Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

probablydance.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 467 posts

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#421

Post by majormajor »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #347
majormajor wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love small states to secede... I think, though, that they would realize they need the big states to pay for shit, protect them, etc...

This is a red herring. All the states are only a few % away from net neutral when it comes to federal money in vs out. Pretty much any state could go it alone from a monetary perspective. Trade agreements would be the hard part. Also, I think you're greatly mis-judging how a deal to the tune of "be 5% poorer but do 100% listening to what the people on the coasts have to say" sounds to e.g. the midwest. You say that l…

I'm unconvinced that I'd be any worse off if, say, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakotas left. Again, right now, I'd like them to take me up on it. Their citizens' voting power is so much greater than mine, it is infuriating.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#422

Post by tastyfreeze »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #408
tastyfreeze wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are arguing for no more states. I very much enjoy the ability to move to another state on a whim if I dont like the state government. Under a popular vote we might as well disband congress. No need for state representation in a direct democracy.

> So you are arguing for no more states. Where did I argue for that? I'm arguing for the state one lives in having no impact on how much one's vote for president counts. I never said that the US should eliminate federalism and run everything directly out of DC. > Under a popular vote we might as well disband congress. I don't follow your logic here. Based on my reasoning, it would make sense to either make Senate rep…

I don't like this example because the effectiveness of direct democracy is greater in small groups. I selected a dinner with families as representative of states with different desires but similar desires within a state. Akin to how a family has similar tastes in food. On that level I feel it is a good example.

Lets say we have a group of families voting on what to have for a shared dinner. Each family gets one vote. Each family gets to decide how their vote is cast. One family of 10 decides they want roast beef. One family of 5 decides they want roast chicken. One newlywed couple decides they want roast chicken. Every member of each family is happy with their choice because they agreed through discussion in their family.

So, there is one vote for roast beef and 2 for roast chicken. But, every family member was happy with the way their vote was tallied even if 10 people aren't getting what they want for dinner.

A popular vote removes the ability of a family to vote in a way they all agree. The family of 10 will always be deciding what everybody has for dinner. At that point it isn't a dinner of families it is a dinner of 17 individuals with 7 never having what they want. So if you are having a dinner with 17 individuals why maintain the grouping of families? With regards to directing what is for dinner the group of a family becomes irrelevant. It also creates division within families instead of agreement on shared direction.

This is similar to popular vote vs electoral college. A popular vote makes the grouping of a state irrelevant and more easily argued that it shouldn't exist. "The populous elects the president directly. Why do we have representatives? We should make policy direct vote as well. Lets get our greater number of representatives to push that through."

Disbanding congress is not an immediate result of popular vote. It is a possible undesirable end. The structure of government should remove the possibility of undesirable outcomes of human nature as much as it can.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#423

Post by matwood »

guscost wrote: post #409
matwood wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first couple days the big counties were counting 24/7. The managers were on TV talking about their teams, and you could watch live streams on many of the counting areas. The court is likely throwing nothing out. The no poll watcher lawsuit was already laughed out of court when the lawyers had to admit a 'non-zero' number of poll watchers were present the whole time [1]. Trump might be fine lying on Twitter consta…

There are many sworn affidavits being filed in court right now, from poll watchers claiming that they were kept too far away to validate a single ballot, or turned away entirely. We’ll see, it will definitely go to court.

Read the fact check. The too far away claim was decided days ago, and people were allowed to be within 6'. There were also live webcams setup. This has literally been one of the most transparent elections in history.

Read through the lawsuits [1]. Most have already been rejected due to no proof. The others outstanding have to do with so few votes it doesn't matter or they actually go against Trump's interests, like stopping the count when he's behind. This is all theater at this point. Maybe they can have a few more press conferences at the garden center next to the sex shop.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-lawsuits-elec...

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#424

Post by tptacek »

matwood wrote: post #423
guscost wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many sworn affidavits being filed in court right now, from poll watchers claiming that they were kept too far away to validate a single ballot, or turned away entirely. We’ll see, it will definitely go to court.

Read the fact check. The too far away claim was decided days ago, and people were allowed to be within 6'. There were also live webcams setup. This has literally been one of the most transparent elections in history. Read through the lawsuits [1]. Most have already been rejected due to no proof. The others outstanding have to do with so few votes it doesn't matter or they actually go against Trump's interests, like s…

Note also the extremely telling detail that Trump's WinRed links for fundraising the recounts and legal challenges allocate 60% of those funds to retiring his campaign debt.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#425

Post by trhway »

matwood wrote: post #313
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The system is secure and robust, at least with regards to the mechanics of individual votings. Among the main factors is its distributed nature. You just can't run a scam with senior citizen volunteers in thousands of individual precincts. Then, there are observers. Famous case from this week's election was Republicans complaining that their two dozen(!) observers weren't allowed closer than 6 feet to the ballots. It…

> The system is secure and robust, at least with regards to the mechanics of individual votings. Agreed. If anything this has shown me just how robust the voting system is currently. Many of the counting locations live streamed the process, there are watchers from all interested parties, and the various people in charge/control seem to be from a mix of both sides. Small errors can still occur, but like we saw from 20…

>Many of the counting locations live streamed the process

applying magician's principles one would make observing public focus all the attention at one place while the actual "magic" would happen outside of that focus spot.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#426

Post by matwood »

tptacek wrote: post #424
matwood wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the fact check. The too far away claim was decided days ago, and people were allowed to be within 6'. There were also live webcams setup. This has literally been one of the most transparent elections in history. Read through the lawsuits [1]. Most have already been rejected due to no proof. The others outstanding have to do with so few votes it doesn't matter or they actually go against Trump's interests, like s…

Note also the extremely telling detail that Trump's WinRed links for fundraising the recounts and legal challenges allocate 60% of those funds to retiring his campaign debt.

Exactly. I was trying to stay away from pointing out that Trump was trying to scam him followers one last time before leaving office, but here we are.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#427

Post by bartread »

thu2111 wrote: post #284
bartread wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK doesn't have national identification. The government tried to bring it in a decade or more ago but it was shot down by the successful no2id campaign. The UK also doesn't have a significant problem with electoral fraud: like the US it has robust processes in place to ensure that its (admittedly less than perfect) electoral system is implemented fairly[0], correctly, and with integrity. This doesn't depend on na…

Actual MPs disagree with you about that: https://www.politicshome.com/thehouse/article/there-is-wides... "I believe the overwhelming majority of my constituents would be shocked if they knew the extent of corrupt election practices and voter fraud which happen each time there is an election. I want open and lawful elections, upholding the principle that every entitled voter should have one vote, and cast it freely."…

> There's a risk that in future the UK may face a similar outcome as the USA.

What outcome is that exactly?

Are you alleging that there has been widespread electoral fraud in the USA? Because if that is what you're suggesting you need to drop the euphemisms and point to the hard evidence.

I am aware of precisely zero solid evidence of material levels of fraud in the 2020 presidential election, and zero evidence that postal ballots have caused any fraud-related issues.

If that's not what you're saying then what exactly are you saying?

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#428

Post by nl »

save_ferris wrote: post #353
nl wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> voters in so-called swing states have much more influence on the outcome of the election than voters in states with established political supremacy I can't imagine any system where there aren't "safe" areas that politicians essentially ignore. Sometimes these "safe" states/areas aren't as safe as they were thought to be (2016 Midwest, 2020 Georgia and Arizona, Texas looks to be heading that way). The Midwest is a p…

> I can't imagine any system where there aren't "safe" areas that politicians essentially ignore. Of course, when you're campaigning for the support of millions of people in a large country, some areas will be prioritized over others. The problem that swing states create, which we've seen play out on multiple occasions in the US, is that a candidate can win the popular vote by a margin of millions and still ultimatel…

I hadn't anticipated this somewhat odd conflation of the issue of swing states with the electoral college. That seems to be primarily a criticism from people who haven't been through many elections - California was a reliable Republican state until 1992, Texas has been reliably Republican for decades but now is a swing state etc.

Most political criticism of the electoral college comes from the idea it is non-representation: A vote in Wyoming is worth between 2.9 and 3.6 times a vote in California[1] depending on if you measure turnout of population.

A non-electoral college system will change that, but instead of it being Republican votes in Democratic strongholds that don't count (and vice-versa) it will be all the votes outside of CA, NY, IL, TX and FL. Parties will create policies that favor large, dense populate centers, and the rest of the country will be ignored.

[1] https://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-t...

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#429

Post by nl »

nanny wrote: post #366
gameman144 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a better argument for proportional allocation of electoral votes per state instead of winner-take-all (a la Nebraska), rather than arguing against the electoral college itself. If you feel Trump voters' voices are muffled in NY or Biden voters' voices are muffled in Texas, I agree wholeheartedly and would be strongly in favor of proportional allotment of electors at the state level. The electoral coll…

Proportional allocation of the electoral college is just a slightly less accurate popular vote. If we're gonna do that, might as well just do pop vote. You don't hear the same argument against the senate as often because it's practically impossible to get rid of it. But many people are still against it (myself included). >why shouldn't they allocate all federal funds to themselves and deprive other states entirely? T…

> California contributes so much to red states, and what do they get in return? A bunch of senators and presidents who do nothing about climate change, thereby letting California burn even more.

It's easy to imagine a political party that runs on a "cheap power for the cities" policy which involves mining and burning coal a long way away from any city.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#430

Post by GauntletWizard »

tcgv wrote: post #358
rjmunro wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main reason you can't force people to vote for you is that once they get in the polling booth, no one knows how they specifically voted. If you allow people to "check their vote" later, an attacker could verify that they voted in the way the attacker wanted.

You're right, this approach would require a strong protection against deanonymization of votes, which could allow attackers to guess who voted for each candidate, for instance according to voting time and location.

Attackers don’t need to guess. They can equally strongarm the information. Under any “blockchain” based voting system, what is preventing your boss from saying “Sit down in this chair and log into the system and let me see who you voted for”? The answer is: Nothing prevents that. So long as you allow checking who you voted for afterwards, you allow the participants to verifiably disclose their votes.

This is precisely what secret votes are guarding against: This prevents vote-harvesting schemes where a corporation forces its workers (or otherwise buys) verified votes. They can pay you to vote X, but they cannot verify that transaction: You can take their money and vote Y.

Post reply on HN