Democracy is in trouble....

[Bob001]

For example:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3666259

Why do you think mail-in ballots are secure? What security features do you think they have that make them secure?

If you don't know it's up to you to investigate.

 

[Ziggurat]

Blame won't fix that problem or many others, but in order to fix a problem you have to find it. Although it's true that there's a difference between what happens and what might happen, we might at least consider that when a thing consistently does not happen despite warnings that it might,

How would you know it didn't happen? Because few people were caught? When there are few mechanisms available to catch people who cheat, that isn't actually strong evidence that there was little cheating.

I don't have faith in god but that does not mean I ought to be allowed to burn down churches.

Who's arguing for burning down churches? Making our elections more secure, in ways that many other developed nations already do, is hardly the equivalent of burning down a church.

 

[lomiller]

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

Knowing the who blame for the problem is an essential step in fixing it. In particular the most serious problems are consistently in elections run by Republican Governors. To fix the problem, step number one is not to vote Republican at the State level. Fix number two would be to jail politicians who's campaigns seek the assistance of foreign powers in US elections.

 

[lomiller]

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.

I can tolerate income inequality if economic mobility doesn't suffer. Mobility has suffered in the US, particularly generation to generation mobility. Poor generation to generation economic mobility puts a country on course for a new permanent aristocracy and eventually a new feudal system.

 

[bruto]

How would you know it didn't happen? Because few people were caught? When there are few mechanisms available to catch people who cheat, that isn't actually strong evidence that there was little cheating.



Who's arguing for burning down churches? Making our elections more secure, in ways that many other developed nations already do, is hardly the equivalent of burning down a church.

You keep saying the same things, but when you say there are few mechanisms to catch people who cheat, what mechanisms do you propose that do not exist, and in what way are the usual mechanisms falling short? If there's a practical thing that other nations are doing that we should be doing without compromising our democracy, let's hear some specifics.

Of course you're not advocating burning down churches, but you're apparently excusing the violent anger of those whose unsubstantiated doubts about election security led them to unprecedented attacks against the government and the election that occurred, based on a vague and unsubstantiated presumption that an election can be stolen through fraud.

 

[Ziggurat]

Thread title “Trump Claims Millions of Illegal Votes Cast” and the context is you defending Republican voter suppression tactics in response to a Trump conspiracy theory, not you making serious or good faith arguments about election security.

I provided exactly what you asked for, and now you're claiming it doesn't count because reasons.

You never asked in good faith. You only asked because you didn't think I would bother. You have proven your fundamental dishonesty, and you're trying to lecture me about good faith arguments? Yeah, no. We're done here.

 

[mgidm86]

Since you just changed, any advice about how to reach them?

It is easy to dismiss them as stupid or loony. I should know, I do that often, though it is more out of laziness than sincere thought they are literally mentally deficient. In all seriousness I am sure it is only very small minority of them that are truly basket cases.

But for the rest... there are questions, why they believe what they believe and how to convince them they are mistaken.

This is only chance to end it all more or less peacefully.

I guess first is understanding why they believe what they do. By the way I pretty much scrolled through the last two pages of voter fraud arguing here. If Trump and all his faithfuls had any evidence we would have already seen it. I've had enough of that.

I don't know how to reach them. With my Mom and my Stepdad they know I try and think things through. I also kind of have an audience with them already. They do listen to me.

However, as I said they still aren't sure about Biden. At least that's what they say. I told them a lot of people don't think Biden is the best choice in the world. He just isn't all the horrible things Trump is, and I'd rather not repeat a list of these things because I can only type so much.

For my parents - well they are Christians, my Mom even worked at the church until Covid. Stepdad is originally from Kansas. But they're not uptight at all. He's a simple guy, educated but not real bright. A good man.

A lot of this with them is just about voting for conservatives. My Stepdad said several years ago "I'd never do business with Trump, he doesn't pay up", yet he voted for him twice.

Fear of the other side.

I want to think that anyone still unsure is a stupid evil idiot. But I look at my parents and I'm pretty sure they aren't evil. And they may not be ISF forum members, but they aren't morons.

It seems to be a deep embedded loyalty to the ideas of what they believe the Republican party is, or should be. Family values, standing up to evil Dems who kill babies (my Mom is not pro-Life), Gawd.

I really think a lot of it is FOX and other conservative media hammering it into their brains every day. People see something on TV and they believe it. Why would Hannity lie? He sounds so reasonable!

And he does, at least to someone who gets all their news (facts) from that source. They don't see the same news we do. They see distortions of events, and they are lied to by omission (and outright), and those are the facts that guys like Hannity can play around with.

They lie straight to their faces.

It's a big fluffy comfortable cloud of bullcrap that has been built just for them. Why leave that cloud when everything on it makes sense? When you control the facts you can say whatever you want and people must believe you.

These guys are good at what they do. I used to listen to talk radio a lot, and the guys I disagreed with could still make convincing arguments, and if you listened long enough, who knows, maybe you'd start believing it.

It's one thing to hear different sides of a subject and draw conclusions based on that. But when you are constantly only hearing one side you can't make an informed decision.

And when the other side is lied about and demonized by your side you have no reason to listen to them or believe anything they say.

In short, these people are systematically lied to. They really do think Biden has mispronounced more words than Trump. They really believe that Biden is in worse physical and mental shape than Trump. They really believe that riots and violence will follow a Biden win.

My Dad is a very smart man, and even he answered, "Yes" when I asked him if he thought Trump was intelligent. That freaked the hell out of me. Even my Dad?

So maybe the one-word answer is "brainwashing"?

How to reach them? Oh ya that was the question!

I don't know. Trump supporters do know Trump says stupid things, but they push away that little voice inside their heads that says "this is bad". I did the same thing, to a point.

Finally that voice became loud enough. But why did I hear it and they don't? It is because I practice skepticism? And is that the only difference? I think maybe it is.

Politics is so polarized right now - how can someone swing all the way across the chasm between left and right? That's a long way across, and I think that's part of it too. It IS too far to cross!

"I can't be a liberal! But this Trump guy is pretty bad...who do I turn to?"

I still don't consider myself liberal. I'm not conservative either. I hate Trump and the Repubs who enabled him, which is most of them in my view. My views have changed on many things but not on others.

I tell them, "It's okay to be conservative and hate Trump. In fact a good conservative would!"

But again, they have nowhere else to turn, at least in their minds.

Fear. Plus what would their friends think? Again, that is fear.

How to help them with that fear? Hard to say. If the evils of Trump aren't enough for them then what is?

FOX could only control the nnarrative for so long with all Trumps "Steal the vote" crap, yet these people STILL believe in him. They STILL think the Dems could be worse. Maybe that's something the Dems need to work out.

It's an important question (how to reach these people).

I'd say now is the best time to try, as they literally have nobody to believe in.....until the next a-hole comes along. That person WILL reach them.

What to do? Outlaw FOX? How can you peel people away from that? Or their astrologer for that matter! Sigh.

 

[Ziggurat]

You keep saying the same things, but when you say there are few mechanisms to catch people who cheat, what mechanisms do you propose that do not exist, and in what way are the usual mechanisms falling short?

For an example of mechanisms falling short, voter rolls are not kept up. When people move away or die, they are frequently not taken off the list. Voter registration requirements in the first place are wholly inadequate, and ineligible voters can and do often register to vote.

If there's a practical thing that other nations are doing that we should be doing without compromising our democracy, let's hear some specifics.

Voter ID is a pretty damn common requirement. Every serious objection to them is actually pretty easy to remedy, if one is interested in doing so.

Of course you're not advocating burning down churches, but you're apparently excusing the violent anger of those whose unsubstantiated doubts about election security led them to unprecedented attacks against the government and the election that occurred, based on a vague and unsubstantiated presumption that an election can be stolen through fraud.

No, I'm not. I've never once excused violence. That is entirely a figment of your own imagination, nothing in what I've actually written contains anything of the sort.

But if you think that violence is the full extent of the problem with a lack of faith in elections, then I don't think you're grasping the full picture. That was a pretty small minority. There is a far larger group of people who would not be willing to engage in violence, but have lost faith in the system. That's not a good situation. And telling them they're wrong isn't a fix.

 

[jimbob]

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.

Yup,
And voter suppression and gerrymandering.

 

[mgidm86]

What I'm hearing about election fraud:

Bigfoot will be caught because he's obviously there, we just haven't figured out the right kind of trap to use yet.

 

[Bob001]

For an example of mechanisms falling short, voter rolls are not kept up. When people move away or die, they are frequently not taken off the list. Voter registration requirements in the first place are wholly inadequate, and ineligible voters can and do often register to vote.

Support your claim. Where is there any evidence that any substantial numbers of people are voting in districts where they don't live, or that others are voting in the names of the deceased, or that people are registering to vote who aren't eligible to do so?

Voter ID is a pretty damn common requirement. Every serious objection to them is actually pretty easy to remedy, if one is interested in doing so.

Voter ID might be administered fairly, IF a larger variety of IDs were accepted and IF they were cheap and easy to obtain. But when examined closely, you will find that states that imposed new requirements that voters present current state-issued IDs to vote also took steps like closing DMV offices to make them harder to get.

The fact is that voting is a core right of citizenship. The state should have to justify denying it; the citizen shouldn't have to justify exercising it.

I repeat, five states conduct elections entirely by mail. Where is there any evidence of fraud, even from losing candidates?

 

[Bob001]

What I'm hearing about election fraud:

Bigfoot will be caught because he's obviously there, we just haven't figured out the right kind of trap to use yet.

We just have to wait for him to show up to vote without ID.

 

[Ziggurat]

Support your claim. Where is there any evidence that any substantial numbers of people are voting in districts where they don't live, or that others are voting in the names of the deceased, or that people are registering to vote who aren't eligible to do so?

You are trying to move the goalpost for me. I'm not talking about how many people have done this. I'm saying there are inadequate protections against it. But we know all that stuff happens on some level, because sometimes people get caught doing it. Maybe not that many people do it right now. But that isn't good enough.

Voter ID might be administered fairly, IF a larger variety of IDs were accepted and IF they were cheap and easy to obtain.

Those are tractable problems. In fact, states with voter ID requirements have to provide those ID's for free. If Democrats got on board with voter ID requirements, they would be able to do a lot to set the agenda of how those requirements are rolled out.

I repeat, five states conduct elections entirely by mail. Where is there any evidence of fraud, even by losing candidates?

If you haven't heard about duplicate ballots, ballots sent to the wrong address, failed signature checks (see my link above for an example of that), etc., then you haven't been paying attention. Again, it doesn't suffice to say that it made no difference this time (but even there, how would you know when the system isn't secure?). The system must be SEEN to be secure. And there's just a crap ton of problems with it right now.

 

[johnny karate]

For example:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3666259

A Trump administration official claiming mail-in ballots aren’t secure in the lead-up to the 2020 election when Republicans were openly campaigning against mail-in ballots. Yes, that’s very compelling.

Why do you think mail-in ballots are secure? What security features do you think they have that make them secure?

Because we just had a national election using a significant amount of mail-in ballots that was very secure.

 

[johnny karate]

I provided exactly what you asked for, and now you're claiming it doesn't count because reasons.

These are the terms of my request: “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.

I’ve highlighted the relevant part. In the example you provided, you weren’t questioning the results of the election, as you’re doing now. You were pushing bogus conservative talking points based on conspiracy theories, also as you’re doing now.

You never asked in good faith. You only asked because you didn't think I would bother. You have proven your fundamental dishonesty, and you're trying to lecture me about good faith arguments? Yeah, no. We're done here.

I’m devastated.

But it should be noted that you are on record pushing election fraud conspiracy theories, and continue to do so in manner that’s a lot more transparent than you probably realize. I’m not particularly concerned about purveyors of conspiracy theories questioning my honesty.

 

[johnny karate]

You are trying to move the goalpost for me. I'm not talking about how many people have done this. I'm saying there are inadequate protections against it. But we know all that stuff happens on some level, because sometimes people get caught doing it. Maybe not that many people do it right now. But that isn't good enough.

Those are tractable problems. In fact, states with voter ID requirements have to provide those ID's for free. If Democrats got on board with voter ID requirements, they would be able to do a lot to set the agenda of how those requirements are rolled out.

If you haven't heard about duplicate ballots, ballots sent to the wrong address, failed signature checks (see my link above for an example of that), etc., then you haven't been paying attention. Again, it doesn't suffice to say that it made no difference this time (but even there, how would you know when the system isn't secure?). The system must be SEEN to be secure. And there's just a crap ton of problems with it right now.

Cite needed.

 

[turingtest]

A Trump administration official claiming mail-in ballots aren’t secure in the lead-up to the 2020 election when Republicans were openly campaigning against mail-in ballots. Yes, that’s very compelling.



Because we just had a national election using a significant amount of mail-in ballots that was very secure.

Well, you know- People here seem to think that being worried about something is evidence in and of itself that they should have been worried. It's quite strange. (ISF)

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Republicans must be unbelievably incompetent not to find the obvious fraud going on...
I wouldn't vote for anyone like that...

 

[Abooga]

Yup,
And voter suppression and gerrymandering.

Yes indeed. I find gerrymanderintg particularly obscene, how can that be a thing? Such a blatant cheat... as for voter suppresion, I don´t know much about the issue. Of course voting should be facilitated, but I find it hard to wrap my mind around how requiring ID for voting can be an issue when here in Europe it´s just a given.

But perhaps we need a new thread if we are going to keep arguing about the security of the voting system, this is getting a bit derailed. (it´s just that in my case I´ve thought for a long time that e-voting means the end of democracy, so when I read the thread title, that´s what came into my mind).

 

[Dave Rogers]

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

But only one of those two things, after extensive investigation and legal scrutiny, has been shown to actually exist rather than having been fabricated in a political disinformation strategy. Care to guess which one?

Dave