6 ms·

We just spent a year hearing from some asshole about how the government was spending too much money and couldn't afford frivolities, yet we're supposed to spend

We just spent a year hearing from some asshole about how the government was spending too much money and couldn't afford frivolities, yet we're supposed to spend money on security theatre to fix a problem that doesn't actually exist, all because some other assholes are butthurt about losing an election fair and square? Remember the people leading the charge for this are insurrectionists. They don't care about protecting voting or the concept of democracy at all.

RickJWagner 13d ago
New Jersey had 6600 hundred non citizens get ballots. If you were writing software, would you overlook a problem like that? https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/30/new-jerseys-noncitizen-voter-registration-brings-private-worries-into-the-open-01015840 https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/30/new-jerseys-nonciti...
- hackyhacky 13d ago
  > If you were writing software, would you overlook a problem like that? They didn't overlook it. They fixed the error. If you are asserting that this error was a partisan, intentional attempt to change the outcome of the election, you're going to need to provide a lot more evidence before injecting USPS into election policy makes sense.
  - ModernMech 13d ago
    Moreover none of the proposed measures would have prevented that, as you said it was in fact an error. The reason why this issue is so intractable is because the level of disruption must be measured against the risk of disenfranchisement. People would be happier to implement these unneeded security measures if there was more care by those proposing them to address those ways in which legal legitimate voters would be refused a ballot. And the fact they don't ever address those concerns is the whole tell that the disenfranchisement is the point. Instead it's always bad faith "Oh you want the elections to be unsecure, you're overlooking massive security holes!" At the end of the day the biggest loudmouth in the world got people so mad about an election that they attacked the government, so then we were forced to spend years going over that election with a fine tooth comb only to turn up zilch. Even the Cyberninjas couldn't find the fraud they alleged when given direct unfettered access to voting records. And yet, we still have to entertain claims about the boogeyman of voting as if they're in good faith. Prove it in just one court under high standards of evidence! But even the biggest loudmouths saying fraud won't say it under oath in front of a judge, because they don't have the evidence to back it up. It's far past the point that noncitizens voting in elections should be considered the biggest threat to our democracy. No, the threat is an authoritarian, insurrectionist president trying to corrupt the election process.
  - RickJWagner 13d ago
    I am asserting that errors happened. Invalid votes were cast, thousands more potentially could be cast. Just in one state. What about the rest? Clearly, there is potential for more problem areas. The American public overwhelmingly wants voter ID, as other countries have, but this is a topic not entertained by one side of the political aisle. Or rather, by the party leaders—- the majority of their voters want voter ID, but the party won’t pursue it! We can’t just shrug these things off. They are real. I’d say there is enough to see here that more scrutiny is warranted. It should be bipartisan.
    - hackyhacky 13d ago
      > I am asserting that errors happened. Errors are not fraud. The current push by the Trump administration is (allegedly) about fraud. > The American public overwhelmingly wants voter ID, as other countries have, but this is a topic not entertained by one side of the political aisle. It's entertained if you can do it fairly. "Fairly" means everyone gets an ID automatically. Why do Republicans oppose given legal voters ID so that they can vote?
      - RickJWagner 13d ago
        I don’t oppose that. What makes you think all Republicans would? I want every single voter to have access to their vote, and I want strict proof that every vote cast was the knowledgeable will of that voter ( and only that voter. I’m thinking of ballot dumps at collection boxes here. ) The distinction between fraud and error doesn’t matter to me. The system has problems, ineligible voters have been casting votes. Nobody should oppose efforts to fix it.
        hackyhacky 13d ago
        > I don’t oppose that. What makes you think all Republicans would? Because your elected GOP representatives consistently vote against it, when universally available ID is presented by Democrats as a condition for voter ID laws. Do you have a plausible explanation for why GOP Congressmen would reject that proposal? I sure do. > Nobody should oppose efforts to fix it. First you have to prove that there is a problem to fix. Fraud, as we've covered, has never been shown to be a significant issue, and software bugs, as I noted, are not cured by invasive and illegal USPS tactics. So what in your view could possibly be fixed by this latest move?

RickJWagner 13d ago

New Jersey had 6600 hundred non citizens get ballots. If you were writing software, would you overlook a problem like that? https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/30/new-jerseys-noncitizen-voter-registration-brings-private-worries-into-the-open-01015840 https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/30/new-jerseys-nonciti...

hackyhacky 13d ago
> If you were writing software, would you overlook a problem like that? They didn't overlook it. They fixed the error. If you are asserting that this error was a partisan, intentional attempt to change the outcome of the election, you're going to need to provide a lot more evidence before injecting USPS into election policy makes sense.
- ModernMech 13d ago
  Moreover none of the proposed measures would have prevented that, as you said it was in fact an error. The reason why this issue is so intractable is because the level of disruption must be measured against the risk of disenfranchisement. People would be happier to implement these unneeded security measures if there was more care by those proposing them to address those ways in which legal legitimate voters would be refused a ballot. And the fact they don't ever address those concerns is the whole tell that the disenfranchisement is the point. Instead it's always bad faith "Oh you want the elections to be unsecure, you're overlooking massive security holes!" At the end of the day the biggest loudmouth in the world got people so mad about an election that they attacked the government, so then we were forced to spend years going over that election with a fine tooth comb only to turn up zilch. Even the Cyberninjas couldn't find the fraud they alleged when given direct unfettered access to voting records. And yet, we still have to entertain claims about the boogeyman of voting as if they're in good faith. Prove it in just one court under high standards of evidence! But even the biggest loudmouths saying fraud won't say it under oath in front of a judge, because they don't have the evidence to back it up. It's far past the point that noncitizens voting in elections should be considered the biggest threat to our democracy. No, the threat is an authoritarian, insurrectionist president trying to corrupt the election process.
- RickJWagner 13d ago
  I am asserting that errors happened. Invalid votes were cast, thousands more potentially could be cast. Just in one state. What about the rest? Clearly, there is potential for more problem areas. The American public overwhelmingly wants voter ID, as other countries have, but this is a topic not entertained by one side of the political aisle. Or rather, by the party leaders—- the majority of their voters want voter ID, but the party won’t pursue it! We can’t just shrug these things off. They are real. I’d say there is enough to see here that more scrutiny is warranted. It should be bipartisan.
  - hackyhacky 13d ago
    > I am asserting that errors happened. Errors are not fraud. The current push by the Trump administration is (allegedly) about fraud. > The American public overwhelmingly wants voter ID, as other countries have, but this is a topic not entertained by one side of the political aisle. It's entertained if you can do it fairly. "Fairly" means everyone gets an ID automatically. Why do Republicans oppose given legal voters ID so that they can vote?
    - RickJWagner 13d ago
      I don’t oppose that. What makes you think all Republicans would? I want every single voter to have access to their vote, and I want strict proof that every vote cast was the knowledgeable will of that voter ( and only that voter. I’m thinking of ballot dumps at collection boxes here. ) The distinction between fraud and error doesn’t matter to me. The system has problems, ineligible voters have been casting votes. Nobody should oppose efforts to fix it.
      - hackyhacky 13d ago
        > I don’t oppose that. What makes you think all Republicans would? Because your elected GOP representatives consistently vote against it, when universally available ID is presented by Democrats as a condition for voter ID laws. Do you have a plausible explanation for why GOP Congressmen would reject that proposal? I sure do. > Nobody should oppose efforts to fix it. First you have to prove that there is a problem to fix. Fraud, as we've covered, has never been shown to be a significant issue, and software bugs, as I noted, are not cured by invasive and illegal USPS tactics. So what in your view could possibly be fixed by this latest move?