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

Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#31

Post by rnestler »

cpeterso wrote: post #21

While I believe the concerns about mail-in voting fraud is vastly overblown, there are genuine security challenges with mail-in paper ballots. How would one design a mail-in voting system that ensures all votes are counted without fraudulent or duplicate votes while also providing voter privacy?

In Switzerland we have mail-in voting since many years and it is the most used voting option. The way it works to ensure that votes aren't fraudulent / duplicate votes while providing voter privacy is as follows: Inside the main envelope there is your transmission card ("Stimmrechtsausweis") which is signed by you and a separate anonymous return envelope with your actual votes. When it arrives in the municipality the transmission card will be verrified and (if valid) the still closed return envelope will be put into the ballot for later counting.

See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland for more information.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#32

Post by egamirorrim »

tathougies wrote: post #29
threatofrain wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reasonable interpretation is that the US President is saying that there is no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud. Is it in fact fraud? You may wish to check whether you're about to engage in fraudulent behavior.

> no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud That's not at all what he is saying. He said mail-in ballots will be 'substantially fraudulent'. The obvious interpretation is that the president believes that a substantial portion of ballots in a mail-in election are fraudulent, not that any one who votes for him via mail is committing fraud. I don't understand the need to read between the lines he…

Surely it's in the way he's phrased it. "There is no way..." - that's a fact right there.

If the post had said "I don't think there's a way..." Then it might have been a different story

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#33

Post by pintxo »

telesilla wrote: post #2

What kinds of evidence-based resources are there I can use to send friends who insist on believing in conspiracies? I usually try and find some peer-reviewed research. Maybe they don't read it because of the dryness but it seems to have the most authority.

I usually go for asking questions. „Is this the most plausible reasoning?“ / „wouldn’t x be way simpler/cheaper/easier?“

The sceptic guide to the universe by Steven Novella also has a short chapter on how to seed some skeptic thinking into others for them to reconsider their believe in conspiracies.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#34

Post by egamirorrim »

Brilliant, this news gladdens my heart. This dangerous cockwomble needs fact checking, hopefully it might make a difference to his ignorant followers. I'm really happy Twitter is starting to apply the same standards to popular accounts that it does to regular users.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#35

Post by tathougies »

egamirorrim wrote: post #32
tathougies wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud That's not at all what he is saying. He said mail-in ballots will be 'substantially fraudulent'. The obvious interpretation is that the president believes that a substantial portion of ballots in a mail-in election are fraudulent, not that any one who votes for him via mail is committing fraud. I don't understand the need to read between the lines he…

Surely it's in the way he's phrased it. "There is no way..." - that's a fact right there. If the post had said "I don't think there's a way..." Then it might have been a different story

When a politician speaks about something political, there is always an implicit 'I believe' or 'I think'. I mean, Biden recently said black-skinned people who don't vote for him aren't black. Obviously, he doesn't need to be fact checked, because he was just saying what he believes. Same with Trump. Politicians speak politics -- a belief system.

Gosh, I really hope Twitter doesn't start fact-checking the Pope. What a sad state of affairs.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#36

Post by sympodius »

cpeterso wrote: post #21

While I believe the concerns about mail-in voting fraud is vastly overblown, there are genuine security challenges with mail-in paper ballots. How would one design a mail-in voting system that ensures all votes are counted without fraudulent or duplicate votes while also providing voter privacy?

The UK has had mail voting for years. It works very well. Your ballot is marked with a unique reference vote. Once you mark the ballot, you fold and seal it, then put it into another envelope that also comes with the ballot.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#37

Post by wbg34 »

karatestomp wrote: post #30
cpeterso wrote: post #21

While I believe the concerns about mail-in voting fraud is vastly overblown, there are genuine security challenges with mail-in paper ballots. How would one design a mail-in voting system that ensures all votes are counted without fraudulent or duplicate votes while also providing voter privacy?

How do all the mail-in ballots we already use work? They’re not exactly uncommon or new. For one thing, it’s how a decent chunk of the armed forces vote—and not just the ones overseas, those stateside vote in their “home” state, not where they’re stationed. That’d be a good place to start.

That's where this issue gets kind of messy. Traditionally, to obtain a mail in ballot, a person had to request the ballot based a set criteria. Those who met that criteria would then receive the ballot which they can complete and mail back. There are two separate changes to that system that conservative groups seem to be concerned with.

The first is the changes to how those ballots are collected. Traditionally, the ballots would have to be mailed or turned into a collection center by the voter or a relative. States have made changes so that anyone can turn in the ballots to a collection center. The concern surrounding this is called ballot harvesting, where groups collect large number of ballots and turn them in for voters. There have been cases where this has been done fraudulently.

The second issue is where States are sending mail in ballots to every registered voter instead of just those who have requested one. There are concerns that the opportunities for ballot harvesting that would increase as a result from this. In addition to the concerns of ballot harvesting, there is concern that this could lead to people stealing ballots before they reach the intended voters.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#38

Post by [deleted] »

tathougies wrote: post #29
threatofrain wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reasonable interpretation is that the US President is saying that there is no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud. Is it in fact fraud? You may wish to check whether you're about to engage in fraudulent behavior.

> no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud That's not at all what he is saying. He said mail-in ballots will be 'substantially fraudulent'. The obvious interpretation is that the president believes that a substantial portion of ballots in a mail-in election are fraudulent, not that any one who votes for him via mail is committing fraud. I don't understand the need to read between the lines he…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#39

Post by cpeterso »

rnestler wrote: post #31
cpeterso wrote: post #21

While I believe the concerns about mail-in voting fraud is vastly overblown, there are genuine security challenges with mail-in paper ballots. How would one design a mail-in voting system that ensures all votes are counted without fraudulent or duplicate votes while also providing voter privacy?

In Switzerland we have mail-in voting since many years and it is the most used voting option. The way it works to ensure that votes aren't fraudulent / duplicate votes while providing voter privacy is as follows: Inside the main envelope there is your transmission card ("Stimmrechtsausweis") which is signed by you and a separate anonymous return envelope with your actual votes. When it arrives in the municipality the…

Thanks! I vote by mail in California, but it is "fire and forget", so it's interesting to see how another system works. I know some people in California who have received email confirmation that their mail-in ballot has been received (though I haven't).

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#40

Post by [deleted] »

tathougies wrote: post #29
threatofrain wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reasonable interpretation is that the US President is saying that there is no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud. Is it in fact fraud? You may wish to check whether you're about to engage in fraudulent behavior.

> no way to legally perform mail-in voting without committing fraud That's not at all what he is saying. He said mail-in ballots will be 'substantially fraudulent'. The obvious interpretation is that the president believes that a substantial portion of ballots in a mail-in election are fraudulent, not that any one who votes for him via mail is committing fraud. I don't understand the need to read between the lines he…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN