@Frogster64 said ^
Taking many days to count votes suggests terrible government. Concluding that the system is rigged because of this suggests one watches too much right-wing media.
Should we do everything to avoid idiots doing bad things ?
@Frogster64 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/YyuiR4ZP)
> Taking many days to count votes suggests terrible government. Concluding that the system is rigged because of this suggests one watches too much right-wing media.
Should we do everything to avoid idiots doing bad things ?
@NotASnakeGR said ^
They were , once again, accused by Trump of trying to "steal the elections" without proof, nonetheless. I don't think it's a sign of anything since they are working within the time limit they were given and we are talking about millions of voters.
I don't know...
As some one who lived at least 3 electoral frauds in the federal elections in my country, I have seen some of the trends.
The thing is that there was a video many years ago about a programmer admitting in the courtroom that he modified code in the voter counting software to give extra votes to certain candidate in Florida, I do not remember if it was during one of the elections of Bush Jr, or after he was already in office. It wasnt for Bush, but either a governor or a city major. I did a quick search, but the video is not there anymore, maybe Ill search deeper next time.
When there is counting of physical votes, citizen observers must be allowed, else, there is always doubt.
But the major sign is the trends. According to experts, the neutral polls do reflect the voter preference. And while they are not pinpoint accurate, there is always some minor deviation (+-2 points or so). So, if the candidates are indeed close, there might be a shift in positions due to how close they are, but when the margin is big, what it doesnt happen certainly is a total shift of the trends.
@NotASnakeGR said [^](/forum/redirect/post/KTzzhRf4)
>They were , once again, accused by Trump of trying to "steal the elections" without proof, nonetheless. I don't think it's a sign of anything since they are working within the time limit they were given and we are talking about millions of voters.
> I don't know...
As some one who lived at least 3 electoral frauds in the federal elections in my country, I have seen some of the trends.
The thing is that there was a video many years ago about a programmer admitting in the courtroom that he modified code in the voter counting software to give extra votes to certain candidate in Florida, I do not remember if it was during one of the elections of Bush Jr, or after he was already in office. It wasnt for Bush, but either a governor or a city major. I did a quick search, but the video is not there anymore, maybe Ill search deeper next time.
When there is counting of physical votes, citizen observers must be allowed, else, there is always doubt.
But the major sign is the trends. According to experts, the neutral polls do reflect the voter preference. And while they are not pinpoint accurate, there is always some minor deviation (+-2 points or so). So, if the candidates are indeed close, there might be a shift in positions due to how close they are, but when the margin is big, what it doesnt happen certainly is a total shift of the trends.
Weird that someone takes issue with the time to count the ballots. Isn't there only one thing important, being that all ballots are counted properly? And not, how long this takes, given that the results come out within a few weeks and that this happens within the legal time frame.
Can we draw any conclusions from that?
Yes. The conclusion that mail-in ballots can't be fully counted the day the election is over, for very obvious reasons. And that California hasn't the resources (for whatever reasons) to count the ballots faster.
A conclusion that you can't make is the one that the orange dumbfuck comes up by default and without ever submitting evidence for his claims: That the election is rigged.
Interesting by the way that the OP never took issue with Trumpfuck's baseless assertions. Assertions that IMHO are intentionally made and meant to undermine the trust in the democratic process.
Weird that someone takes issue with the time to count the ballots. Isn't there only one thing important, being that all ballots are counted properly? And not, how long this takes, given that the results come out within a few weeks and that this happens within the legal time frame.
> Can we draw any conclusions from that?
Yes. The conclusion that mail-in ballots can't be fully counted the day the election is over, for very obvious reasons. And that California hasn't the resources (for whatever reasons) to count the ballots faster.
A conclusion that you can't make is the one that the orange dumbfuck comes up by default and without ever submitting evidence for his claims: That the election is rigged.
Interesting by the way that the OP never took issue with Trumpfuck's baseless assertions. Assertions that IMHO are intentionally made and meant to undermine the trust in the democratic process.
Cluster f-bomb over there
Cluster f-bomb over there
Does "asking a question" this way suggest exemplary democratic discourse?
@Lichess : You can not not see that this thread title is weak-ass Trumpian propaganda.
It doesn't make you a fascist to shut a fascist mouth.
It makes you a fascist when you don't.
Or at least it makes you Petain-like.
Fascists gonna do fascist stuff. But what to think of those who give them the microphone?
Just my opinion, but my hair cutting machine is waiting.
Does "asking a question" this way suggest exemplary democratic discourse?
@Lichess : You can not not see that this thread title is weak-ass Trumpian propaganda.
It doesn't make you a fascist to shut a fascist mouth.
It makes you a fascist when you don't.
Or at least it makes you Petain-like.
Fascists gonna do fascist stuff. But what to think of those who give them the microphone?
Just my opinion, but my hair cutting machine is waiting.
@BasicDecencyNotFound said ^
Does "asking a question" this way suggest exemplary democratic discourse?
@Lichess : You can not not see that this thread title is weak-ass Trumpian propaganda.
It doesn't make you a fascist to shut a fascist mouth.
It makes you a fascist when you don't.
Or at least it makes you Petain-like.
Fascists gonna do fascist stuff. But what to think of those who give them the microphone?
Just my opinion, but my hair cutting machine is waiting.
The "Nazi bar" problem all over again.
@BasicDecencyNotFound said [^](/forum/redirect/post/jNpujJnk)
> Does "asking a question" this way suggest exemplary democratic discourse?
>
> @Lichess : You can not not see that this thread title is weak-ass Trumpian propaganda.
> It doesn't make you a fascist to shut a fascist mouth.
> It makes you a fascist when you don't.
> Or at least it makes you Petain-like.
>
> Fascists gonna do fascist stuff. But what to think of those who give them the microphone?
> Just my opinion, but my hair cutting machine is waiting.
The "Nazi bar" problem all over again.
@Noflaps said ^
Days go by, and California counts and counts and counts. And, uh, counts. And counts some more.
And apparently, days after the primary, it's STILL going on.
Florida, also with a large population, although somewhat smaller, seems to get elections decided MUCH more quickly, and yet also seems to count every ballot.
Can we draw any conclusions from that?
Or must we just, you know, automatically stand by our political favorites.
It shows incompetence at best, and usually fixed elections. The US used to count count votes in a quick and efficient fashion, nowdays despite early voting, machines, it takes days and days. The US is a banana republic without the the great weather, lovely bananas the joy of life. We need voter ID, paper ballots, glass boxes to put them in, National guard at all voting centers inside and out, to control intimidation etc....
@Noflaps said [^](/forum/redirect/post/VkYu0Iot)
> Days go by, and California counts and counts and counts. And, uh, counts. And counts some more.
>
> And apparently, days after the primary, it's STILL going on.
>
> Florida, also with a large population, although somewhat smaller, seems to get elections decided MUCH more quickly, and yet also seems to count every ballot.
>
> Can we draw any conclusions from that?
>
> Or must we just, you know, automatically stand by our political favorites.
It shows incompetence at best, and usually fixed elections. The US used to count count votes in a quick and efficient fashion, nowdays despite early voting, machines, it takes days and days. The US is a banana republic without the the great weather, lovely bananas the joy of life. We need voter ID, paper ballots, glass boxes to put them in, National guard at all voting centers inside and out, to control intimidation etc....
<Comment deleted by user>
@KasifelsMaster said ^
The "Nazi bar" problem all over again.
Yeah.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar
for those who don't know --the story-- history.
Also for those intellectuals that definitely did read some philosophy in their lives :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
@KasifelsMaster said [^](/forum/redirect/post/6n1U1Xt7)
> The "Nazi bar" problem all over again.
Yeah.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar
for those who don't know --the story-- history.
Also for those intellectuals that definitely did read some philosophy in their lives :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
At least they don't pick the winner before the election?
At least they don't pick the winner before the election?