[luxuryballs]

Well there's obviously at least some amount of fraud and a lot of people with eyes on it so finding it seems like the best course of action at the moment, mostly due to the latter since millions of people trusting the elections is pretty important AND if they are verifiably secure it prevents people from running their mouth about it and swaying anyone to distrust them (had to get ahead of it).

But really if you compare the US with the first country your mind thinks of when you think if trustworthy elections we have a long way to go and spending money and time looking for the weak spots is the correct start.

This is an example of the minimum viable amount of effort that should go into this:

"Belgium who was little known that time received more votes than mathematically predicted. So the members of the counting authority took out the magnetic cards and started counting again. After several hours they found that the vote total for every candidate was exactly the same before except for Maria Vindevogel. For Maria Vindevogel, the number of recounted vote was less than the original by 4096 number of votes. How this inflation in votes becomes possible even? What went wrong? Computer experts were brought in to run extensive tests to check the programme. They combed through the code but no bug was detected. Then they tested the hardware again and again."

https://scotopia.in/journal/journalbkend/paper_list/v-4-i-1(...

[HEmanZ]

So much of this noise tho bakes in the assumption that we weren’t already doing voter fraud detection. If my parents are a decent gauge, this is the entire lie the right wing is trying to push: that there has never been rails against voter fraud. That there isn’t a massive amount of machinery already preventing it. And, by acting like “oh now we’re doing something” and ignoring prior work it allows them to put on a captivating dog and pony show for the base that desperately wants to believe the elections are rigged.

It would be like declaring “we are taking the big step of installing smoke alarms in every school in America!” when there are already smoke alarms in every school. You just want the political noise for a base that is too dumb to realize you’re not doing anything new.

[luxuryballs]

for the sake of the smart ones can we at least check? or how much intelligence does one need in order to qualify as a citizen worthy of trustable elections?

[HEmanZ]

Did you not read the point?

We. Have. Checked. Over. And . Over. We have multiple layers of checks. We have cross checks. We already invest a ton into this.

You are proving my example by presupposing there are no checks and that investigations never happen. You are the person saying “please think of the children and install smoke detectors” when they are already installed.

[blooalien]

> for the sake of the smart ones can we at least check?

>> You are proving my example by presupposing there are no checks and that investigations never happen. You are the person saying “please think of the children and install smoke detectors” when they are already installed.

I think they're saying "Can we at least check the batteries in the smoke detectors to be sure everything's cool there?" without taking into account that in addition to there already being smoke detectors with batteries, there's also already multiple layers of maintenance schedule and checks in place to ensure that they always have a fresh battery and regular testing to ensure they function as expected.

[HEmanZ]

Motte and Bailey.

That again presupposes no one is or has done that.

It’s like “I declare we need to check the batteries and maintenance!” because the previous maintenance reports didn’t show as many busted alarms as you want, because your ego is tied to the idea that the smoke alarms don’t work.