this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
122 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2073 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

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 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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 -2 points 6 days 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.