• bloodfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Again, I don’t see anyone saying that they’re planning to lie in order to claim fraud.

    I’m also not entirely convinced that a hand count can be manipulated as easily as you’re suggesting based on the election work I’ve been involved in.

    This honestly seems like one of those times that a stopped clock is right, a person truly believes there is gonna be fraud or recognizes that there are gonna be claims of it and pushes to prepare for the worst.

    Let me flip the script on you:

    Georgia was the focus of a lot of claims of election fraud last time around. If your goal was to build trust in the election process there, wouldn’t you want to go ahead and be prepared for the worst, a hand count?

    • Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      “Again, I don’t see anyone saying that they’re planning to lie in order to claim fraud.”

      Everyone here has taken a lot of time to explain this to you. Here is an article that explains what is really going on.

      https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/18/trump-election-georgia

      This is the opposite of building trust.

      It is just “hand counting good” with you and frankly it makes you look stupid because you are willfully missing the point.

      • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m sorry for not replying to you sooner, I couldn’t find any examples of people lying to claim fraud in that article.

        I read it a bunch of times and it’s very possible that I missed it, so point it out if you think so.

        That’s why I didn’t get back to you till now.

        I’ve really tried to not argue from the standpoint that hand counting is ontologically good, but that there’s a reason why in this case, in this election, under the conditions that Georgia is and will be under, hand counting is a better choice.

        In a bunch of comments up the chain I say as much and I’ve been trying to stay consistent with that.

        I’m really not willfully trying to avoid the point.

        • Doomsider@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I did go back and look at the comments and there were people doubting hand counting. I think this is misplaced and I do agree with your sentiment against this.

          That is all fine and dandy, but in the context of what is going on right now in Georgia calling for hand counting in the 11th hour is asinine. There are many elections officials that are conspiracing as we discuss this.

          The fact that people are on here doubting hand counting is a symptom of the discord that sowing election misinformation leads to.

          This is the real issue, that we are allowing our systems to get damaged by falsehoods. Until we stop the lies things will stay shitty.

          • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            i agree that we need to build trust in the process. I think the right way to do that is to go ahead with a hand count. if they’re conspiring to cast doubt like you’re saying, it’s the way to put a stop to that line of thinking.

            be realistic here, georgia was the subject of allegations of tampering last time around and just because of that there will be allegations this time around. it would have been better to prepare earlier but the unserious move is to wait till election night to start the hand tally.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      They’re already lying about past events which makes it clear that they’re going to keep on lying.

      • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Okay, you and the Georgia board of elections disagree about the 2020 result.

        What is the right way to go about building trust in the election process in that circumstance?

        Is it to just tell the people who think there was manipulation to sit down and shut up or is it to go ahead and prepare for the inevitable accusations of manipulation?

        What im trying to make clear here is that I think that the board of elections is making the right call, even if they don’t think hand counts are inherently better like I do, and even if they’re nefariouslly planning to drum up unfounded accusations of manipulation, because they’re making the call that has the most opportunity to build trust in the election process back up.

        How should it be?

                • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Remove them from office or change the law so that office they hold does exist or change the power the office holds so it can’t do the kinds of things they want to do.

                  • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    Okay let me get this straight:

                    There’s a group of people who don’t believe you can trust the elections. They think there’s a big conspiracy to manipulate them and have taken positions in the board of elections in order to make sure it’s done right (whatever that means).

                    You and others think that theyre the ones involved a conspiracy to manipulate the election, and have occupied those positions in order to further their plot. You and others believe that they’re going ahead with a hand count, the method used when an election is in contention and its results need to be verified, so that the process will slow down and their candidate will be appointed by the house.

                    You don’t think that trust can be built with that group and that they should be purged from office and the ability of those positions to verify and certify elections should be removed.

                    You think the best response to a conspiracy minded movement which doesn’t trust the elections and has occupied the positions in government ostensibly tasked with election security and veracity with the stated purpose of making sure there is no manipulation is to force them out of those positions and take away that power.

                    This is “put battery operated speakers in stop signs that remind schizophrenics to take their medication” level thinking and I’m here for it.