alixkun🟣🎩🍡 on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Jared 🎩 pfp

Once again, R’s are making an issue of a non-issue. https://apnews.com/article/noncitizens-voting-republicans-election-2024-immigration-09b86e6768f755fd875f3c51b0e8ea70

8 replies

0 recast

16 reactions

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

Im genuinely curious though: What data do they have to prove its rare? Amount of ppl caught? That sounds like a pretty unreliable data if thats the case. Imagine we estimate the amount of online piracy just with the amount of ppl getting caught...

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Jared 🎩 pfp

You have to register to vote in each state which is verified by the Secretary of State. Then when you go to vote, your name needs to be on the rolls and usually your signature has to match. Ita not like you can just show up anywhere and vote. Also, the benefit, to the voter, of voting isn’t worth the cost which is a felony.

1 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

To me its an either or question. Either ppl do have to prove their idendity at some point of the process, receive an acknowledgement of that phase, and can present it on election day, and if thats the case then i dont understand what republicans are complaining about? Or there are loopholes that need to be addressed. The "stakes are too high" to justify its not happening doesnt work for me. We have plenty of cases where ppl still commit felony where punishment wayyy outweight the benefit (ex, drink and drive)

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Jared 🎩 pfp

But they do when they register to vote. There are no loopholes to get around having to register. Also, yes people still commit crimes but not voting crimes. We can’t even convince people who can vote to do so.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

Bur if thats the case then, upon registration, why dont they issue some kind of official document, like a card or a piece of paper that would work as an id on election day? This sounds like an easy fix for everyone no?

3 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Jared 🎩 pfp

Because you might deny someone their right to vote. I guess the question is which is worse: 1. Denying someone their right to vote. 2. Allowing someone to potentially vote illegally. I think 1 is worse. Especially, when the overwhelming evidence shows that 2 doesn’t happen. https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

Your studies linked loop back to my first argument. They only base themselves on revealed cases. The one that got caught or triggered a redflag. Hence my argument with estimating online piracy with only caught ppl. It just doesnt make sense and is not a valid argument.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Jared 🎩 pfp

I guess Big Foot exists and we should make laws to protect ourselves from him. Seriously though, show me a problem and we can work on solving it. But if the problem only exists in hypotheticals or “this could be happening” then it’s not worth discussing or passing legislation to fix. We have much bigger political issues to address. And honestly, the hard truth is that voter fraud is just another dog whistle against brown and black Americans.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

The difference with big foot i guess is that cases of voter fraud are registered every years across the globe, so maybe that s a sign that it exists? I gave a simple solution based on what u told me, which could suit every party: give a document to people upon registration that can work as an id on voting day. No extra step, no need to go somewhere to produce an extra id. To that your answer was, what if they lose it? Im sorry, but this is not a serious answer 🤷‍♂️ If i was a republican and see this kinda answer, i would 100% think u have an agenda (i know u dont, just explaining this argument doesnt play well)

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Jared 🎩 pfp

Big foot comment was tongue in cheek and not fair for this type of discussion. Just generally, any additional security precautions are not needed. Even if we had election fraud, it would have to be at such a high level and coordinated that it’s not reasonable to expect this could have any impact on anything other than local elections. For Wisconsin for example, in 2020 you’d need to find 20,000 additional votes for Trump to have won. One individual would have zero impact on the presidential election. Additionally, on top of the security we currently have, there are also poll watchers to watch for fraud. The question goes back to if you believe someone not being able to vote is worse than potential fraud. I would rather have negligible fraud to ensure people do not lose their right to vote.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

I agree with you about what it boils down to, but my conclusion is different. With following elements: -We dont know the scope of the fraud for certain -We have a method used in every other countries, used in the us too (verification by id happens at many stages of ur life) To me, if the trade off is acceptable, then it should be made. In this specific case, i personally judge that showing up on election day with a certificate of registration (since registration is required, its pretty easy), containing a registration number linking to your id thats been verified on registration day, is not an incredible lift to ask to any normal adult citizen. It shouldnt even be a debate.

2 replies

0 recast

1 reaction

anewname pfp

The core premise is wrong: we know the scope because there’s no problem. How do we know? Math, statistical analysis, rigorous investigations, and so on. It’s really not difficult to see what’s actually happening, which is a minority that wants to be in power is doing everything it can to make self-determination thru voting as hard as possible as possible.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

The definition of a "successful fraud" is that is undetected. It's consubstantial to it being successful. So detecting something that is undetected by shear definition sounds quite a bold statement.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

anewname pfp

You’re asking for something that’s unfalsifiable, eg outside the realm of science. It’s the same for asking for evidence of ghosts or the souls. Which means there also isn’t much someone from this side of reason can say 😁

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

Idk if you read the whole thread, but thats exactly what i discussed with Jared. My point is we dont know for sure, but the difference with ghosts, souls or big foot for that matter, is that we have evidences it happens in other countries across the globe every year. So maybe thats a thing that does actually exist, and talking about residual by just measuring detected fraud is not that strong of an argument?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

anewname pfp

No, we do know for sure. Just think about it like this: First claim: We have evidence it happens elsewhere. Sure! And that includes stuff like statistical analysis and math, not to mention audits, etc. Second claim: Even tho there isn’t evidence it happens here, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen here. Basically these things are irreconcilable. Either you have to discount the ways in which fraud is detected in other parts of world, which then throws claim one into doubt, and therefore we can basically just shrug and say we don’t know whether or not there is fraud anywhere in the world, or you have to admit that it’s extremely rare here, because the ways in which electoral fraud has been sussed out elsewhere reveals nearly nothing here. The third option leads us back to the unfalsifiable: it’s happening but we can’t prove that it’s happening; some nefarious or sophisticated actor(s) are manipulating the vote.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

You've been talking about statistical analysis, math and audit, to justify your opinion that "fraud is extremely rare here". Ok. So in the context of what I just mentioned about other countries fraud, where are those statistical analysis, math & audit, showing that the way fraud is happening in other countries throughout the world could not be reproduced here in the US ("the ways in which electoral fraud has been sussed out elsewhere reveals nearly nothing here"). I'm really curious to read through those documents tbh. You're the one who claims that we DO know, so I imagine you have a solid body of documents to sustain your opinion. Please link!

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

anewname pfp

My guy. Your claim is “It happens elsewhere.” If it happens elsewhere, how do you know? Eg there is some method of determining fraud, right? So either you think there is a valid way to uncover fraud or there isn’t. And either you have one standard or set of standards by which you hold this belief, or you don’t. But sure, here is a good primer that covers 49 indicators across 11 stages of an election cycle of how one might use objective methods to determine fraud: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/measuring-electoral-integrity-around-the-world-a-new-dataset/506F05DEF195C4A73DD1C937591B2071 What i’m trying to get you to see is that you’re claiming two incompatible things: we know it happens elsewhere (because reasons) but we don’t know it doesn’t happen here (because reasons). There is no evidence that widespread voter fraud in the US is or has ever been a problem, given the methods used to objectively uncover it elsewhere. End stop.

2 replies

0 recast

1 reaction

alixkun🟣🎩🍡 pfp

alixkun🟣🎩🍡

Another thing: Your problem is that you're dogmatic. You (rightfully) assume that conservatives want stricter ID control laws for voting because they draw the conclusion that it would prevent minorities to vote. Maybe, and probably, it's factually true! But what's also true is that the US need a better ID control system in general, and more particularly for elections. And so you choose to dismiss reality for dogmatism. Just like Conservatives deny scientifically proven climate change because it's associated to leftist ideology. 2 things can be true and important at the same time, don't let your ideology blind you.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction