• Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    53 minutes ago

    Here’s the problem:

    • After spending 4 years saying that our elections are secure, how do you start a serious investigation into this without sounding like whining hypocrites at best?
    • Even if you prove to be 100% in the right, do you honestly think that you’re going to get people to believe it?
    • Even if you prove to be 100% in the right, doesn’t that also just prove that our elections really aren’t secure and can be manipulated pathetically easily?
    • The number of people needed to pull a stunt like this off would be in the thousands. Yet, not a single person has come forward and talked? Not a single election worker saying “Hey, I opened up a box of ballots to count, and all of them were just votes for Trump and nobody else.” Not a single worker tasked with tracking the shipment of these ballots reporting any anomalies? Remember. Every state went redder. You don’t think that in blue states like California or even purple states like Wisconsin, that if there were any anomalies they wouldn’t be screaming about it on social media before they were done unpacking the damn box?
    • Wouldn’t this have just lead to several anomalies in the voting count in at least some cities? Bulk cramming votes by the tens or even hundreds of thousands would surely lead to the number of votes cast in some states or counties being higher than the number of registered voters.
    • How do you prove that it wasn’t just a bunch of low-information Trump voters showing up just to support him, not caring about the other downballot races?

    Personally, I’d rather stick with the narrative that our elections are safe and secure, and the US voters simply voted against their own interests. The best we could hope for beyond that is the GOP saying that the election was stolen in 2020, the Democrats saying it was stolen in 2024, and nobody believing our elections are secure at all heading into 2026 and 2028.

    And even if you want to put all of that aside. A stunt like this would make Mission Impossible seem like Sesame Street by comparison. Think of the work it would take on a national level to pull this off with absolutely nobody talking and without a trace. Now look at the people Trump has leading the charge. What in the name of Jesus’s favorite camel makes you think that any of those fuckwits have the mental capacity to pull that off?

    These claims have little to no basis in reality and should be immediately disregarded just like Trump’s claims of 2020. The fact of the matter is that we lost.

    • Ruorc@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      44 minutes ago

      Regarding your points:

      1. 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.

      2. 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.

      3. 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.

      4. 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.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 minutes ago

        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.

  • Jordan117@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I laughed my ass off at the pathetic, baseless attempts to dispute the 2020 election, but never questioned their legal right to do so (which they failed miserably at). If suspicious Harris supporters believe they have convincing evidence of manipulation, then let their claims be examined and proven or disproven by a recount or in a court of law. Call it copium, but I’d rather check these claims out and be disappointed than pre-emptively assume they’re bullshit.

  • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    The number of people only voting for Trump and leaving the rest of the ballot blank is super weird. Seems like a great reason to do one of those hand recounts the GOP loves.

    Call your reps about this people. I’m calling Senator Bennett’s office on Monday. Can’t hurt.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    The tell:  A historically absurd number of Trump-only bullet ballots or undervote ballots.

    There are always a handful of voters who cast a vote in one race which they care about, and do not make other selections on the ballot.  These are called bullet ballots.  In Presidential Races since 1980, these bullet ballots rarely account for more than 1% of the total votes including in Mr. Trump’s winning 2016 election and losing 2020 election, and when they do it warrants further investigation.  In 2024 in the 43 non-swing states, bullet ballots make up a nominal >1%.   In the seven swing states the numbers are so high to be unbelievable, unprecedented and demanding of further investigation.  Here is analysis from totals as of late Nov. 12th

    Here are the unprecedented results of drop-offs in the two western swing states:

    AZ - 123K+ 7.2%+ of Trump’s total vote.  Enough to reverse the outcome.

    NV -   43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump’s total vote.  Enough to exceed recount threshold.

    It is my belief these two states have illegally added votes.

    For comparison, examine Trump’s 2024 results in three states which border AZ and NV.  They have equally passionate Trump supporters, but have the normal levels of drop off or bullet ballots.

    ID     <2K      0.03% of Trump’s total.

    OR   <4K      0.05% of Trump’s  total

    UT    <1K      0.01% of Trump’s total.

    In the case of Idaho and Utah, Mr. Trump was a run-away winner and had no need to add votes.  In the case of Oregon, Ms. Harris was a run-away winner and adding votes to Trump’s total would add risk without adding value.

    The same pattern of large numbers of drop-off votes or bullet ballots exists in the totals of MI, NC, PA, WI.

    123,000 Arizonans voted only for President & nobody else? That is weird.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 minutes ago

      AZ - 123K+ 7.2%+ of Trump’s total vote.  Enough to reverse the outcome.

      As odd as it is, you are not cramming 123,000 ballots in there without anybody noticing. It’s just not going to happen. Even spread out, that’s still thousands if not tens of thousands of ballots per district. Somebody would have noticed. Somebody would have said something. Some counties would have vote counts higher than the number of registered voters. There would be a giveaway. You don’t cram 7.2% of Trump’s total vote in a state as big as Arizona and leave no trace. That’s just impossible.

      EDIT: People are saying these were digital counts that were manipulated. The argument still stands, though. For that argument to be valid, that would mean that our elections are so insecure that Trump and the brainworm crew were able to hack into voting systems nationwide, en masse, and without anybody noticing. Thousands of people would still have to be involved. There would be a digital trace showing something happened, even if we couldn’t figure out exactly what or by whom. Someone would have made a human error that would stick out like a sore thumb. Digitally or physically, you are not pulling that kind of stunt at that level without anybody noticing, particularly not those lead paint eaters.

      • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 minutes ago

        The letter is suggesting that the vote counting machines were compromised, adding fake digital votes to the total after it had counted all of the real physicsl ballot votes. The letter suggests that a hand count of the physical voted would show the manipulation, because the extra digital votes would not show up in the physical ballots.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        They’ve been replacing election officials with partisan hacks for several years now. Especially in arizona. They are really pissed at the more populated areas that tend to go democrat.

        Does it mean the election was stolen. No. Would it be criminally negligent not to investigate this after Republicans told us they were going to do this and put people in place to do this. Yes.

        • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Would it be criminally negligent not to investigate this after Republicans told us they were going to do this and put people in place to do this.

          It is not criminally negligent to ignore claims that have no basis in reality. In fact, it would be more criminally negligent to waste taxpayer money to give credibility to these claims by investigating.

          Only one of these two sentences can hold true

          1. Our elections are safe and secure, with multiple fali-safes in play to ensure said integrity.

          2. Our elections are so insecure that people can simply drop off thousands or even millions of fake ballots across the country, mix them in with the real ones, and absolutely nobody notices. In multiple states.

          Again. Think of what it would take to be able to cram tens of thousands of ballots into the ballot box without a trace in multiple states across the country. Thousands of people would be needed to print, fill out, drop off, mix in, and count these ballots. And not one person has said something? Not one person let the cat out of the bag? Not one county ended up with an anomoly where there were more votes than voters? And it still doesn’t explain the 10 million or so Biden voters who just stayed home.

          We lost, and these theories have no basis in reality. If they did, we’d know it by now.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 minutes ago

            It is not criminally negligent to ignore claims that have no basis in reality.

            Here’s your reality basis. With them every accusation is a confession. They’ve been putting partisan election deniers in positions of control in many state and country elections office. Just for this sort of thing.

            We lost, and these theories have no basis in reality. If they did, we’d know it by now.

            I never said we didn’t. But as I posted the theories are strongly based in reality. General polling shows ignorant young and minority men swung hard for trump. White people in general held to tradition, carrying water for fascism as well. He likely did win. These sort of outliers should be checked however. And no, as long as we rely on states to set procedure and police themselves. No I don’t trust them implicitly. These are the groups that implemented poll taxes and practiced heavy handed disenfranchisement. Chances are this is nothing. But it is worth being sure.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I don’t know. When Republicans tell you they are going to rig the system for years. When Republicans take action to rig the system for years. It seems like it’s pretty plausible. Now whether or not it would ultimately change the outcome. That’s a good question and no one should get their hopes up. But Democrats absolutely should be investigating this.

    • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      14 hours ago

      It would probably need a lot of internal cooperation, and he just doesn’t go into that. But the excessive bullet ballots only being in swing states is pretty weird, honestly. I wonder how hard it would be to recount/reverify in maybe 2 states as a pilot.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There’s also the issue that Harris and the Democrats spent the last four years repudiating the idea that there was anything insecure about our elections systems, and being the big-tent party that favors process over outcome and desperately clings to democratic norms and the status quo, it seems to me that she’d likely be very loathe to call them into question now.

      And even if she were so inclined, she already conceded (and pretty quickly, at that). Does she even have standing to demand a recount now? And even if she should still have standing, would SCOTUS agree?

      FWIW, personally, these statistical anomalies seem compelling enough to me that I agree we should go ahead and double-check. I’m not holding out much hope that it will happen, though.

  • kmartburrito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Might as well do the check - you sure as fuck aren’t going to be able to check anything out in 2028, if we even hold an election that year.

    Do the check, see where the info leads, no brainer

  • 4am@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    He’s gonna destroy the country anyway; fuck it in say we try. If the numbers in this article are accurate, then anomalies exist. Might as well find out if it’s a “nothing burger”

  • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I’m not experienced enough to know for sure if those claims would truly hold water, but to my layman mind, it sure does sound like a compelling case to at least do a hand count.

  • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I mean, check it out just to rule out the possibility, I guess. The letter spells out how to determine whether this was the case or not - do a hand recount.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    When Mr. Musk announced his $1M lottery for people to go online and sign a pledge to vote for Trump, I became personally suspicious of why such a promotion would be done.  I signed up to see what information he wanted and what the pledge actually stated.  He did not want to know people’s socials or send them texts.  To sign up you had to provide your street address. That was all they cared about.  Once they had the people’s names, and street address this would allow for building a pool of ghost voters who could logically be marked for fake ballots, structured in a manner which matched ePollBook and precinct data.

    Elmo surely wouldn’t try such a thing.

    • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      14 hours ago

      They had pledged to vote though, I would assume the vast majority of them would have done just that, so how are they “ghost voters?” I feel like I’m missing something here.

        • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Yeah, maybe. Compare the list against a list of unlikely voters. Would be tricky to make sure no attempted double votes were cast. The theory is that these people were voted for, by mail? Or that an inside worker at the polls fed the votes into the machines? In the 2nd case maybe investigators could look at the times the “bullet ballot” votes were cast to see if there were irregularities indicating trouble, like them being clustered around certain times of day.