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

141–150 of 308 posts

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

#141

Post by Sabinus »

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?

Because of the incentives of the US voting system. Voting is not mandatory so parties are incentivised to mess with voting access to make it easier for their demographics to vote but not others. There's also a general distain for letting 'the wrong people' vote in America.

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

#142

Post by dimal »

mandeepj wrote: post #108
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.

> holding these "news" networks responsible for brazen repeated lies that are hugely damaging to our society But that moron in WH is still spreading lies about that election; he has no shame, no remorse, no nothing. On the contrary, he was successful in portraying himself a victim and win people’s sympathy. Even though he’s the one who called insurrection. There’s no accountability for him. Look at South Korea, who i…

I had been worried about what would happen as the American republic goes down, whether other countries would follow suit. So those two examples are cause for hope.

As for the second term, we can’t forget that the Democrats basically threw the election. This election was a layup. An easy win. And they did absolutely everything wrong. I almost blame them as much as Trump for this mess.

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

#143

Post by yibg »

jltsiren wrote: post #81
Volundr wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. I don't know that it's that unpopular. I disagree with the 100% fool proof and verifiable claim though. I can think of lots of interesting ways of screwing with it, e.x. manipulating the chain of custody or tampering with the ballots to make errors likely. Everything is a balance. Paper ball…

> I happen to think the pros aren't worth the cons and that most of the handwringing around mail in ballots and machines are FUD rather than measured concerns. You can't trust the machines. You can't trust the election authorities. You can't trust the post office. Those are fundamental assumptions, not FUD or measured concerns. Elections should be designed for bad situations, because the results don't matter that muc…

There has been no evidence of wide spread fraud and there is every evidence that elections have been legitimate and fair. A non trivial portion of the population still thinks the 202 elections was rigged. End of the day, somme people will consider whatever doesn't go their way rigged.

Right now the complaint for voter fraud are things like no ID requirements, mail in ballots etc. If those go away it'll be something else.

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

#144

Post by mindslight »

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…

> Universal PKI-backed national ID would be a program everyone should be behind

I for one am not behind this until we have actual privacy laws with teeth, and those laws have put a stop to the ongoing widespread abuses of the identification system we already have. As it stands, people's nebulous fear of handing out their DL/SSN numbers is the main thing holding back a deluge of every other business (including websites) demanding your ID for one purported reason or another, but really to augment their surveillance databases.

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

#145

Post by ThunderSizzle »

preinheimer wrote: post #88
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".

I don't think that in person voting with ID is a fool proof way to guarantee that only the people who "should be voting" get to vote. I also think you disenfranchise too many people when you do that. - People who work on oil rigs won't get to vote - People who do shift work covering the hours the polls are open wont get to vote - People who are of sound mind, but too unwell to travel to a polling location wont get to…

Nearly everything you said is solved with the roll out of early voting for nearly a whole month or more prior to the actual election say.

Also, all rights come with responsibilities, and part of the responsibility of voting is registering to vote, getting your ID, and showing up to vote. We shouldn't bend society to let people who don't want bare minimum responsibility to participate in their right.

We have no problem putting serious restrictions on rights of people in other areas coinciding with responsibility.

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

#146

Post by platevoltage »

temp0826 wrote: post #50
kg wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Enforced compulsory voting and ranked-choice voting (along with term limits and ending citizens united) would be pretty great.

Ranked Choice - absolutely. I would be much more enthusiastic about voting if I wasn't forced to vote for the empty garbage dumpster in order to keep the garbage dumpster full of baby diapers thats been set on fire from winning.

I really think people are too uninformed for compulsory voting. I envy these people. It would be nice not to care. I don't need them looking at a list of candidates and being like "Oh I remember that guy, he made a cameo in Home Alone 2, check"

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

#147

Post by platevoltage »

mrangle wrote: post #96
kg wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

ID isn't a poll tax because it isn't a poll tax. Voter ID requirements are no more discriminatory than they are for air travel.

Air Travel isn't a constitutionally protected right. Try again.

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

#148

Post by tasty_freeze »

lesuorac wrote: post #56
otterley wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been trusting our voters' word for centuries and it hasn't been a problem yet. Why all the distrust all of a sudden? What changed?

It has been a problem! Even paper ballots have been a problem! Jimmy Carter has documented his own first hand account with it. > We asked John Pope, a friend of ours, to go to the courthouse to represent me. When he arrived he was dismayed to see the local political boss, Joe Hurst, ostentatiously helping my opponent. He was requiring all voters to mark their ballots on a table in front of him and telling them to vot…

You are confusing election fraud with voter fraud. Voter fraud is a non-issue, but election fraud is something that absolutely needs to be worried about.

One thing I have asked a handful of R friends and family is this: after 2016 Trump claimed 3M+ illegal votes were cast. Not only did he have a personal interest in rooting out such illegal voting, but he was duty-bound to do something about it. He formed a committee, headed by Kris Kobach (which is its own significant story) to investigate ... and nothing came of it. So, which is it: was Trump negligent in not stopping this massive amount of illegal voting, were they incompetent in that they didn't find any, or were they just lying?

Another recurring news item every two years is about how some eagle-eyed county registrar has found hundreds of dead people enrolled to vote. Huzzah, voter fraud proved once again! The fact is that people die all the time (and move away) and one of the routine duties of the registrar is to use official records to scrub the voter rolls. When my folks died I didn't go to the registrar and ask them to remove their names. In the half a dozen times I've moved I've never notified the registrar that I've moved. Such reports are a non-story. The next time someone brings it up I'd love to ask: hey, what is the breakdown on that list? How many of them are not citizens? How many are affiliated with each party. I'm sure it would show that there is no conspiracy going on, just people moving and dying.

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

#149

Post by senderista »

dimal wrote: post #142
mandeepj wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> holding these "news" networks responsible for brazen repeated lies that are hugely damaging to our society But that moron in WH is still spreading lies about that election; he has no shame, no remorse, no nothing. On the contrary, he was successful in portraying himself a victim and win people’s sympathy. Even though he’s the one who called insurrection. There’s no accountability for him. Look at South Korea, who i…

I had been worried about what would happen as the American republic goes down, whether other countries would follow suit. So those two examples are cause for hope. As for the second term, we can’t forget that the Democrats basically threw the election. This election was a layup. An easy win. And they did absolutely everything wrong. I almost blame them as much as Trump for this mess.

When it comes to pleasing the base, or the voters, Democrats always choose the former. At least they can feel good about losing.

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

#150

Post by platevoltage »

baggy_trough wrote: post #23
kg wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You have to have an ID to work. If we need to get non-workers ID in order to have secure elections, that is money well spent.

That has to happen before we can even talk about Voter ID requirements. I've NEVER seen a Republican mention this as an idea.
Post reply on HN