• GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Iit’s okay if you don’t like that one scientist. because there are dozens of other computer security experts who have come to the same conclusion, that since Trump’s lawyers admitted to hiring people to steal voting software used by 90% of voters in swing states, manual recounts should be implemented.

    Feel free to source it with concrete probable claims that have been verified by reputable sources.

    I think manual counting should be the norm - all votes are counted manually in my country - but it’s unlikely that you will be able to get anyone to actually pull the trigger without concrete evidence of interference.

    The Republicans have zero evidence of election interference.

    Agreed.

    democrats have straight up factual evidence of ballot, interference and electoral fraud.

    Post it, then.

    do you know about how W won the 2004 election?

    I know how the 2000 election got stolen by Bush, but I’m not aware of the same thing happening in 2004. Feel free to fill in details.

    do you know about the fake elector scheme 4 years ago?

    Yes. It was never put into practice. Trump did try to institute a coup, but failed.

    have you ever heard of gerrymandering?

    Yes, this is a well-known example of legal election interference. Hand-counts won’t help in this case.

    voter poll purging?

    Same here

    Republican ballot interference has happened every election for decades, and it looks like it happened on a wider scale this time.

    Instances of legal election interference are not proof of illegal election interference occurring.

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      19 credible sources are available throughout the paper that you didn’t read and you are uninformed about both the stolen voting machine data and the fake electors scheme.

      “Feel free to source it with concrete probable claims”

      so you don’t believe the US court findings or the confessions by Trump’s lawyers that they hired people to steal voting machine data?

      which part do you need more evidence for?

      the fake electors scheme?

      if you don’t know any of this, you’re out of your depth here.

      incidentally, that open letter is completely sourced, every allegation they make has multiple sources behind it.

      you can read the letter and its sources.

      “concrete evidence of interference.”

      Great, there is a mountain of concrete evidence of election and ballot interference.

      from 4 years ago, then 2 years ago, then during the 2024 election, and in between.

      you’re not making any sense.

      Read at least the letter that you’re making things up about.

      it directly provides the evidence you claim to be interested in.

      “Yes. It was never put into practice. Trump did try to institute a coup, but failed.”

      no, you are also entirely incorrect here.

      The fake electors scheme was put into practice nationally. fake electors mailed out false ballots to NARA and Mike Pence in an effort to steal the election before the real ballots arrived in the mail.

      The National archives discovered that the ballots were false and negated them.

      The fake electore scheme absolutely went into practice, people have admitted to participating in it, taken guilty plea deals and are still going through trials because of their participation in the fake elector scheme.

      I don’t know what you think you’re arguing again, but so far you’ve been wrong on every point.

      If you need more clarification, ask questions but for goodness sake, read something first so you have a baseline of knowledge before you talk about it.

      you’re entirely uninformed with regard to election interference.