I'm only wondering about the statistically improbable break between the state where they voted all Dems downballot but then swapped to Trump just for President.
This is so statistically unlikely, having one or two states this way would be improbable as hell, but (I am not claiming this is true) there are apparently many instances where this happened.
I'm not sharing any of this stuff I see but so far this is the one that got my eyebrow raised.
Missouri voted to legalize abortion again. Then elected the man who will get it banned nationally. Previously we voted to reduce dark money etc in local elections. And in the very next election repealed those restrictions again. People are fucking ignorant. Those in the state of misery doubly so.
Montana voted red all the way down except to protect abortion. Just last year they had kids argue to the state Supreme Court that they have rights when it comes to the environment, and they won.
I have no idea what is up or down anymore
I fully believe that the Rs pulled some sort of shady shit with ballots. For them 'every accusation is a confession' is an immutable law.
It doesn't matter, though, because the people who could do anything about it are on his team.
I had suggested to people before that if you are not going to vote for President, at least vote down the ballot for local people and don't discard the whole election. Voting Democrat but then for Trump does seem very odd.
It's true that downballot Dems ran ahead of Harris in most states. Why do you think it's statistically unlikely? Polls ahead of the election showed downballot Dems were more popular than Harris. Republicans focused most of their negative campaigning on Harris. Biden's very unpopular and she didn't try to distance herself from him (I'm not saying that she should have, I'm just observing that she didn't). Sexists and racists were less likely to vote for Harris.
This is ludicrous. If someone is claiming their vote has not been received or counted I'm absolutely going to amplify them and make sure they're contacting the proper authorities.
Sure, if it's somebody you know or trust who's saying this, then it's not disinformation; agreed about helping them contact election officials and/or other authorities, and if you think it's useful to amplify it, then I'm not trying to talk you out of it.
If it's not somebody you know or trust, then amplifying it is quite possibly helping out a disinformation campaign.
And in any case, amplifying individual claims is very different from the unsupported claims about "millions of missing votes", and that's what I am trying to talk people out of.
Even if they turn out to be a Russian troll, just trying to sow discord among the American public?
Oh so when millions of accounts come out of nowhere to praise Orange Julius, call Kamala a genocider, and back Jill Stein those are real, but when someone with a credible web presence and years of posting history across various platforms claims their absentee ballot hasn't been received* they're a Russian troll? Get fucked.
Nah, I’m all for auditing the results, and ensuring no fuckery went down. But when I see a bunch of commenters come out of now where and say that their vote wasn’t yet counted, I get skeptical. Especially when that’s the exact thing the other side was saying 4 years ago.
Russias goal is to spark a civil war. They’ll come in and say whatever in favor of either side if they think it’ll increase the anger between them. Just be careful what you read.
"check to see if the information is accurate" is better advice.
All the way back to bush, conservatives were ramping up removing voting machines from minority and blue districts, purging voter registrations, challenging cosmetic scuffs on ballots, and they did the same thing this election.
votes being attacked and blocked definitely happened, and thousands of votes were blocked in most states that were perfectly legal, but it doesn't stop conservatives from challenging their validity.
it doesn't have to be labeled a "conspiracy" if it is a fact.
conservatives can't win purely on numbers anymore, so they focus on dividing and disqualifying democratic voters.
blocked legal ballots:
purged voter rolls:
"check to see if the information is accurate" is better advice.
This is just great general advice for anything you read or post online. A misinformation tweet on Monday, spreads like wildfire on Tuesday, is looked at by professionals on Wednesday, a reasonable take or correction appears Thursday, and by Friday the only thing anyone remembers is the lie.
I'm reminded of "This Video Will Make You Angry" by CGP Grey, https://youtu.be/rE3j_RHkqJc
But you don't get likes or whatever by taking time to write out a well thought out opinion.
I talked about that in the article:
Don't get me wrong, multiple voter suppression techniques actually were used to keep people from voting – purging voters from rolls, felon disenfranchisement, 6-hour lines, texts with false information, voter intimidation, voter id laws, signature challenges, etc etc etc. But that's not what these conspiracy allegations are focusing on.
And I also discussed it in terms of the goals of people pushing these conspiracy theories:
focusing attention on an alleged fraud that didn't occur is a good way to divert attention from all voter suppression that really has occurred and has been steadily ramping up ever since Republicans on the Supreme Court gutted the Voing Rights Act – and got even worse this year after Republicans blocked legislation that could have provided voters and election officials with more protection.
you also mention that we don't know the extent of the voter fraud that occurred, that there certainly was voter fraud, that exaggerated claims of voter fraud are not widespread.
and then the conclusion is to be careful of "conspiracies".
that doesn't track.
we're not sure how much of the rainforest corporations have destroyed.
We know that corporations have certainly destroyed large parts of the rainforest.
therefore, if you hear people talking about corporations destroying too much rainforest, it might develop into a dangerous conspiracy, so report it for disinformation?
no.
voter suppression is and has been a real and significant problem, people should be aware of it. reporting hyperbolic disinformation should be a supportive paragraph to this point, not the conclusion or title, especially when violent calls to action are not a problem on the democratic side..
as you say, hyperbolic claims only manifest sporadically on a couple message boards.
that is not the same as an entire political party simultaneously claiming that their election was stolen and then violently attacking the capitol and the two should not be correlated.
Just accept the fact that the elections were functioning as intended with some expected hiccups as they so have every big presidential election. I had to get my ballot cured in 2016, it wasn't a conspiracy, just people doing the best they can.
There's no massive voter fraud, no machines flipping their shit. Just shitty fucking Americans as per usual.
Yep. The only real election fuckery is fox news, christianity and russia poisoning people's minds.
People spent the last 4 years asking for proof in response for allegations of voter fraud and the only way to not normalize the concept of voter fraud is to continue to do just that. The only reasonable thing to do is just that.
Throughout America's history we've gotten through some pretty wild shit with nothing more than the fervent belief that the framework upon which our Republic is built can withstand the test of time so long as we are willing to defend it, and have faith that people like those were counting the votes, because most of them are
"Right-wing influencers are positioning this unfounded claiming as"evidence" of election fraud in 2020"
JFC... If they did that before why the hell wouldn't they just do it again? I guess even the Democrats that "stole the election last time" just like Trump now? Much logic.
Only conservatives are allowed to claim election fraud, even if the evidence is literally incontrovertible that republicans stole it. Nice
What's the evidence you find "literally incontrovertible"?
The comparison is apt though:
In 2020, almost all non-partisan voting rights organizations and election experts (as well as most Republicans, despite losing) were saying that there was in fact no evidence of widespread election fraud. So conservatives claiming election fraud were seen as conspiracy theorists who were spreading disinfo (either intentionally or because they really thought there was evidence).
In 2024, almost all non-partisan voting rights organizations and election experts (as well as most Democrats, despite losing) are saying that there was in fact no evidence of widespread election fraud. So ...
It’s also worth mentioning that turnout percentage wise, 12m fewer votes is just 6-7%, and a turnout swing of that size is perfectly normal
Man this election was so cooked it came with a side of fries and two sachets of ketchup fml
How so?
I'm not picking I fight, I just want to know your thoughts on it.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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