• Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours 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
      4
      ·
      4 hours 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.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Ok, but ask yourself…even under a best case scenario, what do you expect to realistically accomplish? Trump won, but by slightly less?

        Because if you prove anything, that also comes with the side effect of proving that our elections are not secure. You just proved that __________ successfully hacked voting machines across multiple counties in several swing states without being detected. It doesn’t matter who you put in that blank. Trump’s cronies. Russian hackers. North Korean hackers. Chinese hackers. Killer clowns from outer space. All of the above. Doesn’t matter. You’ve just told the entire population of the United States that their vote really doesn’t matter because the election is going to be decided by whatever hacker group is most successful. Good luck trying to get any voter to believe our elections are secure ever again. No matter what happens, the losing side will always just blame “the hackers”. Those lawsuits against Dominion and the other voting machine manufacturers? Yeah, they’re going to be giving that money back, because you just proved that any old hacker group actually could get into them at will and change the outcome of the election. Fox News will gladly take back their 800 million. Good luck getting anyone to believe that either the 2020 or 2024 election was legitimate. Or any other election ever again, for that matter.

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

          Look if you want to gaslight someone. Gaslight someone else. I’ve been paying attention and got receipts.

          If someone verbally and physically threatens poll workers. Putting people into offices they have no qualification for. Who’s only goal is to deny a Democrats victory, and there are unusual or suspicious circumstances. If we do not look into it. We don’t deserve a democracy. And yes if he wins by less. He wins by less. But at least we know. This isn’t a baseless wild goose chase like the fascists wanted. If the Democrats were the ones making the threats and taking these actions and a similar discrepancy or unusual anomaly popped up. I would still say we need to look into it. If this isn’t something worth looking into. Something worth understanding. Then what is?

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

            I’m not trying to gaslight a thing.

            Try telling people “Our elections are secure” while also telling them “Trump supporters changed ballot counts in voting systems across multiple states without detection.”

            Pick one. The two cannot exist simultaneously. If you pick the former, your investigation is irrelevant. If you pick the latter, nobody will ever believe our elections are secure again. If you try to pick both, you’re the one gaslighting.