Democracy is in trouble....

[Bob001]

Let's just note here that Trump-appointed and other Repub election officials say there was no significant fraud or misconduct associated with the 2020 elections.
https://www.vox.com/2020/11/13/21563...dhs-cisa-krebs
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/2020-...b6370e7e3158ca
https://www.11alive.com/article/news...3-095f418050eb

Ex-AG Barr says the same thing.
https://www.npr.org/2020/12/01/94081...al-authorities

At some point the actual facts have to outweigh vague suppositions and allegations.

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Bob001

At some point the actual facts have to outweigh vague suppositions and allegations.

It's a sad comment on the times that that's now a politically partisan position.

Dave

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Bob001

Let's just note here that Trump-appointed election officials say there was no significant fraud or misconduct associated with the 2020 elections.19896/barr-says-no-election-fraud-has-been-found-by-federal-authorities[/url]

Or any election. We keep doing study after study, investigation after investigation, into the vague Right wing wankfantasy of buses of brown people and dead people using absentee ballots being used to outvote the good God fearing white folks and NOTHING EVER COMES OF IT.

- Loyola Law School looked at over a billion (billion with a b) votes cast over 14 year period and found... 31 credible cases of voter impersonation, and some of those might have been clerical errors.

- A five year vote fraud investigation by the George W. Bush administration (you know that liberal thinktank) turned up "virtually no evidence" of organized fraud. 86 convictions for various forms of voter fraud did come about due to this investigation and again many of these appear to be clerical errors.

- A 2014 two year investigation to voting in Iowa yielded only 27 credible cases and yet again tended more toward clerical errors.

- The Washington Post found an average of 4 documented cases of voter fraud out of 136 million votes cast.

- Dartmouth found no evidence of voter fraud in the 2016 election.

- The Secretary of State for the State of Kansas reviewed 84 million votes and found 14 cases.

- In 2011 Wisconsin charged 20 felons with falsifying voting records in an attempt to vote.

So yeah the recurring theme, from Republican, Democrat, Academic, and Press investigations all seem to agree that if you look at millions upon millions of votes you might find.... a few cases, most of which are clerical errors.

So yes anyone still going "But are we sure voting is secure enough?" is not acting as an honest agents in this discussion and almost certainly has an ulterior motive.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by Abooga

....
The Brennan Center summarized almost 200 errors in election machines from 2002-2008, many of which happened repeatedly in different jurisdictions, which had no clearinghouse to learn from each other.[27] More errors have happened since then.
....

12 to 18 years ago. Complaints about all-electronic voting resulted in most states moving to systems that provide secure paper trails. Almost 95% of ballots cast in 2020 were on paper or with paper backup.

Quote:

Krebs explained that 82% of the ballots used in the 2016 presidential election had a paper record associated with them. In 2020, that figure increased to 95%.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-kr...changed-votes/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/electio...es-2020-11-29/

[Ethan Thane Athen]

Originally Posted by Abooga

Not surprisingly "In the United Kingdom a 2016 government inquiry found that postal voting "was considered by some to be the UK’s main electoral vulnerability and to provide the 'best' opportunity for electoral fraud..." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absent...United_Kingdom)

My point was that we have lower levels of security than the US yet no-one here cries about voter fraud (boundaries yes, voter fraud, no).

Our electoral security is purely based on ballot registration being sent by post and your name being ticked off when you vote - so presumably someone would shout if they didn’t get their registration or if they turned up to vote and were told they already had. Simple but seems to work.

Of course the Tories keep getting in but I put that down to Labour consistently picking the wrong leader (at least they have a half-decent one now) and most of the UK public being apathetic, thick as **** or both.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by catsmate

Will you be providing actual evidence for this one of your claims?

There has been plenty of evidicne for the vulnerability of electronic voting machines built up over the years.

Zig's angle is that
a) he didn't give a damn about Democrats won this election and the nutbar right claimed that this was due to voter fraud. Only then does he decide to talk about these vulnerabilities as a way to deflect criticism of these right wing nutbars.

b) He implies Biden won't do anything to fix the problem and therefor "Democrats are just as bad". The reality is Elections are a state responsibility so Biden can't do much in the first place and the most vulnerable systems are typically run by Republicans

c) he conflates previous security problems with electronic voting to this years election, where the nutbars are complaining about the insecurity of mail in elections, which have the paper trail the some electronic systems are missing. Indeed in 2018 Republicans in North Carolina were caught in a vote tampering scheme which shows this system is more secure than many of the electronic systems

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by No Other

ha ha what a presumptuous and inaccurate comment. But it is good to know that you are an "honest agent" that doesn't need to provide facts, your good word is enough.

You should tell all those black people you know about this. I’m sure they’ll get a real kick out of it and declare you Winner of the Internet in Perpetuity Throughout the Universe.

[CORed]

Originally Posted by Abooga

After reading all that, I´m not sure if it´s as secure as it needs to be. I can imagine there are ways to do some large scale cheating if sufficient means were employed. Having read about Randi´s exploits in discovering fraudsters should make one more aware of these things. Think of the lengths the JREF used to go to make the million dollar challenge foolproof... is this system equally robust? One way I can think of to make it safer would be if voters got to keep some sort of receipt, with a security code that they could check online (match with a public online list made of codes and votes) to see if their vote has been counted correctly.

Providing the voter with a means of verifying that their vote was counted as they cast it is a proposal I have seen before, and I think it makes a lot of sense.

[CORed]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

But they COUNTED the votes cast by BLACKS!!!!!!!!!! That totally counts as the left stealing elections.

I've been of the opinion for some time that most of Republicans' claimed concern about voter fraud is really a dog whistle for non-white people voting.

[No Other]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

You should tell all those black people you know about this. I’m sure they’ll get a real kick out of it and declare you Winner of the Internet in Perpetuity Throughout the Universe.

I have shared this site with many of my friends who are Black... and they laugh at the White people trying to act concerned when Whites don't have a clue how Blacks live. Voting is the least of their concern, they want action on jobs, action on proportional representation, action on less taxation, action on affordable healthcare, gentrification needs to stop, and most of all... make housing more affordable.

But none of that is discussed on this thread.

[CORed]

Originally Posted by lomiller

There has been plenty of evidicne for the vulnerability of electronic voting machines built up over the years.

Zig's angle is that
a) he didn't give a damn about Democrats won this election and the nutbar right claimed that this was due to voter fraud. Only then does he decide to talk about these vulnerabilities as a way to deflect criticism of these right wing nutbars.

b) He implies Biden won't do anything to fix the problem and therefor "Democrats are just as bad". The reality is Elections are a state responsibility so Biden can't do much in the first place and the most vulnerable systems are typically run by Republicans

c) he conflates previous security problems with electronic voting to this years election, where the nutbars are complaining about the insecurity of mail in elections, which have the paper trail the some electronic systems are missing. Indeed in 2018 Republicans in North Carolina were caught in a vote tampering scheme which shows this system is more secure than many of the electronic systems

I believe a paper record is a necessity. Entirely digital systems are potentially too easy to manipulate fraudulently. My preference is a hand-marked paper ballot with machine counting, preferably with hand counted samples for verification. This is how it is already done in Colorado, and probably many other places. It is also quite amenable to voting by mail.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by CORed

I believe a paper record is a necessity. Entirely digital systems are potentially too easy to manipulate fraudulently. My preference is a hand-marked paper ballot with machine counting, preferably with hand counted samples for verification. This is how it is already done in Colorado, and probably many other places. It is also quite amenable to voting by mail.

Just ditch the counting machines and do a paper ballot and hand count. It really isn't that hard and it encourages a larger number of more conveniently located polling stations.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by No Other

I have shared this site with many of my friends who are Black... and they laugh at the White people trying to act concerned when Whites don't have a clue how Blacks live. Voting is the least of their concern, they want action on jobs, action on proportional representation, action on less taxation, action on affordable healthcare, gentrification needs to stop, and most of all... make housing more affordable.

But none of that is discussed on this thread.

You should explain to your fictional black friends that pretty much all of those issues are directly tied to voting and that they should be more concerned about Republican efforts to make voting more difficult for them, and maybe consider what that tells them about Republicans.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by No Other

I have shared this site with many of my friends who are Black... and they laugh at the White people trying to act concerned when Whites don't have a clue how Blacks live. Voting is the least of their concern, they want action on jobs, action on proportional representation, action on less taxation, action on affordable healthcare, gentrification needs to stop, and most of all... make housing more affordable.
....

I don't know what point you're trying to make, but willful voter suppression tactics against black voters make it harder for them to have an impact in all those other areas.

And this "lower taxes" meme has to stop. A big part of where we are today is the result of massive tax cuts that started in the Reagan administration and have always been a Repub priority. Paying more to get more, and expecting the wealthiest to pay a share commensurate with the success our society has bestowed upon them, is not some radiclib fantasy.

[Mader Levap]

Originally Posted by Abooga

My solution would be to make a more tamper proof system Are you saying that it would hurt democrats? Are you claiming that democrats cheat?

No, I claim you find problems where there are none and ignore actual real problems that are advantageous to party that you like.

Do you think you are first guy ever that tried to peddle "voter fraud omg" nonsense here on this forum?

Originally Posted by Distracted1

and right after an election the newly elected react the most defensively regarding the election process-for fear their wins will seem illegitimate.

You are lying and gaslighting. All fraud noise we heard in last few months was from loser of this election.

Originally Posted by Distracted1

Now would be an ideal time for the Democrats to take the initiative on establishing some safe, fair, secure, accessible, and uniform voting process for the Nation. Instead, it seems, they must insist the system is perfect, and that any calls to address the obvious problems with it is just an attempt to discredit their win.

More lying.

Originally Posted by Distracted1

Biden could address a real problem, whilst simultaneously demonstrating confidence in the legitimacy of his own win, and a willingness to reach out to the loonies who need to be brought back to a level of reasonableness, by making "election reform" a centerpiece of his admin.

Oh, election reform is needed, but not kind of reform that authoritarian rethuglican degenerates want to ensure One True Party rule.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by CORed

I've been of the opinion for some time that most of Republicans' claimed concern about voter fraud is really a dog whistle for non-white people voting.

It's not really a dogwhistle when the are just actively saying it.

Again Republicans have admitted this, openly, that they don't feel they can win elections if certain people are allowed to vote. We keep having the discussion as if that cat is still in the bag.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by CORed

I believe a paper record is a necessity. Entirely digital systems are potentially too easy to manipulate fraudulently. My preference is a hand-marked paper ballot with machine counting, preferably with hand counted samples for verification. This is how it is already done in Colorado, and probably many other places. It is also quite amenable to voting by mail.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Just ditch the counting machines and do a paper ballot and hand count. It really isn't that hard and it encourages a larger number of more conveniently located polling stations.

I think you missed the part where we said that 95% of votes cast in 2020 were on paper ballots or machines that provided a paper record.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-kr...changed-votes/

Voting machines are not the problem. In fact, the Trumpers are against paper ballots if they are submitted by mail.

[No Other]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

You should explain to your fictional black friends that pretty much all of those issues are directly tied to voting and that they should be more concerned about Republican efforts to make voting more difficult for them, and maybe consider what that tells them about Republicans.

Time and again you make things up like "fictional black friends". Your pathetic lying (... and saying fictional black friends IS lying) is serial. You think affordable housing is voter related??? Just like one of "fictional black friend" said... "You Whitey's play this game as if voting is the answer; the answer is actions."

Now that we have President Joe Biden in place and Congress is controlled by Biden Democrats (not to be confused with Bernie Democrats), those listed issues should go away.

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by CORed

Providing the voter with a means of verifying that their vote was counted as they cast it is a proposal I have seen before, and I think it makes a lot of sense.

How can it possibly be compatible with a secret ballot?

Dave

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

How can it possibly be compatible with a secret ballot?

Dave

Indeed. You can verify that a vote was cast (and there are various ways to insure this) but if you can connect the verification of the count itself with the person casting the vote, there is no way to guarantee secrecy that cannot be breached by some nefarious means.

Secure balloting requires not only that a vote be immune from alteration between the casting and the counting, but immune from tracking.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by No Other

Time and again you make things up like "fictional black friends". Your pathetic lying (... and saying fictional black friends IS lying) is serial. You think affordable housing is voter related??? Just like one of "fictional black friend" said... "You Whitey's play this game as if voting is the answer; the answer is actions."

Now that we have President Joe Biden in place and Congress is controlled by Biden Democrats (not to be confused with Bernie Democrats), those listed issues should go away.

It’s not lying to say that you don’t believe what someone else is telling you.

And gosh, call me a hard-hearted cynic, but for some reason when random people on the Internet present anecdotes that perfectly support whatever point they’re trying to make, I have a hard time believing them.

Therefore, I’ll refer to the characters in your little stories “fictional” to my heart’s content.

Points for the nearly-convincing dialogue, though.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by bruto

.....
Secure balloting requires not only that a vote be immune from alteration between the casting and the counting, but immune from tracking.

When somebody casts a vote in person he knows he voted. There is also a record of him signing in at the polling place. Mall ballots are returned in an envelope that is barcoded. Many states have systems to allow voters to confirm online that their vote was received. Ballots themselves don't need to be tracked, unless you think the authorities aren't counting ballots they received.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Or any election. We keep doing study after study, investigation after investigation, into the vague Right wing wankfantasy of buses of brown people and dead people using absentee ballots being used to outvote the good God fearing white folks and NOTHING EVER COMES OF IT.

- Loyola Law School looked at over a billion (billion with a b) votes cast over 14 year period and found... 31 credible cases of voter impersonation, and some of those might have been clerical errors.

- A five year vote fraud investigation by the George W. Bush administration (you know that liberal thinktank) turned up "virtually no evidence" of organized fraud. 86 convictions for various forms of voter fraud did come about due to this investigation and again many of these appear to be clerical errors.

- A 2014 two year investigation to voting in Iowa yielded only 27 credible cases and yet again tended more toward clerical errors.

- The Washington Post found an average of 4 documented cases of voter fraud out of 136 million votes cast.

- Dartmouth found no evidence of voter fraud in the 2016 election.

- The Secretary of State for the State of Kansas reviewed 84 million votes and found 14 cases.

- In 2011 Wisconsin charged 20 felons with falsifying voting records in an attempt to vote.

So yeah the recurring theme, from Republican, Democrat, Academic, and Press investigations all seem to agree that if you look at millions upon millions of votes you might find.... a few cases, most of which are clerical errors.

So yes anyone still going "But are we sure voting is secure enough?" is not acting as an honest agents in this discussion and almost certainly has an ulterior motive.

You can't steal an election without manipulating the vote counts. So there must've been massive voter fraud that occurred in the 2016 election when Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, which is something that has been totally proven to have happened. How do you square that with your claim that study after study shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare?

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

You can't steal an election without manipulating the vote counts. So there must've been massive voter fraud that occurred in the 2016 election when Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, which is something that has been totally proven to have happened. How do you square that with your claim that study after study shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare?

that is debatable.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

You can't steal an election without manipulating the vote counts. So there must've been massive voter fraud that occurred in the 2016 election when Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, which is something that has been totally proven to have happened. How do you square that with your claim that study after study shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare?

Gerrymandering, voter suppression and the use of social media to spread lies do not involve manipulating votes once they've been cast, yet all can significantly affect the outcome of an election.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

You can't steal an election without manipulating the vote counts. So there must've been massive voter fraud that occurred in the 2016 election when Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, which is something that has been totally proven to have happened. How do you square that with your claim that study after study shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare?

No one has claimed that the Russians manipulated vote counts. What the Russians did do, among other things, is manipulate social media to promote lies that supported Trump and/or hurt Clinton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia...ates_elections

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

You should explain to your fictional black friends that pretty much all of those issues are directly tied to voting and that they should be more concerned about Republican efforts to make voting more difficult for them, and maybe consider what that tells them about Republicans.

His black "friends" likely know this, and most of them do not argue with him, because he's actually just "that guy at work that's always talking", and not an actual friend at all.

It's definitely true that things like jobs, education, and health care are top concerns among black voters - as with every voter. But when one candidate addresses these topics, and the other blathers on about scenes from Birth of a Nation, they , like other people, figure things out quickly.

And yes, I mean people of all races figure it out quickly.

[Distracted1]

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

No, I claim you find problems where there are none and ignore actual real problems that are advantageous to party that you like.

Do you think you are first guy ever that tried to peddle "voter fraud omg" nonsense here on this forum?


You are lying and gaslighting. All fraud noise we heard in last few months was from loser of this election.


More lying.


Oh, election reform is needed, but not kind of reform that authoritarian rethuglican degenerates want to ensure One True Party rule.

I shall give your "yes, election reform is needed- but not if those less-than-human by virtue of disagreeing with me 'people' are allowed any input" argument all the consideration it is due.

You might, in the interim, acquire a dictionary and attempt to gain an understanding of the difference between a "lie" and an opinion or piece of data that you find incorrect. Or don't, if you don't wish to. Not doing so will certainly not lessen my opinion of your reasoning ability.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

You can't steal an election without manipulating the vote counts. So there must've been massive voter fraud that occurred in the 2016 election when Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, which is something that has been totally proven to have happened. How do you square that with your claim that study after study shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare?

Exactly. How can anyone possibly square this scenario that Captain Howdy fabricated with science and facts?

Checkmate, libtards.

[Mader Levap]

Originally Posted by Distracted1

I shall give your "yes, election reform is needed- but not if those less-than-human by virtue of disagreeing with me 'people' are allowed any input" argument all the consideration it is due.

You may find with surprise that I care about opinion of pro-authoritarians on democratic reforms as much as I care about opinion of Nazis on Jews.

Originally Posted by Distracted1

You might, in the interim, acquire a dictionary and attempt to gain an understanding of the difference between a "lie" and an opinion or piece of data that you find incorrect. Or don't, if you don't wish to. Not doing so will certainly not lessen my opinion of your reasoning ability.

Lack of rebuttal noted. I repeat: loudest and only whine about election result we all heard was from loser. Your lies and gaslighting about democrats oh so concerned about election result won't change that.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

that is debatable.

Our electoral college system makes it possible for a Presidential candidate to receive fewer total votes and still win the election. But to win an individual state (and therefore all of the electors for that state) the candidate must receive more votes than the other candidates. That can be achieved by pulling fraudulent ballots out from under a table when nobody is watching (which totally didn't happen, although it could). It can be achieved by not counting ballots cast by voters who are affiliated with the wrong political party. It can be achieved by making it easy for people to vote multiple times or allowing ineligible people to vote. It can be achieved by publishing potentially damaging information about a candidate right before election day (Hillary's emails in 2016) or actively suppressing damaging information about a candidate right before election day (Hunter Biden). It can be achieved by malicious foreign actors setting up sock puppets on Facebook and employing advanced KGB developed mind control techniques to brainwash American voters into doing Putin's bidding (which is so obviously what happened in 2016 that we didn't even need evidence to prove it). Ultimately, the winner of an election needs to be able to claim more votes than the loser.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Exactly. How can anyone possibly square this scenario that Captain Howdy fabricated with science and facts?

Checkmate, libtards.

Another non-sequitur from one of our resident racists.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

You can't steal an election without manipulating the vote counts. So there must've been massive voter fraud that occurred in the 2016 election when Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, which is something that has been totally proven to have happened. How do you square that with your claim that study after study shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare?

It's easy to square. You start by actually squaring it with what I said and not intentionally misrepresenting it. It's called honesty, try it sometime.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

Another non-sequitur from one of our resident racists.

Is this the, "oh if you mention race you're a racist, even if you are mentioning the impact of racism on blacks" fallacy?

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

It's easy to square. You start by actually squaring it with what I said and not intentionally misrepresenting it. It's called honesty, try it sometime.

I think that might make you racist, but I’m totally clear on how the rules work.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Is this the, "oh if you mention race you're a racist, even if you are mentioning the impact of racism on blacks" fallacy?

This is also possibly racist, but again l’m not sure. Safe to assume it is though.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

This is also possibly racist, but again l’m not sure. Safe to assume it is though.

That is my, for want of a better word, understanding. I seem to recall that Applecored and The Big Dog used to think it a hilarious gotcha to call anyone racist if they said that blacks were disadvantaged because of racism.

[No Other]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

It’s not lying to say that you don’t believe what someone else is telling you.

You can disagree without claiming that I am lying... and saying my friends are FICTIONAL is saying I am lying.

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by No Other

You can disagree without claiming that I am lying... and saying my friends are FICTIONAL is saying I am lying.

So you claim.

That is to say: If your argument is based on their testimony we have no real reason to take your argument seriously until their testimony can be verified. A simple workaround is to make arguments that don't rely on personal testimony of your imagined acquaintances.

You'll notice that most people here understand that. Or, just don't have a lot of acquaintances in real life.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

It's easy to square. You start by actually squaring it with what I said and not intentionally misrepresenting it. It's called honesty, try it sometime.

You said that:

Quote:

"We keep doing study after study, investigation after investigation, into the vague Right wing wankfantasy of buses of brown people and dead people using absentee ballots being used to outvote the good God fearing white folks and NOTHING EVER COMES OF IT.

Quote:

.....So yeah the recurring theme, from Republican, Democrat, Academic, and Press investigations all seem to agree that if you look at millions upon millions of votes you might find.... a few cases, most of which are clerical errors.

and

Quote:

So yes anyone still going "But are we sure voting is secure enough?" is not acting as an honest agents in this discussion and almost certainly has an ulterior motive."

That sounds to me like you're saying our elections are secure. Inconsequential clerical errors might sometimes occur but outright voter fraud extensive enough to swing an election doesn't happen. Yet, in 2016, we knew that Russians succeeded in manipulating our election to Donald Trump's advantage. Russian interference was so obvious we didn't even need evidence to prove it. The US government spent three years investigating and documenting the extent of the collusion between Trump's inner circle and the Kremlin. Several high level officials were indicted, prosecuted, and convicted of crimes as a result of this investigation. Some of them even spent time in jail and many more of them had their lives turned upside down because of their suspected role in election interference. When the investigation was concluded, it was found that nobody--not even Trump himself--was able to prove they were innocent of any wrong doing or that Russians did not succeed in manipulating the vote count to ensure Hillary's defeat.

And you want me to believe that our elections are secure and that it's unpatriotic, treasonous, and probably racist to question the results? C'mon man, that's a bunch of malarkey!