secure and ignoring something like this just allows the GOP to continue to use it. If they get away with it this time and are the ones in power, how is anyone supposed to prevent them from doing it again? The whole reason were having to deal with the idea of rigged elections is because the GOP and Trump decided fuck up that system our trust and replace it with fear and lies.
On the last point, these claims do have a basis in reality looking at the data. The math shows a departure from historic norms, which calls it question how accurate the counts are. Asking for a recount is not a problem, but saying and doing nothing when it looks like something is wrong is a problem.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree, then. I think we're both on the same side and ultimately want the same things. And I'm not saying your points are invalid. But at the same time, I don't see any real evidence to support it, I have absolutely no reason to believe that Trump's team of all people would have the brain capacity necessary to pull it off, and I think chasing down conspiracy theories with little tangible evidence is going to do far more harm than good.
Again, the best that we would be able to hope for is to say "Our elections are so insecure that Trump and his band of human crayon eaters was able to hack into systems nationwide without a god damned person noticing. Oh, and Kamala Harris actually won the election. Believe us!" Because you will not get any further than that with your average American voter.
The undeniable facts are this: Kamala Harris got 10+ million less voters than Joe Biden. Which means that 10+ million Biden voters stayed home. The GOP had absolutely nothing to do with that. If those 10 million democrats came out to vote, we'd have won the election in a landslide even if Trump was able to pull off that little stunt.
We lost because 10 million Democrats stayed home. What the GOP did or did not do has absolutely no impact on that fact. No investigation will change that fact.
Why would you think it was Trumps team and not Russia?
Does it really matter? The end result would still be the same. "Our elections were so insecure that ________ were able to go into networks across the nation, alter or invalidate the votes of over 10 million people, and escape undetected." Doesn't matter who you put in that blank. The message would be the same. "Our election systems our compromised, Trump certainly isn't going to fix it in 4 years, so it won't matter who you vote for in 2028 since _________ is probably just going to decide the result again anyway."
Show me the evidence that they stayed home, rather than their votes having been suppressed or not counted.
Sure.
Choose one:
United states elections are secure; hacking voting systems to invalidate or alter over 10 million votes would be an impossibility, and any attempts to do so would be caught and thwarted by a team of networking experts using at least the bare minimum of networking security at multiple levels.
United states elections are so insecure that ____________* can hack into voting systems nationwide undetected, alter or invalidate the votes of tens of millions of people across all 50 states and hundreds of districts, exit with impunity and escape detection for two weeks and counting.
Pick one. The two cannot coexist simultaneously. For fraud to exist at that scale, you're saying that our election integrity is about as secure as my grandmother's wireless hotspot. A problem of that scale can't be fixed in four years, rendering it irrelevant to even bother trying in 2028. Trump would make sure of that.