this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
5 points (55.1% liked)

politics

19221 readers
2442 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

He won. Get this conspiracy bullshit out of here.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

To be fair, it's been a longstanding rule with Republicans that whatever they accuse others of is merely a projection of what they'll do the moment they can get away with it. Whether or not they would try to steal an election isn't even a question. They've as much as admitted it. The only question is whether or not they did. I've not seen any evidence to that effect, and I'm not presuming there is any, but it would be idiotic not to at least contemplate the possibility.

[–] EndlessApollo 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Have you not heard of any of the shit tons of ballots that got destroyed, forged, and stolen by republicans leading up to the election? Or how they're not counting a shit ton of provisional ballots in Georgia and tried to get them to be hand counted? I'm p sure other states did that too but I don't remember

Edit just realized this sounds kinda rude, not my intention 🌸 I can look for some links if you want

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Statistically anomalous data exists, it should be scrutinized, just partially. Sample and do a hand recount for 1 district that shows the greatest evidence of bullet ballots, if that turns out close to expectations, that's the end of it. If it isn't... that's a massive can of worms.

1 anomaly can be seen as a random outlier, and if it wouldn't impact the overall result, can be ignored. Multiple anomalies, in only the places that matter is worth a little time to confirm.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Yeah probably. But this is a man who has never gotten anything honestly in his entire life. All they do is project, and they just spent years shrieking about this exact thing. Historically, that has meant that they have done/are doing/will do that thing.

I'm not going to just automatically assume anything, but it would be the least surprising thing ever if it turned out to be true.