politics
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
view the rest of the comments
I agree with you, but I do need to point out that for years Republicans have been screaming election interference just so when it happens against Democrats, it looks petty and not serious. I haven't dove down the rabbit hole, but it does sound like there has been evidence suggesting maleficence.
It's kind of a catch 22... In order to investigate potential evidence of election interference, you have to first put on the tin foil hat and believe that it was possible and worth investigating in the first place, which in itself aligns with "qanon BS".
I disagree with your catch 22 statement, my understanding of how our elections work is that Democrats would have lawyers/representatives at locations to verify result as they come in to centralized hubs and also sent out. Especially in hotly contested areas. Voting is so decentralized, there would need to be large swaths of people involved on both the republican and democrat side to allow for vote manipulation. All this is to say, you don't need to look for election fraud in this situation, it would become apparent when vote tallies are not adding up, and surprising voting numbers are coming from only certain areas. I have found no reliable new organization discussing evidence of election fraud in the form of vote manipulation and if you have a source, I'd be interested in reading about it. Unless I see any evidence, it just seems like left wing conspiracy thinking that does a good job at distracting people and normalizing vote manipulation when there's already real issues in front of us ( Musk paying people to vote, areas not providing sufficient voting booths for populations making for longer vote times, voter ID laws, etc).
Yeah, it's pretty naive to think that the party of, "every accusation is a confession," who screamed about election fraud for 4 years didn't commit election fraud.
Musk lotteries, bullet ballots being orders of magnitude higher than previous years only in swing states, bomb threats in blue areas and judges not extending voting times to accommodate, Trump saying Musk was going to help him out and voting machines using Starlink internet, etc.
I feel it's also pretty naive to believe generalizations such as "every accusations is a confession" are perfectly representative. Sure that saying applies a lot to Republicans, but it doesn't mean its a rule.
I will admit, when I hear election fraud I understand the term to mean, directly subverting election rules. This would entail: changing votes, tallying votes incorrectly, accepting fraudulent votes willingly etc. I don't believe Trump and company did any of these things, or if they did, not enough to make an impact on the election. I'm willing to accept evidence to the contrary.
Reading the definition of election fraud, it also can include the examples you mentioned (which i would say isn't in my original and incorrect understanding of election fraud). I do agree that Trump and his team did do many things that subvert a free election including some that you said such as the Musk lotteries, the bomb threats in blue areas, allowing laws that make voting harder in blue areas, etc.
The reason I'm expanding on what kind of election fraud I believe Trump committed is because some of it has evidence, and others (Trump/Musk directly changing votes/not counting votes) just doesn't have any evidence. I would imagine Democrats and reporters would be very eager to publish this kind of evidence if it existed, but I don't know of any reliable news organization talking about this. I feel it ultimately servers as a distraction and actually normalizes the idea of election fraud in the form of changing votes.