7 ms·

This is on par with election fraud. No matter if there is any, one side will downplay while the other screams it’s the tip of the iceberg. Both sides know presi

This is on par with election fraud. No matter if there is any, one side will downplay while the other screams it’s the tip of the iceberg. Both sides know presidential elections are a zero-sum game and will do whatever it takes to win. Again, I don’t think there was that much, let alone enough to swing the election, but we can’t even discuss any of it honestly.

x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
We can't discuss it because they side that claims it exists is solely doing so to overturn the election. Don't try to tiptoe the fact that it's their ulterior motives which is why they are met with a tsunami of eye-rolling.
NationalPark 6y ago
But you aren't even trying to discuss it honestly! The prior probability of voter fraud is so low that it demands really incredible evidence. When you frame it like "vote fraud or not voter fraud", you're implicitly lending a whole lot of credibility to something that is, well, not the least bit credible. Also, to borrow from a completely different polarizing thread, you're making a classic motte-and-bailey argument in record time. You start out broad - "election fraud", a "zero sum game" that they must be cheating at - but by the end of the comment you're already on, "Okay, not election fraud, but there were votes that were incorrectly cast somehow, and thats what I'm actually upset about..." which of course is obviously a defensible position that nobody would disagree with. Another way to think about how silly this is: Can you conceive of a world were Trump and his supporters don't claim there was fraud, but accept a Joe Biden win?
- umanwizard 6y ago
  > The prior probability of voter fraud is so low Why?
  - vajrabum 6y ago
    Because close to nobody is ever charged with voter fraud and multiple investigations after 2016 launched by folks at the federal level looking for it, failed to turn up cases. In the recent election, the Trump team has repeatedly alleged voter fraud but not presented any evidence of such in a courtroom.
  - takeda 6y ago
    I don't know what GP is trying to say, but the problem was that they never provided any actual evidence. Everything was presented on social media was made of videos that might have looked suspicious to someone not familiar with the process, but easily were debunked. For similar reason no viable evidence was provided to courts. Frankly, I would be glad if we would actually ban electronic voting machines, and use paper ballots. There were some fishy things happening in states[1] that didn't get as much attention. It's much harder to commit fraud on larger scale with paper ballots, since everyone knows how they work and it is much harder to hide things. [1] https://www.dcreport.org/2020/12/19/mitch-mcconnells-re-election-the-numbers-dont-add-up/ https://www.dcreport.org/2020/12/19/mitch-mcconnells-re-elec...
- artichokes 6y ago
  >The prior probability of voter fraud is so low that it demands really incredible evidence. The prior probability of voter fraud is the number of elections in which actors have engaged in fraud / the total number of elections that taken place. Consider any of the countless elections that have taken place around the world and throughout history. Do you believe that the number of them in which actors engaged in fraud is so low as to be incredible, when you think about countries and time periods that are not the country and time period you presently live in? Peruvian elections in 1960. Scottish elections in 1990. Zimbabwe in 1994. I'm just naming random countries/times here. What percentage of these do you think involved fraud? That's what the prior probability is.

x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago

We can't discuss it because they side that claims it exists is solely doing so to overturn the election. Don't try to tiptoe the fact that it's their ulterior motives which is why they are met with a tsunami of eye-rolling.

NationalPark 6y ago

But you aren't even trying to discuss it honestly! The prior probability of voter fraud is so low that it demands really incredible evidence. When you frame it like "vote fraud or not voter fraud", you're implicitly lending a whole lot of credibility to something that is, well, not the least bit credible. Also, to borrow from a completely different polarizing thread, you're making a classic motte-and-bailey argument in record time. You start out broad - "election fraud", a "zero sum game" that they must be cheating at - but by the end of the comment you're already on, "Okay, not election fraud, but there were votes that were incorrectly cast somehow, and thats what I'm actually upset about..." which of course is obviously a defensible position that nobody would disagree with. Another way to think about how silly this is: Can you conceive of a world were Trump and his supporters don't claim there was fraud, but accept a Joe Biden win?

umanwizard 6y ago
> The prior probability of voter fraud is so low Why?
- vajrabum 6y ago
  Because close to nobody is ever charged with voter fraud and multiple investigations after 2016 launched by folks at the federal level looking for it, failed to turn up cases. In the recent election, the Trump team has repeatedly alleged voter fraud but not presented any evidence of such in a courtroom.
- takeda 6y ago
  I don't know what GP is trying to say, but the problem was that they never provided any actual evidence. Everything was presented on social media was made of videos that might have looked suspicious to someone not familiar with the process, but easily were debunked. For similar reason no viable evidence was provided to courts. Frankly, I would be glad if we would actually ban electronic voting machines, and use paper ballots. There were some fishy things happening in states[1] that didn't get as much attention. It's much harder to commit fraud on larger scale with paper ballots, since everyone knows how they work and it is much harder to hide things. [1] https://www.dcreport.org/2020/12/19/mitch-mcconnells-re-election-the-numbers-dont-add-up/ https://www.dcreport.org/2020/12/19/mitch-mcconnells-re-elec...
artichokes 6y ago
>The prior probability of voter fraud is so low that it demands really incredible evidence. The prior probability of voter fraud is the number of elections in which actors have engaged in fraud / the total number of elections that taken place. Consider any of the countless elections that have taken place around the world and throughout history. Do you believe that the number of them in which actors engaged in fraud is so low as to be incredible, when you think about countries and time periods that are not the country and time period you presently live in? Peruvian elections in 1960. Scottish elections in 1990. Zimbabwe in 1994. I'm just naming random countries/times here. What percentage of these do you think involved fraud? That's what the prior probability is.