I’m wishing you luck in your endeavor.
Gee, I didn’t know it was all up to me. I had thought others were interested to. People like Alex Halderman. Maybe you should wish him luck.
“You” is never plural?
no but “you in your” sure does imply it.
This is tiresome. Goodbye.
‘For this Nation to remain true to its principles, we cannot allow any American’s vote to be denied, diluted, or defiled. The right to vote is the crown jewel of American liberties, and we will not see its luster diminished.’
Hah, more like, that’s fucking stupid.
As long as I have been paying attention to politics, both parties have been doing anything they can to game the system. In the last decade, since the democrats have been on a winning streak, most of the claims of election fraud have come from the right. As soon as Trump won the election, they stopped all the noise about “Soros vote machines” and illegal aliens voting.
So now similar charges are coming from the left.
I am pretty cynical about both parties. I will never believe that any political party is all good or all bad. I think that if either party can figure a way to rig the system without the expectation of being caught, they will do it. In large and small ways. It is also reasonable to expect that anyone who is doing so will scoff at their opponents for suggesting such a thing is even possible.
I expect the Brennan Center to arrive at different conclusions soon. Since 2007, they have regarded it as a “myth”.
As with most things in life, Max, it’s not what you say so much as how you say it.
So am I. But I’m far more cynical about Republican voters than Democrat voters.
He is beyond such partisan leaps, measuring skepticism perfectly equally between parties. An “independent”, you see.
I don’t know why persons feign objectivity so. Do they think it makes them more believable?
Correct. But since at least the 1980s only one of the parties has been worthy of having its gaming of the system called racist in terms of means and ends. That same party’s surrogates have, and will continue to, falsely accuse the other party of gaming the system in the same racist manner they do (the psychological term is “projection”).
The Brennan Center calls conservatives’ allegations of widespread voter fraud a myth based on very good evidence, so I expect they will continue to do so. Ballot tampering may be discovered in a case of alleged hacking like this, but the Brennan Center would still not change their opinion on the prevalence of voter fraud – not the least because they understand the distinction between ballot tampering and voter fraud.
It certainly makes the false equivalencies roll more easily off the tongue.
Because of the tradition of local governance.
American voting norms were developed in the late 18th and early 19th centuries when America was overwhelmingly rural and communication between voters within the same state could take days. To build a functioning democracy in this environment laws and customs put almost all of the responsibility for managing elections at the county level – the unit of governance where typically everyone was within a day’s communication of one another.
This distributed system has some real advantages, and also induces some very strange quirks in the modern era. But that is different discussion.
Typically, if a modernization is desired, the state legislature will describe the desired modernization and disburse funds to the counties for this specific purpose.
Why are there voting machines at all, to be honest? Numerous developed countries use paper ballots counted by hand in the presence of volunteer observers from the various parties.
The media should do it. File an open records request, get the ballots, get the machines, and start investigating.
Vote by mail and tallying machines are more reliable than observers or voting machines.
It works great in WA, though interestingly enough doesn’t raise voting participation significantly.
It seems to me that auditing election results should be standard practice. I’m not saying I want to overturn results (that’s a can of worms). I’m just saying that a properly operating system can handle the scrutiny, no matter the outcome.
Smart move on the Trump campaign to declare early on that any unfavorable result would be contested.
Forced the HRC and the DNC to condemn that kind of thing which makes it a lot easier to paint her as a hypocrite if she does contest the result.
Is it hard to believe the Trump campaign would be that clever? No harder than it was to believe HRC took notes, got caught, and then the party promoted the person who passed them, or any other number of moron moves by people regarded as the smart folks in the room.
Heads we win tails you lose. I don’t think it’s necessarily “brilliant” considering they were going to do it anyway and always reserve takebacksies if they won.
For the same reason a public school education can be a life-ruining entrypoint to the school-to-prison pipeline, a useless dead-end that craps out unemployable illiterates, or an award-winning program that provides talented teachers with the latest technology to do their jobs. Because in America, even our government services are starkly striated between the haves and the have-nots.