As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

The Battle Over Voting Rights (also Gerrymandering)

18384868889102

Posts

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2019
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    There are also people who honestly view politics as something to avoid like the plague.

    Which, our broadly societal push of viewing policy as mostly meaningless compared to theatre criticism, handling your bootstraps, and innumerable veto points helps inculcate.

    moniker on
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    There are also people who honestly view politics as something to avoid like the plague.

    Which, our broadly societal push of viewing policy as mostly meaningless compared to theatre criticism, handling your bootstraps, and innumerable veto points helps inculcate.

    One of the things I've heard recently from people who deal with non-voters a lot while trying to get them to vote is that most non-voters make a conscious decision not to vote. A lot of people just don't want to be involved because they think their involvement won't matter or it's all bullshit anyway or the like.

  • Options
    Martini_PhilosopherMartini_Philosopher Registered User regular
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
  • Options
    MillMill Registered User regular
    Yeah, the whole "politics shouldn't be discussed at the dinner table," has been rather disastrous for our society. I'd argue it's one of the elements that let's batshit and fringe policy positions fester into a problem, since the conceit ensures that the only time the holders of such positions usually don't run into opposition until they engage in a political activity; especially, with how the internet can allow them to find a community of far strung individuals that have such views. It's hard to say if the coarsening of politics has gotten worse or not, but the concept behind the whole avoiding politics has probably not helped, since it ensures that many never have to work or accept the idea that there are differences of opinion and that doesn't mean there needs to animosity. Also the lack of discussion let's people get away into heavily buying into some real rank bullshit, to the point where they'll feel willfully compelled to cling to said bullshit despite overwhelming evidence that the bullshit is outright wrong or indefensible. Finally, it let's be getting into this falsehood that politics can be avoided. Politics isn't just limited to government offices, it's something that crops up any time there is a policy disagreement. I mean hell, anytime the office has a fight over what toppings to have a on pizza, is essentially politics because their is a disagreement on the lunch policy in regards to whether one of the pizzas will have pineapple on it or not.

    Also apparently the FEC has become even more useless? They can no longer vote to enforce campaign laws now that the vice-chairman has resigned. Granted seeing how the republicans would always vote to cover the asses of their peers, it didn't really get anything done anyways; especially, since it has equal membership between each party. Also if you guessed the vice-chairman was a republican, you are correct. Probably a high chance the fucker, Petersen, likely did it for shady shit given how his judgeship nomination in 2017 went (spoiler, he had to withdraw because he was unable to answer basic legal questions during his confirmation hearing. Not having to have any votes means not having to either throw some of their peers under the bus to maintain credibility or risk having to justify some really shitty votes.

  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    so that's why I've never been chosen!

  • Options
    cckerberoscckerberos Registered User regular
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Depending on the locale, there might be some basis for this.

    To quote from the Seattle Municipal Court website: "Jurors are selected from Washington State driver license/ID and voter registration records provided by the State of Washington and King County."

    Granted, most non-voters are going to have a driver's license or state ID so not registering to vote isn't actually going to do them any good.

    cckerberos.png
  • Options
    Martini_PhilosopherMartini_Philosopher Registered User regular
    Xaquin wrote: »
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    so that's why I've never been chosen!

    Maybe? I know my wife gets selected more than I do for county and state duty which comes down to however the random was programmed into their selection software. Kansas is also weird in that driver licenses are renewed/tested for at the state level offices but car registrations are done by county. So, at least in our county, they pull all the private property registrations (all of the cars, boats, trailers, trucks, etc) and then get mill levy records from the state to compliment those. If between all of that you've managed to not have to register anything then yeah, that's why you've not been selected for jury duty.

    All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
  • Options
    PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    edited August 2019
    Mill wrote: »
    Yeah, the whole "politics shouldn't be discussed at the dinner table," has been rather disastrous for our society. I'd argue it's one of the elements that let's batshit and fringe policy positions fester into a problem, since the conceit ensures that the only time the holders of such positions usually don't run into opposition until they engage in a political activity; especially, with how the internet can allow them to find a community of far strung individuals that have such views. It's hard to say if the coarsening of politics has gotten worse or not, but the concept behind the whole avoiding politics has probably not helped, since it ensures that many never have to work or accept the idea that there are differences of opinion and that doesn't mean there needs to animosity. Also the lack of discussion let's people get away into heavily buying into some real rank bullshit, to the point where they'll feel willfully compelled to cling to said bullshit despite overwhelming evidence that the bullshit is outright wrong or indefensible. Finally, it let's be getting into this falsehood that politics can be avoided. Politics isn't just limited to government offices, it's something that crops up any time there is a policy disagreement. I mean hell, anytime the office has a fight over what toppings to have a on pizza, is essentially politics because their is a disagreement on the lunch policy in regards to whether one of the pizzas will have pineapple on it or not.

    Also apparently the FEC has become even more useless? They can no longer vote to enforce campaign laws now that the vice-chairman has resigned. Granted seeing how the republicans would always vote to cover the asses of their peers, it didn't really get anything done anyways; especially, since it has equal membership between each party. Also if you guessed the vice-chairman was a republican, you are correct. Probably a high chance the fucker, Petersen, likely did it for shady shit given how his judgeship nomination in 2017 went (spoiler, he had to withdraw because he was unable to answer basic legal questions during his confirmation hearing. Not having to have any votes means not having to either throw some of their peers under the bus to maintain credibility or risk having to justify some really shitty votes.

    Like a lot of American traditions, I've come to believe that "politics shouldn't be discussed at the dinner table" is code for "Don't make the conservatives angry or they will..." So much of U.S. white middle class behavior makes a lot more sense when you realize it comes from a learned fear response to white conservative rage and violence.

    Phillishere on
  • Options
    CalicaCalica Registered User regular
    It's such a classic abuse scenario too. Don't say anything that upsets Uncle Racist, because then there'll be a shouting match and it'll be your fault.

  • Options
    LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    This doesn’t seem accurate as it would preclude renters. Also when I got it in WV I was living with my parents at the time.

  • Options
    chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    LostNinja wrote: »
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    This doesn’t seem accurate as it would preclude renters. Also when I got it in WV I was living with my parents at the time.

    Property can include cars as well as houses.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    chrisnl wrote: »
    LostNinja wrote: »
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    This doesn’t seem accurate as it would preclude renters. Also when I got it in WV I was living with my parents at the time.

    Property can include cars as well as houses.

    Ah, okay then.

  • Options
    [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular
    LostNinja wrote: »
    chrisnl wrote: »
    LostNinja wrote: »
    zekebeau wrote: »
    I'm visiting my local MassHealth Enrollment Center today to figure out a problem with my daughter's coverage today. It's the first time I've come here before since all my previous transactions with MassHealth have always been online or by phone.

    The first thing the receptionist asks people after they state their problem is if they're registered to vote. Then we all get a form from the sec of state to register. The form is both in English and Spanish. Most interesting is the form says that if the form is left blank it will still automatically register the person.

    Though while I was marveling over this form, and waiting my turn, I was particularly alarmed to see nearly all the other people after me say that not only are they not registered to vote, they don't want to be registered.

    Whyyyy? The state of Massachusetts makes it so easy! Why would people go out of their way to refuse to vote?

    (Just my anecdote, of course, but still pretty alarming)

    My guesses:
    (1) "If I'm not registered / don't vote, it's not my responsibility / my fault."
    (2) "Voter registration is how they find you."

    Also, there is a belief that not being registered means you won't get jury duty.

    Which is why every time my wife or I get selected for duty, the first thing they tell you it's done by property records not voting registration.

    This doesn’t seem accurate as it would preclude renters. Also when I got it in WV I was living with my parents at the time.

    Property can include cars as well as houses.

    Ah, okay then.

    This is why, to be truly free, you must have no possessions.

    I will humbly accept the burden of taking all your stuff off your hands.

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    So this dropped today:
    https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/mystery-missing-votes-deepens-congress-investigates-georgia/x4OTY0ylxfA0Z0Rg6wjkyN/#
    To find a clue about what might have gone wrong with Georgia’s election last fall, look no further than voting machine No. 3 at the Winterville Train Depot outside Athens.

    On machine No. 3, Republicans won every race. On each of the other six machines in that precinct, Democrats won every race.

    The odds of an anomaly that large are less than 1 in 1 million, according to a statistician’s analysis in court documents. The strange results would disappear if votes for Democratic and Republican candidates were flipped on machine No. 3.

    It just so happens that this occurred in Republican Brian Kemp’s home precinct, where he initially had a problem voting when his yellow voter access card didn’t work because a poll worker forgot to activate it. At the time, Kemp was secretary of state — Georgia’s top election official — and running for governor in a tight contest with Democrat Stacey Abrams.
    The suspicious results in Winterville are evidence in the ongoing mystery of whether errors with voting machines contributed to a stark drop-off in votes recorded in the race for Georgia lieutenant governor between Republican Geoff Duncan, who ended up winning, and Democrat Sarah Riggs Amico.
    The potential voting irregularities were included among 15,500 pages of documents obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that have also been turned over to the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Committee, which is looking into Georgia’s elections. The documents, provided under the Georgia Open Records Act, offer details of alleged voting irregularities but no answers.

    Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office has refused to open an investigation.

    Basically a whole lot of weird shit about the 2018 race in Georgia.

    Just for starters, electronic voting machines need to be just outright banned.

  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    So this dropped today:
    https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/mystery-missing-votes-deepens-congress-investigates-georgia/x4OTY0ylxfA0Z0Rg6wjkyN/#
    To find a clue about what might have gone wrong with Georgia’s election last fall, look no further than voting machine No. 3 at the Winterville Train Depot outside Athens.

    On machine No. 3, Republicans won every race. On each of the other six machines in that precinct, Democrats won every race.

    The odds of an anomaly that large are less than 1 in 1 million, according to a statistician’s analysis in court documents. The strange results would disappear if votes for Democratic and Republican candidates were flipped on machine No. 3.

    It just so happens that this occurred in Republican Brian Kemp’s home precinct, where he initially had a problem voting when his yellow voter access card didn’t work because a poll worker forgot to activate it. At the time, Kemp was secretary of state — Georgia’s top election official — and running for governor in a tight contest with Democrat Stacey Abrams.
    The suspicious results in Winterville are evidence in the ongoing mystery of whether errors with voting machines contributed to a stark drop-off in votes recorded in the race for Georgia lieutenant governor between Republican Geoff Duncan, who ended up winning, and Democrat Sarah Riggs Amico.
    The potential voting irregularities were included among 15,500 pages of documents obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that have also been turned over to the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Committee, which is looking into Georgia’s elections. The documents, provided under the Georgia Open Records Act, offer details of alleged voting irregularities but no answers.

    Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office has refused to open an investigation.

    Basically a whole lot of weird shit about the 2018 race in Georgia.

    Just for starters, electronic voting machines need to be just outright banned.

    I've been saying that for years, every since I saw that Voting Machines were less secure than slot machines.

  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    As of today there are TWO Senate races in Georgia next year, too.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    That's because slot machines are super heavily regulated. And even they have exploitable bugs pop up (or malicious code snuck in) from time to time.

    But wow. That sounds like pretty strong evidence of the race being screwed up.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    That's because slot machines are super heavily regulated. And even they have exploitable bugs pop up (or malicious code snuck in) from time to time.

    But wow. That sounds like pretty strong evidence of the race being screwed up.

    Stolen.

  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited August 2019
    Polaritie wrote: »
    That's because slot machines are super heavily regulated. And even they have exploitable bugs pop up (or malicious code snuck in) from time to time.

    But wow. That sounds like pretty strong evidence of the race being screwed up.

    There's also huge cash incentives to secure slot machines. The only possible profit vector related to voting machine security would be in ensuring they were not.

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    That's because slot machines are super heavily regulated. And even they have exploitable bugs pop up (or malicious code snuck in) from time to time.

    But wow. That sounds like pretty strong evidence of the race being screwed up.

    Stolen.

    I mean, yes, but that has plausible deniability.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • Options
    MillMill Registered User regular
    I've yet to see a good reason to have electronic voting machines and I see plenty of reasons to fucking outlaw the things, followed by taking any existing ones to a scrapyard or incinerator.

    There should be a paper trail and that paper trail shouldn't have the voter be reliant on some machine to tell them how their vote was counted. I mean, we this thing called a scantron machine. Just use those for voting. They can't be hacked, the voter will know exactly what name is on their ballot and it's an excellent paper trail. If the concern is long lines, well maybe early voting should be a thing everywhere, along with easy access to voting by mail.

    I strongly suspect the GOP pushes for electronic voting machines because they have two intents. One is fucking grifting because they have shithead buddies that make money on electronic voting machines. The other is to steal electrons because there is no way to keep a voting machine 100% tamper proof and that is just too damn tempting for shitty hostile powers to go after; especially, since some states don't really have the money to keep basic services properly funded.

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    That's because slot machines are super heavily regulated. And even they have exploitable bugs pop up (or malicious code snuck in) from time to time.

    But wow. That sounds like pretty strong evidence of the race being screwed up.

    Stolen.

    I mean, yes, but that has plausible deniability.

    No it doesn't, not with how Kemp and the GOP deliberately worked to impede any attempt at oversight and made sure that any ability to recount or check for tampering was eliminated.

  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    There is no doubt in my mind that Abrams actually won.

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    There is no doubt in my mind that Abrams actually won.

    In a fair democratic election, yes.

  • Options
    chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    edited August 2019
    There was an article that came up on my phone's news feed about voting machines in Georgia literally changing people's votes right in front of them. They claim it was only a few machines, but who really believes that?

    -edit- This was in a GOP primary runoff race, and all the listed incidents were changing to the establishment candidate.

    chrisnl on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    That's because slot machines are super heavily regulated. And even they have exploitable bugs pop up (or malicious code snuck in) from time to time.

    But wow. That sounds like pretty strong evidence of the race being screwed up.

    Stolen.

    I mean, yes, but that has plausible deniability.

    No it doesn't, not with how Kemp and the GOP deliberately worked to impede any attempt at oversight and made sure that any ability to recount or check for tampering was eliminated.

    And that's easily argued as "being assholes who totally didn't steal an election" in a court. Yes, everyone here knows they stole it.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • Options
    MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    edited August 2019
    chrisnl wrote: »
    There was an article that came up on my phone's news feed about voting machines in Georgia literally changing people's votes right in front of them. They claim it was only a few machines, but who really believes that?

    -edit- This was in a GOP primary runoff race, and all the listed incidents were changing to the establishment candidate.

    And straight Democratic ticket machine votes in Texas still picked Ted Cruz for Senate and people often had to try multiple times for the machines to not go to Cruz (so Beto might actually have won the race if not for all the switched votes by people who didn't notice), and North Carolina voting machines changed people's votes in front of them...and honestly I think every voting machine is probably already compromised and we have no idea how many elections have been stolen already for how many years.

    Mayabird on
  • Options
    CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Mayabird wrote: »
    chrisnl wrote: »
    There was an article that came up on my phone's news feed about voting machines in Georgia literally changing people's votes right in front of them. They claim it was only a few machines, but who really believes that?

    -edit- This was in a GOP primary runoff race, and all the listed incidents were changing to the establishment candidate.

    and we have no idea how many elections have been stolen already for how many years.

    Yeah, it always seems fishy how Red States tend to be the ones buying cranky and unreliable old-fashioned voting machines which always seem to err on the side of voting Republican. Florida seems particularly prone to "Ooops, we are all so incompetent that we aren't entirely sure who won but we are guessing it was the Republican" elections.

    And then all the Sensible People say "Well, they are just unreliable cranky old voting machines. Don't get paranoid about it. It's incompetence, not malice."

  • Options
    MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Mayabird wrote: »
    chrisnl wrote: »
    There was an article that came up on my phone's news feed about voting machines in Georgia literally changing people's votes right in front of them. They claim it was only a few machines, but who really believes that?

    -edit- This was in a GOP primary runoff race, and all the listed incidents were changing to the establishment candidate.

    And straight Democratic ticket machine votes in Texas still picked Ted Cruz for Senate and people often had to try multiple times for the machines to not go to Cruz (so Beto might actually have won the race if not for all the switched votes by people who didn't notice), and North Carolina voting machines changed people's votes in front of them...and honestly I think every voting machine is probably already compromised and we have no idea how many elections have been stolen already for how many years.

    Am curious, have any of these "faulty" electronic voting machines ever clearly faulted at a systemic level (ie, multiple machines, or at least one machine consistently) in favour of a Democratic candidate?

    Cause while I'm open to the possibility it has happened, there will be no surprise if it turns out it hasn't.

  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    edited August 2019
    It’s a 230 year old tradition (at least) in the US of the rich, racist white dudes to try to keep others from voting, or suppressing their votes, or creating rules to limit the voting power of urban areas, or to outright proclaim their intention to instill minority rule...

    It’s a recent thing for them to go through the trouble of masking these intentions, honestly

    Captain Inertia on
  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    chrisnl wrote: »
    There was an article that came up on my phone's news feed about voting machines in Georgia literally changing people's votes right in front of them. They claim it was only a few machines, but who really believes that?

    -edit- This was in a GOP primary runoff race, and all the listed incidents were changing to the establishment candidate.

    And straight Democratic ticket machine votes in Texas still picked Ted Cruz for Senate and people often had to try multiple times for the machines to not go to Cruz (so Beto might actually have won the race if not for all the switched votes by people who didn't notice), and North Carolina voting machines changed people's votes in front of them...and honestly I think every voting machine is probably already compromised and we have no idea how many elections have been stolen already for how many years.

    Am curious, have any of these "faulty" electronic voting machines ever clearly faulted at a systemic level (ie, multiple machines, or at least one machine consistently) in favour of a Democratic candidate?

    Cause while I'm open to the possibility it has happened, there will be no surprise if it turns out it hasn't.

    I feel confident in saying that there has not, because if there was even a single instance of it, then it would be endlessly trotted out by every conservative talking head every single time anyone brought up how these machines seem to always err in the GOP's favor.

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    MorganV wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    chrisnl wrote: »
    There was an article that came up on my phone's news feed about voting machines in Georgia literally changing people's votes right in front of them. They claim it was only a few machines, but who really believes that?

    -edit- This was in a GOP primary runoff race, and all the listed incidents were changing to the establishment candidate.

    And straight Democratic ticket machine votes in Texas still picked Ted Cruz for Senate and people often had to try multiple times for the machines to not go to Cruz (so Beto might actually have won the race if not for all the switched votes by people who didn't notice), and North Carolina voting machines changed people's votes in front of them...and honestly I think every voting machine is probably already compromised and we have no idea how many elections have been stolen already for how many years.

    Am curious, have any of these "faulty" electronic voting machines ever clearly faulted at a systemic level (ie, multiple machines, or at least one machine consistently) in favour of a Democratic candidate?

    Cause while I'm open to the possibility it has happened, there will be no surprise if it turns out it hasn't.

    I feel confident in saying that there has not, because if there was even a single instance of it, then it would be endlessly trotted out by every conservative talking head every single time anyone brought up how these machines seem to always err in the GOP's favor.

    And the need for voter ID even though it wouldn't prevent anything.

  • Options
    MillMill Registered User regular
    North Carolina court has ruled against the bullshit maps that the republican party has put together to ensure they can't be voted out. Court cites that the NC constituion stipulates free & fair elections. The asshat party is probably going to appeal and I have no idea how shitty or not shitty the NC Supreme Court is, if they rule against republicans, then the GOP is probably going to have a much harder time at chipping away at the democrats majority in the House of Representatives.

  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    Tentatively good news out of North Carolina?


    NC State court orders the legislature to redraw their shitty maps!

    Annnd:
    The Republican leader of the State Senate, Phil Berger, cast the decision as part of a national Democratic strategy to overturn Republican rule via the courts, but said the Legislature would not appeal the ruling. The North Carolina Supreme Court, which would hear any appeal, has six Democratic justices and one Republican.

    Can't wait to see how many districts the state GOP is willing to give up, because that ruling isn't going anywhere now.

  • Options
    CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    I think I see a donkey in the top right of the map there.

  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    I think I see a donkey in the top right of the map there.

    Buck teeth, so it's more of a rabbit.

  • Options
    MillMill Registered User regular
    Awesome, so the shitty GOP is going to lose seats in NC because they used bullshit to essentially steal power. Now if we could just outlaw electronic voting machines, do away with the BS voter disenfranchisement, get early voting everywhere, get all elections on the same day & do away with gerrymandering in other states.

  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    I think I see a donkey in the top right of the map there.

    That district is like 89% water too

  • Options
    Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    Annnd:
    The Republican leader of the State Senate, Phil Berger, cast the decision as part of a national Democratic strategy to overturn Republican rule via the courts, but said the Legislature would not appeal the ruling. The North Carolina Supreme Court, which would hear any appeal, has six Democratic justices and one Republican.
    I don't get it. Sure, they'd fail with the state court, but Roberts and company have explicitly said that parties can gerrymander all they like, so their efforts would likely be approved there.

  • Options
    PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    Annnd:
    The Republican leader of the State Senate, Phil Berger, cast the decision as part of a national Democratic strategy to overturn Republican rule via the courts, but said the Legislature would not appeal the ruling. The North Carolina Supreme Court, which would hear any appeal, has six Democratic justices and one Republican.
    I don't get it. Sure, they'd fail with the state court, but Roberts and company have explicitly said that parties can gerrymander all they like, so their efforts would likely be approved there.

    They would ha e to overturn their previous ruling for that.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
This discussion has been closed.