Democracy is in trouble....

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

Proof? How about any indication whatsoever of any fraud, beyond the trace elements that would accompany any election in the hundreds of millions? Where is a scrap of anything resembling actual evidence of foul play, beyond the inescapable background noise?

This disinformation campaign conducted by Trump and the GOP is nothing short of felonious. The entire party should be sharing a cell with Trump and his gang.

Edited by Agatha:

Edited for rule 12

The system is insecure. People don't have faith in it. You can keep trying to blame whomever you want to for that, but blame won't fix it.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Edited by Agatha:

Edited to match original post

The system is insecure. People don't have faith in it. You can keep trying to blame whomever you want to for that, but blame won't fix it.

what makes you think that?

Countless studies have shown that in all but the narrowest of elections, manipulations are too small to have a decisive effect.
The system could be more secure, but it is clearly secure enough under the current rule to provide reproducible outcomes - the recounts have shown that.

No. If people don't have faith in the system, it's because either because they have been systematically disenfranchised or because their leaders have repeatedly told them that fraud is rampant when it is not.

[JoeMorgue]

Oh goodie. Biden's been President for less time then it takes to make a baked potato in the oven and the Trumpers, who have been hiding in the shadows for weeks, are already starting to come up for to complain about how Biden hasn't fixed everything yet.

I can't wait for them to suddenly realize there's a plague and huge deficient and start freaking out about it.

Dishonest, morally corrupt, pathetic nonsense.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I agree. But I'm worried Democrats won't take this problem seriously. Their guy won, there isn't proof of widespread fraud, so that's likely good enough for them.

Except it isn't. The system isn't sufficiently transparent or sufficiently secure. There are systematic problems, and they need fixing. And yes, that includes getting rid of electronic voting. All votes should be paper. Electronic tabulation of votes (ie, machine readers of paper ballots) is fine, since that can be double checked by hand, but purely computer votes should be off the table across the board. But that's only the start. There are a whole bunch of problems with the way even paper ballot voting was and is handled that really need addressing. Unfortunately that probably won't happen. The winners rarely feel incentive to reform an election process they won, even if it's for the good of the nation.

What about gerrymandering, voter suppression and the biased Electoral College system? Those need to be addressed too, right?

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Oh goodie. Biden's been President for less time then it takes to make a baked potato in the oven and the Trumpers, who have been hiding in the shadows for weeks, are already starting to come up for to complain about how Biden hasn't fixed everything yet.

...

He hasn't?

That makes him just as bad as Trump!

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I agree. But I'm worried Democrats won't take this problem seriously. Their guy won, there isn't proof of widespread fraud, so that's likely good enough for them.

Except it isn't. The system isn't sufficiently transparent or sufficiently secure. There are systematic problems, and they need fixing. And yes, that includes getting rid of electronic voting. All votes should be paper. Electronic tabulation of votes (ie, machine readers of paper ballots) is fine, since that can be double checked by hand, but purely computer votes should be off the table across the board. But that's only the start. There are a whole bunch of problems with the way even paper ballot voting was and is handled that really need addressing. Unfortunately that probably won't happen. The winners rarely feel incentive to reform an election process they won, even if it's for the good of the nation.

Where is there any evidence that any election fraud occurred in 2020? Republican officials have affirmed that there was no fraud. Atty Gen Barr says there was no fraud. The Trump-appointed head of election security says there was no fraud (and got fired for it). Trump lawyers have gone to court 60+ times and offered zero evidence of fraud. When does this "there must have been fraud even if we can't find it!" silliness end?

And according to this, roughly 90 percent of votes cast in 2020 were on paper ballots, far more than in recent previous elections.

Quote:

According to the highly respected Verified Voting website, in 2006 less than half the nation’s votes (47.7 percent) were cast in jurisdictions using mostly hand-marked paper ballots. In 2020 it was 70 percent. Another 18.1 percent were cast on ballot-marking devices used to mark paper ballots. Thus, this year, nearly 9 out of every 10 votes cast in the U.S. were marked on paper. Virtually all were counted with digital scanners, leaving the preserved original ballots intact for Trump’s bitterly contested recounts.

https://truthout.org/articles/paper-...2020-election/

The real election fraud is when Repubs cancel registrations of people likely to vote against them, or close polling stations in neighborhoods they think won't support them, or make it harder to register in the first place, or when a President claims mailed ballots and ballots cast in big cities in swing states shouldn't count. Five states conduct their elections entirely by mail, without any hint of fraud or serious error. That's the direction we should move everywhere. And many states provide automatic voter registration as part of getting a driver's license or conducting other official business. That should be universal, too.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Oh goodie. Biden's been President for less time then it takes to make a baked potato in the oven and the Trumpers, who have been hiding in the shadows for weeks, are already starting to come up for to complain about how Biden hasn't fixed everything yet.

I can't wait for them to suddenly realize there's a plague and huge deficient and start freaking out about it.

Dishonest, morally corrupt, pathetic nonsense.

I've been wondering about that.

Will the MAGA heads suddenly care that 4,000+ people are dying every day in this country now that it's Biden's problem?

I think their covid denialism probably goes deeper than just Trump loyalty.

Or perhaps i'm giving them too much credit. Perhaps they will simultaneously blame Biden for the deaths while insisting that the pandemic is wildly exaggerated or an outright hoax.

if I had to bet, I think they'll probably attack Biden for the ongoing covid economic slump, while not mentioning the deaths much. That allows them to blame the government for shutdowns without examining the true dangers of the virus.

[No Other]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

none of these things were what Republicans claimed he was doing, i.e. taking away guns, replacing Christianity with Islam, putting critics in camps.

Republicans were never mentioned... 'crazy lib' is what Pixel42 said.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by No Other

Not sure how "crazy lib" is defined but there were plenty of Obama mistakes that ultimately led to Hillary's defeat in 2016.

1. Arab Spring was mishandled. We backed the Syrian Rebels plus we had our *** handed to us in Libya.
2. Taxes soared under Obama.
3. Highest rate of deportations... it is still the highest.
4. Did not fill judicial nominations with any urgency and that allowed Trump to stack the courts.
5. Recessions always occur but the recovery of the 2008 was the slowest since WWII.
6. Fast and Furious was a national disgrace.
7. The national debt went from $10T to $20T.

Worst of All:

Obama made drone strikes a policy, 540 drone strikes in 8 years. Trump continued this policy in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia (none of these countries have threatened the USA)... let's see if Biden will stop the attacks. History says "no" but let's give Biden a chance.

Now do Trump.

Here, let me get you started:

400,000 Americans dead from a pandemic he let spiral out of control.

Millions out of work because of a pandemic he let spiral out of control.

Violent coup at the U.S. Capitol that he incited.

But yeah, Obama really bungled the Arab Spring.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

what makes you think that?

Countless studies have shown that in all but the narrowest of elections, manipulations are too small to have a decisive effect.

The security of a system is not judged on what has happened, but what can happen.

The system isn't secure. There are too few mechanisms in place to actually detect and prevent fraud. That is true even if no fraud has occurred to date. Our elections are much more insecure than those of most other developed countries.

Quote:

No. If people don't have faith in the system, it's because either because they have been systematically disenfranchised or because their leaders have repeatedly told them that fraud is rampant when it is not.

Again, you can keep blaming whoever you want to blame, but blame won't fix the problem.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by No Other

Republicans were never mentioned... 'crazy lib' is what Pixel42 said.

My post was in response to what mgidm86 was saying about his Trump supporting relatives. I probably should have quoted him to make that clear, here belatedly is the quote.

Originally Posted by mgidm86

And that, in my experience is what it's all about. Fear of the liberals. Hey I don't like some things the Dems want to do either! But a lot of their fears are based on lies and exaggerations.

The violent riots in Portland, the unfortunate wording of "De-fund The Police". FOX jumped all over that. The message is "Crazy Liberals Want To Get Rid Of The Police! Look At The Riots!!! That's what they want!"

Yes, every person I have talked to says exactly that. So does everyone in the media - Trump supporters interviewed on the street, pundits, Hannity. It's all about the evil Dems. NOTHING MORE.

[SuburbanTurkey]

I would suggest that Democracies are in trouble because neither liberal nor conservative parties are offering meaningful solutions to the grave societal ills of our time. Seeing no meaningful solution, populations are scrapping the entire democratic framework out of desperation, often only making the problems worse.

Income inequality is growing at a staggering rate and more and more formerly secure people are sliding into poverty. The social safety net is being gutted and public infrastructure is allowed to rot. Meanwhile the wealthiest and most privileged among us are only becoming more powerful. The the wealthy few increasingly wield power over the powerless masses, it is becoming increasingly clear that these political systems are just not working.

The hollowing out of our societies is bringing out the worst in an increasingly desperate population, grasping at straws such as conspiratorialism, insular nationalism, or outright fascism as a solution. Like half-starved dogs fighting over table scraps, the increasingly poor material conditions for ordinary people have us going for eachothers throats.

TL;DR: Socialism or barbarism brah.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

It's funny that you don't see how your own name applies here.

The system is insecure. People don't have faith in it. You can keep trying to blame whomever you want to for that, but blame won't fix it.

I'm all in favor of optimizing the electoral mechanics for security, but reform in this context is 100% meaningless, because this cult would have believed anything their brain damaged guru would have told them regardless. They don't care how the votes were processed any more than creationists care how carefully fossils are removed from the ground. If I had to compare the dangers presented to US democratic institutions by electronic voting machines vs a cult of QAnon pizzagate believers worshiping a mentally ill clown, I'd say there's no comparison.

Why don't you address the questions raised in my comment? Where is anything remotely indicative of voter fraud in this election? Wouldn't you agree that "people don't have faith in it" because they don't want to have faith in it, rather than any rational explanation.

[The Great Zaganza]

given the massive incentive to detect voter fraud if the other side is doing it, it is highly unlikely that is is massive and widespread.

You are repeating what others have told you without thinking about it yourself.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

The security of a system is not judged on what has happened, but what can happen.

The system isn't secure. There are too few mechanisms in place to actually detect and prevent fraud. That is true even if no fraud has occurred to date. Our elections are much more insecure than those of most other developed countries.



Again, you can keep blaming whoever you want to blame, but blame won't fix the problem.

Cite your sources, please.

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

The system is insecure.

Asserted without evidence.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

People don't have faith in it.

Argumentum ad populum.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You can keep trying to blame whomever you want to for that, but blame won't fix it.

Assumes a conclusion.

Dave

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Argumentum ad populum.

Well, no. The fact that people don't have faith in the system is a description of a problem in and of itself. You may not care about that problem, but in a democracy, it matters. A lot.

Quote:

Assumes a conclusion.

I haven't assumed that people don't have faith in the system. It's pretty well demonstrated.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

given the massive incentive to detect voter fraud if the other side is doing it

I don't care about incentives. I care about mechanisms. And the mechanisms are ****.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Well, no. The fact that people don't have faith in the system is a description of a problem in and of itself. You may not care about that problem, but in a democracy, it matters. A lot.

You don't get to play that card when you're the one lying to people telling them the system is broken.

Edited by zooterkin:

<SNIP> Edited for rule 12.

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Well, no. The fact that people don't have faith in the system is a description of a problem in and of itself. You may not care about that problem, but in a democracy, it matters. A lot.

Thing is, we all know why some people don't have faith in the system, and it's nothing to do with any actual attribute of the system. What needs to be fixed is the cause of people's lack of faith in the system - no, hang on, that already got sorted just over an hour ago.

Dave

[Mader Levap]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I don't care about incentives. I care about mechanisms. And the mechanisms are ****.

Oh, they sure are. After all, Democrats won despite all of Republican's cheating. That cannot continue, obviously.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I don't care about incentives. I care about mechanisms. And the mechanisms are ****.

A sentiment you weren’t expressing four years ago.

[The Great Zaganza]

Zig, how would you distinguish a system that is actually rife with fraud from one that has been hyped, over years, as being full of fraud, except by the number of court cases dealing with fraud?

There has been a massive spotlight on the election this time, and literally NOTHING has come of it.

extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

A sentiment you weren’t expressing four years ago.

That is false. In the past it mostly came up in the context of voter ID laws, but I've been saying for a very long time that our elections are not sufficiently secure, and that they aren't transparently secure either. Your imagined hypocrisy doesn't exist.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Zig, how would you distinguish a system that is actually rife with fraud from one that has been hyped, over years, as being full of fraud, except by the number of court cases dealing with fraud?

Interesting question, though I don't think you've actually thought it through. A system where fraud is common but detection is poor may have just as many detected cases of fraud as a system in which fraud is rare but detection is very good. You cannot tell them apart at all by looking at the number of court cases.

Which is why examining the actual mechanisms you have to ensure security is a better approach if you want to prevent fraud and instill confidence in the system.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Well, no. The fact that people don't have faith in the system is a description of a problem in and of itself. You may not care about that problem, but in a democracy, it matters. A lot.

I haven't assumed that people don't have faith in the system. It's pretty well demonstrated.

No, that's not demonstrated at all. What "people" don't have faith in the system? You mean a percentage of Repubs, right? And on what basis? You think maybe the fact that a raging lunatic and his fawning acolytes have promoted a false tale that he couldn't have lost a free and fair election might have more to do with it than any deficiencies in the system?

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Interesting question, though I don't think you've actually thought it through. A system where fraud is common but detection is poor may have just as many detected cases of fraud as a system in which fraud is rare but detection is very good. You cannot tell them apart at all by looking at the number of court cases.

Which is why examining the actual mechanisms you have to ensure security is a better approach if you want to prevent fraud and instill confidence in the system.

you know how I know that the system is fine, and that politicians know it is?

Because NONE of the Republicans elected on the same ballot as Biden have called their own legitimacy into question.
And neither have any of their voters.

Face it. this has nothing to do with fraud and everything to do with losing.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Bob001

No, that's not demonstrated at all.

Then you haven't been paying attention.

Quote:

What "people" don't have faith in the system?

For example:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep...mp-robbed-poll
Other polls have also found large numbers considered the election stolen. That's a problem, isn't it?

Quote:

And on what basis? You think maybe the fact that a raging lunatic and his fawning acolytes have promoted a false tale that he couldn't have lost a free and fair election might have more to do with it than any deficiencies in the system?

I think that these claims about a stolen election got a lot of traction because the system is insufficiently secure. Had the system been more secure, and visibly so, far fewer people would have found those claims to be persuasive.

You can't stop people from claiming fraud without getting rid of the 1st amendment. We CAN do something to improve election security and transparency. So what's the goal: find someone to blame, or actually do something about the problem?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

you know how I know that the system is fine, and that politicians know it is?

Because NONE of the Republicans elected on the same ballot as Biden have called their own legitimacy into question.

Wow, that's a stupid argument. When a system benefits someone, their incentive is to not question it. Anyone who won their election benefited from the current system.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Wow, that's a stupid argument. When a system benefits someone, their incentive is to not question it. Anyone who won their election benefited from the current system.

maybe you haven't considered it, then.

Voters in places where their R-Congressman won, but so did Biden, don't think the system benefited them - they feel cheated according to you.

But, also according to you, they are fine with the result that benefits them and only call foul on the one they don't like.


In other words, people being upset about the result is no evidence of fraud at all.

would you have considered the system rigged if Trump had won?
Because none of the Trump voters would have.

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I think that these claims about a stolen election got a lot of traction because the system is insufficiently secure.

So it was nothing to do with Trump's months-long, relentless disinformation campaign on Twitter then. And the people who don't trust it aren't the ones so clueless about how the system works that they couldn't tell the difference between normal procedure and wholesale fraud. Glad we got all that sorted out.

Dave

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

So it was nothing to do with Trump's months-long, relentless disinformation campaign on Twitter then.

I didn't say that. Are you taking the position that it has nothing to do with deficiencies in the security and transparencies of our elections? You haven't actually said that either. I will assume, charitably, that you are not.

But only one of those two things is actually the responsibility of government to address. Care to guess which one?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

would you have considered the system rigged if Trump had won?

I would consider the system insufficiently secure and transparent, yes. I thought it was back in 2016, and even before.

Quote:

Because none of the Trump voters would have.

The nice thing about claims like this is that, because they rely on counter-factuals, they can never be disproven.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That is false. In the past it mostly came up in the context of voter ID laws, but I've been saying for a very long time that our elections are not sufficiently secure, and that they aren't transparently secure either. Your imagined hypocrisy doesn't exist.

Provide a link to a post from shortly after Trump won in which you expressed concern for election integrity as you’re doing now, and I’ll retract my statement.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I would consider the system insufficiently secure and transparent, yes. I thought it was back in 2016, and even before.

The nice thing about claims like this is that, because they rely on counter-factuals, they can never be disproven.

Your claims regarding election security remain unsupported and therefore continue to not to be taken seriously.

[Abooga]

I remember years ago in this forum there were some threads about e-voting and it was mostly agreed that it wasn't secure enough. The more knowledge the posters had about computers, the less they trusted these systems. The fact that it is not allowed in the great majority of countries should mean that its lack of sufficient security is incontrovertible. I know it may not be the best moment to talk about it because it gets mixed with Trump's CT about having won by a landslide (yeah, right...)but it is nevertheless a real issue.

[Mader Levap]

Computers are fine in support role, but physical trace is needed.

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Provide a link to a post from shortly after Trump won in which you expressed concern for election integrity as you’re doing now, and I’ll retract my statement.

That's unfair. He only has 47,000 posts on this forum. Practically a newbie.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Provide a link to a post from shortly after Trump won in which you expressed concern for election integrity as you’re doing now, and I’ll retract my statement.

November 28, 2016.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

It's not speculation that the system is inadequately secured. That remains true regardless of how much that insecurity has been exploited.

I have always been consistent about this.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I would consider the system insufficiently secure and transparent, yes. I thought it was back in 2016, and even before.
.....

90% of votes in 2020 were cast on paper ballots that can be stored and recounted. I agree it should be 100%. That could be accomplished by conducting elections entirely by mail. But the expansion of mail voting with paper ballots this year seems to be a primary basis for allegations of fraud. Trump and his acolytes literally tried to claim that only ballots cast on election day were valid. That reflects a basic delusion about how elections work, and how they are supposed to work. Their delusions are on them, not on the electoral process.