7
Election denialism emerges on the left after Trump’s win
(www.nbcnews.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
7 points (57.4% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2645 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
I just need someone to disprove the "bullet ballot" thing I saw. I have no idea if their numbers are real, but if Trump did actually get hundreds of thousands of votes in swing states where he's literally the only candidate selected I want that shit looked into at the very least. That's waaaaay outside the norm.
I'm being very careful not to go full dumbass like Trump voters in 2020 but I also think the GOP has a significantly greater propensity to cheat based on, well everything. That feels fair.
There’s also the well-established history of projection to consider with the GOP. While I doubt anything at scale was actually pulled off, an investigation is still fair and reasonable.
Not only that, but they have just spent years having the left call out their obvious bullshit claims over and over, so the base is primed and ready to immediately believe that this is just a cynical attempt by the Democrats to overturn a fair election. After all, that's exactly what they just did. And everyone must think and behave just like them because it's all they know or care to know.
Not that I care what those people believe, but I just know that they will dismiss it outright and never even consider any evidence that may come out.
A source for those interested: https://substack.com/home/post/p-151721941
Without calling into question the broader possibility that malfeasance did occur, I don't feel like this argument is particularly credible.
Suppose you were to engage in some form of straight up ballot stuffing? Why then would you make them bullet ballots? Why not vote straight ticket Republican? Straight ticket ballots are not unusual - even less so then bullet ballots, apparently - so you'd draw less suspicion, and you'd get the benefit of lots of extra down ticket votes.
If someone was going to cheat, what benefit would they gain from cheating this way?
If this was some tabulation hack, then maybe whatever exploit they used to add or flip votes didn't easily allow for introducing a full ballot of choices.
If it was human ballot stuffing maybe it was easier to make only one selection so that local county-level choices wouldn't limit where/when those ballots could be introduced.
Just for the record, I don't think there's anything to this. It's very hard to do voter fraud on a scale that matters, and I need more evidence than some strange ballots. If evidence emerges, I'll change my mind, but I don't expect that to happen.
That said, if I were to come up with an argument for why they did it this way, it's because of how fascism is lined up behind a specific leader. Nobody below him matters. However important those people think they are, they are replaceable parts. This line of thought is so ingrained into fascism that they don't even think of supporting anybody else.
Which is really important for reasons beyond possible voter fraud. It explains why people would naturally vote that way on their own, and then the voter fraud theory is cut up by Occom's Razer.
The people below him matter because they enact his agenda. The fact that there is a cult of personality around Trump absolutely explains why real voters would vote that way. But anyone enacting a ballot stuffing scheme on his behalf would almost certainly understand that he needs cronies to actually do any of the things he wants to do.
I think you're guilty of crediting them with an abundance of intelligence.
But I'm forced to credit them with intelligence, by the framing of the theory.
You see that, right?
The supposition is that these people engaged in a massive ballot stuffing scheme, and covered it up so well (including successfully obtaining the silence of every one of the people involved) that the only evidence left is an abnormally high number of bullet ballots.
So they have to be smart enough and self-serving enough to do all that, but stupid enough to not do the obvious - and selfish - thing and make those ballots straight ticket votes.
See my previous point about any argument that relies on the same people simultaneously displaying extremes of competence and incompetence. I'm not saying that never happens, but it is usually a good indicator that you're engaging in wishful thinking.
Republicans are dumb enough to give it away if that is what happened. I'm not saying it is but I think there is definitely a non zero chance it is.
Generally speaking, a good test for fantastical thinking is when your theory relies on the same people displaying outlandish degrees of both competence and incompence at the same time.
If the people who did this are good enough to pull off - and keep quiet - a fraud at this scale, how did they fuck up such an elementary component?
If they're capable of fucking up something that basic, how is it that they've failed to leave any other stunningly obvious evidence?
Personally, I'm of the opinion that even apparently fair elections should be treated as active crime scenes. That's how we do things in Canada. Everything is checked and rechecked. But this particular theory seems to have veered pretty far into moon landing territory.
That's what I'm saying look for other evidence, the anomaly is worth checking but doesn't mean something nefarious happened.