791–800 of 1001 posts
Disgusting. YouTube has profiteered via ad revenue on these videos for over a month and now that it's dying down they want to be the last ones through the door and say "hey we're against this stuff we're the good guys." They stand for free speech as long as it suits them and they stand against misinformation when it doesn't, the fucking sociopaths.
Free speech is not applicable to private companies.
If there is to be toleration in the world, one of the things taught in schools must be the habit of weighing evidence, and the practice of not giving full assent to propositions which there is no reason to believe true. For example, the art of reading the newspapers should be taught. The schoolmaster should select some incident which happened a good many years ago, and roused political passions in its day. He should…
Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even…
If we don't have a meaningful signature match, than we don't have a meaningful way to prevent fraud with mail in ballots. Period. Bad ballot Rejection rate of 6% in previous election to now 0.02%, with mail in ballots. Mismatched signatures resulted in a rejection for only 0.02% of all absentee ballots cast. How is that even possible. They counted almost everything. For those of you that think its unfair to reject ba…
As others have noted, the statistics you listed are recklessly inaccurate. That said: even if they were accurate, we'd still need to examine how may signature match failures result in detecting actual fraudulent voting, and how many signature match failures don't (ie they are false positives that serve to disenfranchise voters). It turns out that the vast majority (97%) of ballots rejected due to signature match issu…
Also rights come with responsibilities. If you can't sing your signature in a consistent way, than maybe you should not vote by mail in ballot. Vote in person.
Most up to date stats on the rejection rates that I found. 0.6% vs 6.4% in Georgia.
https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2020:_Analysis_of_...
Holy shit, this thread is scary. Sure, there are some implications worth discussing based on this news. However, the number of people directly posting doubts on the election results is way more concerning and shows that Youtube might be doing a good thing in this case.
Yes, to think that somebody might have doubts that the most ideologically contentious election in modern history, wherein both sides perceived the opposition to be an existential threat to their lives or lifestyles might have on any scale been marred by political actors attempting to fix the results in their favor is a sign that people are too irrational to be exposed to the idea going forward…
Unpopular opinion: it is much better to have a leader hated by the media and who's every move is scrutinized by the press than to have a leader cowtowed by the press and given a free pass on anything. How do I know? I'm from Russia. Authoritatism begins with tight control of news sources.
YouTube !== Government Your comparison is off.
I was opposed to removing Confederate statues. I felt they should be left in place but the plaques should be replaced to merely mention their birth and death dates and that they had committed treason against the United States but were forgiven after the Civil War. I would suggest the same for these videos. Place an non-editable and non-removable preface that states none of the assertions in this video are verifiably…
Wildly different comparison you're trying to make there my friend. Statues on public land very different than a private business doing whatever it wants.
If Google wanted to be responsible they would remove videos covering the election in any way. If there had actually been widespread fraud is this something we would want Google doing? They have said themselves that they intend to manipulate elections in the US and this is exactly how they would do it.
> They have said themselves that they intend to manipulate elections Source please. That's a bold statement.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7178881/Undercover-...