97
Duty to Warn Letter Regarding Hacking of 2024 Election
(substack.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
97 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3244 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Here's the problem:
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.
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.
Regarding your points:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.