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

Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 308 posts

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#11

Post by marstall »

whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

The arguments pro and con are purely motivated by partisan concerns. its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id, therefore voter id laws supposedly favors republicans. that supposed fact is at the heart of the entire debate and as far as i know there is nothing more to it.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#12

Post by quink »

thejazzman wrote: post #8
whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

unpopular for many valid and party leaning ressons.

Australian here. Electronic voting is a joke. And a not very funny one.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#13

Post by the_gastropod »

whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

There were literally Russian-sourced bomb threats at several major democratic strongholds' polling locations in the last presidential election. https://www.npr.org/2024/11/06/nx-s1-5181834/election-day-vo...

Voter ID and blocking mail-in / early voting are just a few examples of contemporary Republican voter suppression efforts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_Unite...

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#14

Post by kristjansson »

alistairSH wrote: post #2

~1/3 of their annual revenue. Not nothing, but likely small enough that it’s just a cost of doing business and not a real deterrent. IMO.

Agree that it should be more, but what sort of margins do you realize that 1/3 of _revenue_ seems small?

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#15

Post by kg »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #10
whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

The counterargument is that mail in ballots help increase voter turnouts and that requiring id will turn people away. It's a weak argument because you shouldn't try to increase turnout by making voting less secure. Any other solution should be found instead.

If we really want to increase turnout, we can just make voting mandatory like other countries have.

Requiring ID is a problem given that a lot of people don't have easy access (or access at all) to legal ID, for various reasons, some as simple as cost. Having a license costs money on an ongoing basis and you need to have access to documents to prove your identity like a birth certificate, and some citizens don't have those through no fault of their own, like losing everything in a fire or even the relevant records agency itself burning down. Thankfully there are often fee waivers for hardship but there are certainly corner cases where saying 'if you want to vote you need ID' is basically a poll tax, something we rightfully banned in the US a long time ago.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#16

Post by quink »

quink wrote: post #12
thejazzman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

unpopular for many valid and party leaning ressons.

Australian here. Electronic voting is a joke. And a not very funny one.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_by_country

In fact, I’d call electronic voting unpopular given the many, many examples on this page.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#17

Post by TacticalCoder »

whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

You're downvoted but requiring voter ID should be 100% mandatory. There's a near 100% overlap between states not requiring voter ID and states where democrats won.

And that since many elections.

The correlation statistically makes absolutely zero sense.

The only logical explanation is that illegals do vote and that they do mainly vote for democrats.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#18

Post by virgildotcodes »

whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

How on Earth are we able to have a global digital financial system that is able to keep track of trillions in transactions per year but running a seasonal election with < 100 million participants through a digital system seems too hard?

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#19

Post by esafak »

whatsupdog wrote: post #4

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

Where there is a will, there is a way. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44899415

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#20

Post by tyre »

siliconc0w wrote: post #5

It's pretty sad that is these sort of ticky-tacky lawsuits are really the only mechanism we seem have of holding these "news" networks responsible for brazen repeated lies that are hugely damaging to our society (like saying a election was stolen). And that wasn't even the problem, it's that their lies created damages for another corporation.

Related:

“I find all of this so weird because of how it _elevates_ finance. [Various cases] imply that we are not entitled to be protected from pollution as _citizens_, or as _humans_. [Another] implies that we are not entitled to be told the truth _as citizens_. (Which: is true!) Rather, in each case, we are only entitled to be protected from lies _as shareholders_. The great harm of pollution, or of political dishonesty, is that it might lower the share prices of the companies we own.”

— Matt Levine

Here he is talking about shareholder lawsuits (securities fraud) being the primary mechanism of holding social responsibility.

Post reply on HN