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

121–130 of 308 posts

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

#121

Post by [deleted] »

baggy_trough wrote: post #25
the_gastropod wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Count me as one who strongly opposes mail-in and early voting because I believe it violates the sanctity of the voting booth.

[deleted]

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

#122

Post by scarface_74 »

sugarpimpdorsey wrote: post #26
marstall wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id This notion that Democrats keep pushing - that a sizable portion of their voting base is too dumb to get an ID - when massive developing countries like India that are still struggling with basic things like sanitation have long ago solved this problem - is nothing short of embarrassing. There are people in rural India that live in straw huts tha…

The red states consistently make it harder for Democratic leaning populations to get ID. Everything from closing places where ID is available to places like Texas make gun permits a legal form of ID and not student IDs.

In some places native Americans can’t get IDs because of their address.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-...

https://journals.law.harvard.edu/crcl/voter-discrimination-t...

In Florida, voters passed a law that made it easier for people released from prison to vote. It was still blocked by the legislation.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/28/ron-desantis...

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

#124

Post by cj »

mapt wrote: post #111
cj wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lawyers would tell you that water isn't wet Sure, but do you really think the Fox News anchors honestly believed what they were saying? I’d venture a guess: no. They said what they said because that’s what they had to do to get their paycheck at the end of the day. Yes, lawyers will say whatever to win a case. But I highly doubt those news anchors really thought the election was stolen. It’s all for ratings. Let’s…

To willingly lie about something you need to be able to differentiate truth from fiction. Defamation hinges on either this willing lie ("malice") or on negligence (and the expected due diligence for a self-professed news organization is high). There is a little performative middle ground here, but WHATEVER is argued in court does not moot the things argued at every commercial break about trusting their news instituti…

> Fox news is not, and never has been, intended as satire

Their homepage right now is featuring a pull up and push up contest between Hegseth and RFK jr.

It hardly appears as though they’re trying to be a legitimate news network. (Same goes for CNN - both are incredibly and undeniably outrageous in their reporting)

But I agree, their audiences take their reporting seriously, even if they themselves are just saying what they say for the ratings.

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

#125

Post by platevoltage »

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.

I'm supposed to believe that my mail in paper ballot in California was less secure than when I voted in PA by pushing a button on a screen with no paper trail, on a machine made by a company with political ties.

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

#126

Post by [deleted] »

litoE wrote: post #82
FridayoLeary wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've never understood why elections are held on a Tuesday. Why aren't they held on a Sunday, which would eliminate the excuse of "I have to go to work"?

[deleted]

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

#127

Post by jedimastert »

sugarpimpdorsey wrote: post #26
marstall wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id This notion that Democrats keep pushing - that a sizable portion of their voting base is too dumb to get an ID - when massive developing countries like India that are still struggling with basic things like sanitation have long ago solved this problem - is nothing short of embarrassing. There are people in rural India that live in straw huts tha…

> This notion that Democrats keep pushing - that a sizable portion of their voting base is too dumb to get an ID

Citation needed

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

#128

Post by bspammer »

virgildotcodes wrote: post #18
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?

Even if you ignore all technical problems - the problem with electronic voting is that it provides a breeding ground for conspiracy theories. Even if an election is run perfectly legitimately, bad actors can make credible-sounding claims around hackers editing votes, or voting machines being rigged.

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

#129

Post by Nursie »

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".

Except it doesn’t matter whether it’s foolproof or verifiable.

The only thing that matters is seizing on a narrative and running with it, whipping up fear and discontent.

The solution is to heal the partisanship in US society that infects everything there, and acts like poison on public discourse and trust.

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

#130

Post by yibg »

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".

Is there evidence that in person voting is meaningfully more secure than other forms (like mail in voting) let alone 100% fool proof?

Even assuming it is, how do we solve the other issues it causes if it's the only way to vote? e.g.:

- How do US citizens that don't live or are not at the time of voting physically in the US vote? e.g. overseas military personnel.

- People that live in remote areas of the country without easy access to in person voting stations?

- Those with limited mobility and have a hard time physically getting to a voting station?

- Those with limited transportation options? e.g. don't have reliable access to a car.

- Those that do shift work and can't or can't afford to take the time off?

- The estimated millions of Americans that don't have a valid form of ID?

End of the day, even if in person voting with a valid ID is the only reliable way to vote, we also need to evaluate the marginal reduction in voting fraud against disenfranchising voters.

Post reply on HN