That doesn't mean anything, are we really doing this? Can we just accept Americans are idiots
this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
87 points (83.7% liked)
politics
19126 readers
2596 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Considering how much trump and his supporters tried to steal the election last time around, this almost certainly means something, and we'd be idiots to ignore it
The key flaw in this idea that fake bullet ballots put Trump over the top ignores the fact that Republicans won House and Senate seats as well.
If it were bullet ballots, we would have seen split tickets where Trump won but Dems won House and Senate seats at that did NOT happen.
So, no, this is all specious reasoning from the start.
Look at the Abortion bill in Arizona:
https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Proposition_139,_Right_to_Abortion_Initiative_(2024)
Yes - 2,000,287 - 61.61%
No - 1,246,202 - 38.39%
3,246,529 votes cast.
Now look at President:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election_in_Arizona
Republican - Donald Trump - 1,770,242 - 52.2%
Democratic - Kamala Harris - 1,582,860 - 46.7%
Green - Jill Stein - 18,319 - 0.5%
Libertarian - Chase Oliver - 17,898 - 0.5%
3,389,319 votes cast.
There were 142,790 more votes cast for President than in the abortion race, but Trump beat Harris by 187,382 votes.
Even if all 142K overvotes cast in the Presidential race were fake bullet ballots, Trump STILL would have won by 44,592 votes.
What seems more likely, 1) A vast conspiracy involving the Trump campaign, a group of hackers, Elon Musk and various employees at his super PAC, along with countless other shadowy actors in a cabal that supposedly hacked the vote—an elaborate plot divined by one guy who has gotten nearly every data point verifiably wrong and has provided zero evidence for his related claims, yet somehow “got it right.” Or, 2) A small number of Trump voters simply didn’t care or know much about other offices or candidates and just voted for Trump and left the rest blank?
Right.
It’s genuinely sad to watch people grasp at conspiracy theories like this. Conspiratorial thinking is strongly correlated with feelings of insecurity, low agreeability, narcissism, intolerance of uncertainty, a lack of control, fear, and tendencies toward confirmation bias and proportionality bias. So while it’s not entirely surprising to see some on the left indulging in this kind of thinking—just as Trump supporters did and do—it’s still disappointing to witness.
Within every election, there is a certain number of bullet ballots to be expected. The norm falls around 1-2% or so, with an expected margin of error. Every swing state (and ONLY swing states). Hit around 5-12%.
There were 57 bomb threats that targeted ballot counting stations. All in swing states.
In pretty much every swing states, Trump won the Presidency, but Democrats won pretty much every other down ballot race?
The polls were pretty much correct for the swing states..... except for the Presidency?
There's coincidences and then there's fucking Looney Toons levels of improbability.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but considering all that, you don't think a single investigation should occur?
Right, you’re not a conspiracy theorist—you’re just “asking questions” and urging people to “do their own research.” Where have we heard that before? While you throw around baseless accusations about the Harris-Trump election, the reality is this: there’s no credible evidence to support claims of widespread fraud. Swing states have robust systems for verifying results, and the election process is overseen by bipartisan officials, including both Democrats and Republicans who vouched for its integrity. Demanding "just one investigation" isn’t about seeking the truth; it’s about refusing to accept the outcome.
I know you you're unlikely to read let alone comprehend this post—just like you didn’t read the article you’re twisting—but for anyone else stumbling across your nonsense, this is the reality: your claims are bullshit. They're not just wrong, they’re embarrassingly, demonstrably wrong based on the very data provided for you in the article to which you are responding. Let’s go through the numbers you’ve clearly ignored.
You say there were “5-12% bullet ballots” in swing states, but the data in no way supports that claim. Take North Carolina: out of 5,722,556 ballots cast, 5,592,243 included votes in the governor’s race. That means just 130,313 ballots didn’t—a mere 2.3%, not your laughable “5-12%.” Arizona? Of 3.4 million ballots cast, only 81,673 didn’t include votes for the Senate race—about 2.4%, again miles below your inflated, made-up conspiracy numbers. Nevada? The difference was 23,159 ballots out of nearly 1.5 million—a negligible 1.6%. Interesting. On average that's... basically right where you said it should "normally" be.
Bullet ballots in battleground states are rare, but they’ve always existed, especially in contentious elections. And they've always been higher in battleground states. Swing-state voters tend to focus on the presidency when the stakes are high, which is common knowledge to anyone who understands voting behavior. Your numbers? They don’t exist.
As for your implication that it’s “improbable” for Trump to win the presidency while Democrats do better down-ballot, I hate to break it to you, but racism and sexism is a much simpler, proven explanation with data to support it. Polling had consistently shown that Harris faced deep resistance, even among Democrats, with much of it rooted in gender and racial bias. Voters who rejected Harris while supporting other Democrats weren’t casting "impossible" ballots—they were reflecting prejudices that have been documented for decades. You don’t need a vast conspiracy to explain why Kamala Harris lost; you need to look at exit polls and confront the ugly reality of American history and culture
The bomb threats on Election Day, which you seem desperate to weave into your narrative, were investigated by the FBI and found to largely be hoaxes originating from Russian email domains. These threats, while reprehensible, had no impact on the election's integrity and were not linked to any domestic conspiracy. The idea that they were part of a grand scheme to disrupt the “chain of custody” or facilitate hacking is pure fantasy, unsupported by a shred of evidence. If anything, they reflect an attempt to intimidate voters and officials, not to alter outcomes. Clinging to this as proof of fraud is the hallmark of conspiracy theorists: taking unrelated incidents and spinning them into a baseless, implausible story when reality doesn’t fit their worldview.
And this is exactly where your conspiratorial thinking falls apart. Rather than accept straightforward, evidence-backed explanations—strategic voting in swing states, voter sexism, or even the simple fact that Trump remains popular among many, indeed a majority of, voters in this country—you leap to shadowy plots and grand conspiracies. This is textbook conspiracy logic: inflate normal patterns into anomalies, ignore the data that contradicts you, and demand investigations into “questions” you’ve invented yourself. It’s bad-faith reasoning at its worst.
Your entire argument isn’t skepticism; it’s denial. You’re not interested in the facts—if you were, you’d see how consistently they dismantle your claims. This isn’t about election fraud. It’s about your refusal to reckon with reality.
She lost. Get over it.
Didn't you know? If dems called out trump for stealing the election, they'd be no better than him 😇
/s yall need to get your heads out of your asses, the election was clearly stolen and pretending otherwise won't save you from trump or make you a superior person
Wow, impressive! You managed to showcase at least five of the psychological traits we discussed in record time. I also love how you accuse me of not reading the article, while cozying up to someone who actually didn’t read it and is throwing out numbers that flat-out contradict the data in the very article you shared. But hey, they’re feeding your paranoid conspiracy, so I guess that’s all that matters, right? If only there were a term for this kind of behavior—oh wait, there is: "confirmation bias."
Honestly, you really speedran those psychological traits. Bravo. 🤣
He lost. Get over it :3
Does it feel good putting this much effort into defending Donnie? Do you feel superior to everyone else bc you ignore obvious signs of election fraud and tampering? Or are you under the impression if you start kissing ass now he won't deport or kill you?
I’ve come to understand that you are open about grappling with a way of thinking that makes it hard to let go, take accountability, and engage with reality as it is. It seems that you’ve created a kind of mental framework—almost a dreamworld—where everyone and everything is aligned against you. This tendency to assign blame outwardly, to view others through the lens of imagined hostility or hidden agendas, mirrors the patterns we often see in conspiratorial thinking. I can only imagine how exhausting it must be to live with such constant anger and frustration, feeling perpetually under siege by the world around you. This way of thinking doesn’t just keep you trapped—it compounds your sense of helplessness, fostering isolation and perpetuating the very struggles you’re trying to escape.
What makes this even harder is how these feelings trap you in a vicious cycle. Anger and helplessness often lead to assigning blame or constructing theories that rationalize the world in negative ways. This mindset, in turn, fosters behaviors and patterns that reinforce those same feelings, perpetuating a feedback loop that’s hard to escape. The effects on your relationships must be profound. I can imagine how isolating and disheartening that must feel.
I hadn’t realized until now just how long this has been a part of your life, consuming so much of your energy. It’s clear that these challenges have been significant for you. With that said, I’m going to step back and block you. I imagine this won't be the first time this has happened to you, and I'm not talking about Lemmy. However, I do genuinely wish you well, and I hope that one day you can confront and overcome the struggles that have held you back. Breaking free from this cycle will require immense effort and readiness, but I believe it’s possible for you to wrestle with those demons.
When you’re ready, I suspect you’ll find you have more support around you than you might realize.
My demons are trump and assholes like you who endlessly defend him and his fascism. I hope I get to do some wrestling too :3
You didn't read the article did you? Or even the snopes "correction" of it? Pls do that before discounting it as fake, being wilfully ignorant about this does nobody any good
🙄
All good points here, but the clarification that Snopes and everyone else is missing and not talking about are kind of important:
- "Bullet Ballots" are single votes for one candidate with nothing else filled out. In order to be valid that means...
- A voters information would have to be put on a form and fed into a tabular, and in the case of Georgia and Arizona (I think?) physically reviewed before fed into said machine because...
- The tabulation machines are set to confirm a specific amount of information, and if that information is wrong, it will error. This is a code on the form that can be machine scanned, so that makes sure it fits a specific location, precinct, county, whathaveyou., BECAUSE...
- if someone were to get a grip of these forms and ballot stuff them, then counts would be meaningless.
So really all that needs to be done is to find a large enough sample of size of consistent voters who had a flipped vote, find their forms, ensure nothing is fucky with the forms, then interview to confirm with the voter. Do that for a few thousand people in Wherever, USA and you'll have your answer.
It's not hard, it's just time consuming and costs money. Voters don't generally have a way to even check their vote was counted for all the candidates they chose in most states, which I think is fucked up, otherwise this might be a bit easier.
Ballots are anonymous, there isn't identifying information on the part put in a tabulator.
Yeah, what did you read about my post that said that was the case?
The point is you are wrong. The ballot itself is anonymous.
Again, you're missing the entire point. It's a fact, and I can't be wrong.
Edit: guy, you don't need to try and revisit all my comments and downvote. You're just wrong. Deal with it.
find a large enough sample of size of consistent voters who had a flipped vote
Is that possible in AZ? In my state the poll worker records that you appeared to vote, then gives you a generic ballot. The ballot is not tied to you. Your vote is completely secret with no way to trace it.
Some states it is not, as I mentioned.
However, Snopes' research, in which we compared the vote tallies cited by Spoonamore with the latest official election results, found his figures to be incorrect and his assertions to make no mathematical sense.
Sure, investigate. But what though? You need evidence of something before even alleging a crime.
I'd say the number of bullet ballots is evidence that something is almost certainly up that needs investigating. That's not a normal occurrence
So the assertion is that Republicans inserted a bunch of fake votes but only for president? Why would they not just make it down ballot?
Ostensibly because the presidential election is the one that they really cared about this time around.
I don't believe there was fraud but I do believe statistical anomalies are worth a second look. Some people won't ever be convinced but I'm certain the various audits of 2020 that came up empty swayed at least a few people (on that topic, not Trump as a whole).
Damn imagine if true, knowing that your US Government was illegally elected. This really should be investigated for the sake of the entire world.
Well, we saw it in 2000 so that's nothing new...
according to that planetcritical post I shared, it seems that the public still doesn't know the actual results of the 2000 election? Doesn't seem democratic to me.
It doesn't seem democratic because America is a corporate plutocracy masquerading as a democracy.
Seems it's been investigated enough and no surprises, the numbers are off and allegations based on no evidence.
Remember when there was a bunch of idiots from the red camp, all bent on the idea Biden stole the election? Well, it's that and the blue camp has idiots too. This is something we'll have to get used to now, a bunch of idiots from X claiming Y stole the election.
Remember when they demanded a hand recount, got it, and then kept lying about the results even after they were verified?
That's the difference.
but it can't be that off the margin. from 1% to 7.2% in the case of Arizona, thats highly suspicious. Also the theory shared by those computer scientists is too damn convincing so those ballots should be hand counted, imho.
https://www.planetcritical.com/p/cyber-security-experts-warn-election-hacked
Also I will never understand why USA insist on using Computers for voting.
Or how a winner-takes-it-all approach is in any way fair or reasonable to the people.
Their "theory" amounts to, "the Internet exists". They make no specific claim of a breach in election security and have no evidence of a breach. It's all purely, "somebody could have reprogrammed the machines at some unknown time and place."
They have no theory for how such a reprogramming would be distributed. Just fear mongering about how computers can be programmed to do anything.
The source you linked is referencing the claims that snopes is partially debunking
"partially debunking" here basically means "correcting numbers that were slightly too large and clarifying the explanation given is a hypothesis". This is still suspicious as heck, especially given all the other ways republican politicians and voters and funders have tried to influence and tamper with the election
I mean this puts a bad taste in my mouth for the credibility of the letter:
In an email, North Carolina State Board of Elections spokesman Patrick Gannon told Snopes, "Without access to confidential data, there is no way that anyone could know what this individual claims to know about North Carolina's presidential election. North Carolinians cast secret ballots, and cast vote records and ballot images that could potentially provide this information are confidential in North Carolina. My first step in fact-checking this would be to ask the writer to show his work."
I welcome investigation & would fully believe if this is corroborated and true. I won't believe it until then especially when there are crucial discrepancies in tallies that invalidate some (not all) claims from the letter
Except for one MASSIVE difference, Harris isn't making the claims, calling for violence and to "stop the count"
And fast.