The Orange Man. He's bad. Very, very bad!

[Froggy]

"The Complaint comes nowhere close to meeting this daunting
standard. It alleges no facts which, if proven by clear and convincing evidence, would show that
Sidney Powell knew her statements were false (assuming that they were indeed false, which
Defendants dispute). Nor have Plaintiffs alleged any facts showing that Powell “in fact entertained
serious doubts as to the truth of h[er] publication.” In fact, she believed the allegations then and
she believes them now"

And from P41 you left out:
"The statements at issue fit precisely in this mold. They all concern the 2020 presidential
election, which was both bitter and controversial. Indeed, the very first statement attributed to
Powell is from November 8, 2020, during an appearance on the Fox News program Sunday
Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. Compl. at ¶ 181(b). As the screen-capture reproduced in
the Complaint makes abundantly clear, her appearance there was to discuss the topic “Trump Team
Set To File New Lawsuits Over Balloting”

The complaint by Dominion is based on what she's said about the evidence not on the evidence.

[Madmya]

A lot of people in the US are losing their shit about having to have ID to vote, I don't understand why this is a bad thing. Anyone?

[Hercy]

Because in many states obtaining an ID isn't free, and 50 years ago the US amended their Constitution to outlaw poll taxes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fo ... nstitution

[unfnknblvbl]

A lot of people in the US are losing their shit about having to have ID to vote, I don't understand why this is a bad thing. Anyone?

Also, VoterID is separate from say, a driver's license. Then there's the fact that voter registration in the USA is controlled by the state. So if there's a Republican party in power, they'll invariably gerrymander districts and registration requirements to ensure that the other guys don't get a look in. And vice-versa.

The US electoral system is just nuts from tip to root.

[Madmya]

Calling it a poll tax seems like a stretch. Do we really believe conservatives are this sinister and evil? It's like people believe they are actually the devil incarnate.

We've had two elections in a row where the result hasn't been accepted by everyone, that's bad. Election integrity is high on the agenda right now, and giving someone 4 years to get a bloody ID is not a big ask. We should be going down the same road.

[unfnknblvbl]

Calling it a poll tax seems like a stretch.

Yeah, but you know how these things work. Any kind of money paid to a government authority counts as tax if you really really want it to.

Do we really believe conservatives are this sinister and evil? It's like people believe they are actually the devil incarnate.

given that they want to make it a crime to give food or water to somebody waiting in line to vote...?

We've had two elections in a row where the result hasn't been accepted by everyone, that's bad. Election integrity is high on the agenda right now, and giving someone 4 years to get a bloody ID is not a big ask. We should be going down the same road.

Why? Why should either country go down the road of VoterID? There's literally no evidence of widespread voter fraud in either country. The only thing undermining confidence in the USA elections is the USA themselves. Look at the last election, where the Republicans were demanding that counting of votes stop before all legally cast votes were counted, just because they were ahead. In a system where every vote is supposed to count, that's not how that works. Or the election before, where the guy that lost the popular vote won due to an archaic system dating to a time when people got around in horse and buggies, and only property owners could cast a vote (in public, mind you).

If anything, the USA should be copying the AEC. They desperately need a nonpartisan, non-commercial electoral body to oversee this shit. As shitty as I think our electoral system is every three years, every four years I freaking love it

[Madmya]

Do we really believe conservatives are this sinister and evil? It's like people believe they are actually the devil incarnate.

given that they want to make it a crime to give food or water to somebody waiting in line to vote...?

Haha yeah I've seen this freedom valiantly argued on the interwebs and it's a bit baffling to me. It does seem a bit heavy handed, but not being able to have a sandwich or a drink of water in line... who cares? You're there to vote. Or is it scientifically proven that republican voters are better at staying hydrated for longer?

We've had two elections in a row where the result hasn't been accepted by everyone, that's bad. Election integrity is high on the agenda right now, and giving someone 4 years to get a bloody ID is not a big ask. We should be going down the same road.

Why? Why should either country go down the road of VoterID? There's literally no evidence of widespread voter fraud in either country. The only thing undermining confidence in the USA elections is the USA themselves. Look at the last election, where the Republicans were demanding that counting of votes stop before all legally cast votes were counted, just because they were ahead. In a system where every vote is supposed to count, that's not how that works. Or the election before, where the guy that lost the popular vote won due to an archaic system dating to a time when people got around in horse and buggies, and only property owners could cast a vote (in public, mind you).

If anything, the USA should be copying the AEC. They desperately need a nonpartisan, non-commercial electoral body to oversee this shit. As shitty as I think our electoral system is every three years, every four years I freaking love it

Oh screw going down the road of the US electoral system. Each state having their own system is part of the problem.

Anyway, as I said we've had two elections in a row where the result hasn't been trusted and there have been subsequent problems. Regardless of whether there was fraud or not, it's paramount that people believe their elections were fair. I'm not saying widespread fraud took place, but just because none was found doesn't mean none happened. I personally know of fraudulent votes in our plebiscite and there is no way they will know about it even if it were investigated. So it can happen. Deciding the leadership of your country should be fucking tight. We already know of the CCP inserting people in our political system, you just need one dirty operative to get to preselection then you only have to concentrate on that one electorate to get them in power.

[unfnknblvbl]

Do we really believe conservatives are this sinister and evil? It's like people believe they are actually the devil incarnate.

given that they want to make it a crime to give food or water to somebody waiting in line to vote...?

Haha yeah I've seen this freedom valiantly argued on the interwebs and it's a bit baffling to me. It does seem a bit heavy handed, but not being able to have a sandwich or a drink of water in line... who cares? You're there to vote. Or is it scientifically proven that republican voters are better at staying hydrated for longer?

The problem is just how long people are forced to wait in line to vote in the USA. The districts are so gerrymandered that ones of the opposing team are fewer polling places, and the system is completely rigged to discourage "certain people" from voting. So in poor districts in Georgia with thousands of low-income voters, they have to potentially take a day off work to stand in line to vote, since election day is not on a Sunday or public holiday for some stupid reason. And then in many cases, their vote is not actually cast until the polling booth is officially closed. Something the Republicans argue tooth and nail against (when it's to their advantage, of course).

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/92452767 ... polling-pl

Oh screw going down the road of the US electoral system. Each state having their own system is part of the problem.

Anyway, as I said we've had two elections in a row where the result hasn't been trusted and there have been subsequent problems. Regardless of whether there was fraud or not, it's paramount that people believe their elections were fair.

What doesn't help is Americans being... Americans. One of their largest news networks running the whole "stop the steal" line last election, and perpetrating the idiotic lie that there was widespread voter fraud in that one and the last one. At least the liberal side of things had a legitimate axe to grind, seeing as they lost, despite winning the popular vote by a substantial margin. But of course, Trump is far too vain to concede even that small defeat, so he went on the warpath about fraudulent votes tipping Clinton over the line for that.

I'm not saying widespread fraud took place, but just because none was found doesn't mean none happened. I personally know of fraudulent votes in our plebiscite and there is no way they will know about it even if it were investigated. So it can happen.

Then... it wasn't widespread? You can't stamp out voter fraud completely, not with some easily replicated ID card or system. You could make sure people get their thumbs printed and stained with indelible ink when they cast their vote, but then you're literally no better than Afghanistan. Not saying that their way of doing things is necessarily wrong, but I can't see our conservatives liking that equivalence, let alone American ones.

Deciding the leadership of your country should be fucking tight. We already know of the CCP inserting people in our political system, you just need one dirty operative to get to preselection then you only have to concentrate on that one electorate to get them in power.

Yes, it should be tight. But we should be looking at the robustness of the whole system, not making it onerous for honest people to cast a vote. Look out! The CCP are trying to insert their people into our system! ...but let's not pay any attention to our current leaders parachuting morally bankrupt nazi apologists into positions within political parties they're not registered with, representing states they don't reside in...

[Madmya]

Ahhh this is a quoting mess.

The problem is just how long people are forced to wait in line to vote in the USA. The districts are so gerrymandered that ones of the opposing team are fewer polling places, and the system is completely rigged to discourage "certain people" from voting. So in poor districts in Georgia with thousands of low-income voters, they have to potentially take a day off work to stand in line to vote, since election day is not on a Sunday or public holiday for some stupid reason. And then in many cases, their vote is not actually cast until the polling booth is officially closed. Something the Republicans argue tooth and nail against (when it's to their advantage, of course).

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/92452767 ... polling-pl

None of these things really goes against the idea of Voter ID. Gerrymandering seems a separate issue, and one that I'm not interested in as I have no idea about the logistics. But I do know despite all of these apparent gerrymandering, Georgia still turned blue from a swathe of postal votes. Postal votes kind of makes all of your points redundant.

Oh screw going down the road of the US electoral system. Each state having their own system is part of the problem.

Anyway, as I said we've had two elections in a row where the result hasn't been trusted and there have been subsequent problems. Regardless of whether there was fraud or not, it's paramount that people believe their elections were fair.

What doesn't help is Americans being... Americans. One of their largest news networks running the whole "stop the steal" line last election, and perpetrating the idiotic lie that there was widespread voter fraud in that one and the last one. At least the liberal side of things had a legitimate axe to grind, seeing as they lost, despite winning the popular vote by a substantial margin. But of course, Trump is far too vain to concede even that small defeat, so he went on the warpath about fraudulent votes tipping Clinton over the line for that.

Trump is a dick. We all know that. I wanted Trump to win but the manner in which he conducted himself post-election has put me right off, and I'm even sympathetic with his view of why he feels the election was stolen. But has Clinton conceded victory yet? All media is complicit in the shit we have today, and Big Tech.

Then... it wasn't widespread? You can't stamp out voter fraud completely, not with some easily replicated ID card or system. You could make sure people get their thumbs printed and stained with indelible ink when they cast their vote, but then you're literally no better than Afghanistan. Not saying that their way of doing things is necessarily wrong, but I can't see our conservatives liking that equivalence, let alone American ones.

None can be found because you can't prove the votes are illegitimate, so you have no idea either way. Another reason to get an ID system.

Deciding the leadership of your country should be fucking tight. We already know of the CCP inserting people in our political system, you just need one dirty operative to get to preselection then you only have to concentrate on that one electorate to get them in power.

Yes, it should be tight. But we should be looking at the robustness of the whole system, not making it onerous for honest people to cast a vote. Look out! The CCP are trying to insert their people into our system! ...but let's not pay any attention to our current leaders parachuting morally bankrupt nazi apologists into positions within political parties they're not registered with, representing states they don't reside in...

Now THIS is classic "whataboutism". Sure, both can be issues worth worrying about. You've watered down the threat of the CCP a few times now, I unfortunately don't share those feelings.


There's a lot of quote replies but nothing even close to a compelling reason as to why voter ID shouldn't happen. Your main argument is gerrymandering, all of which seems to already be in place and was overcome in the last election via postal votes. I'm not saying that gerrymandering isn't a problem, it's just that it seems to be an issue that is mostly separate from Voter ID. And if you're going to have predominantly postal votes, voter ID is even more important. A significant portion of civilians don't trust the election process, this is important and should be bipartisan.

Edit: Ugh this post is a hot mess.

[Ambrose Burnside]

Gerrymandering seems a separate issue, and one that I'm not interested in

Then you have no real interest in ending voter fraud.

But has Clinton conceded victory yet?

Yes. The day after the election. How could you not know that?

https://www.vox.com/2016/11/9/13570328/ ... l-election

Trump is a dick. We all know that. I wanted Trump to win but the manner in which he conducted himself post-election has put me right off, and I'm even sympathetic with his view of why he feels the election was stolen.

Wat

[flipswitch]

[unfnknblvbl]

Ahhh this is a quoting mess.

Absolutely right.

So, to sum up and rebut in as few quotes as possible; VoterID goes hand in hand with voter suppression and gerrymandering in the USA. You absolutely cannot deny that those things exist and are enshrined in law there. To say that postal voting makes all my points invalid is disingenuous, as postal voting was only widespread in the 2020 election because of the pandemic. The regulations have already been wound right back in this regard, almost to where they were before the pandemic; postal/absentee votes have been all but eradicated. But still they have the whole "thou shalt not feed or water a hungry or thirsty person who is waiting to vote" law. Georgia will probably flip back in the next election as a result of these things.
Remember, the USA's early voting regulations are wack.

If you can't find widespread voter fraud because you can't verify if the votes were legitimate, but you insist on proclaiming that there was voter fraud, and so VoterID is a Good Thing™ then you might just be a weird conspiracy theorist. Instead you should probably champion actually increasing the robustness of the checks used to verify those legitimate votes and weed out illegitimate ones. After all, if your only tool is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail. It's a very McCarthyist attitude.

something something CCP

something something nazis

Now THIS is classic "whataboutism". Sure, both can be issues worth worrying about. You've watered down the threat of the CCP a few times now, I unfortunately don't share those feelings.

No, whataboutism is you dropping the CCP's-activities-in-Australia trope into a conversation only tangentially related to Australian politics. VoterID wouldn't even remotely hinder the CCP messing around. It doesn't even scratch the surface of how brazenly corrupt the political class is in either country. Voter fraud in either country a dead cat tactic; a blatant distraction, and I'm honestly surprised you've fallen for it.

My main argument against VoterID is not gerrymandering, it's that it goes hand-in-hand with voter suppression. In a state where they already do everything they can to discourage poor and black communities from voting, well, they're going to make it more onerous for people from those communities to get the ID, then keep it onerous for them to cast their vote.
And remember, this is in a country that already makes their citizens register as somebody who will vote for who they're going to vote for before they get to vote for that person they've publicly registered that they're going to vote for. Do you really think that whole scenario isn't ripe for abuse in a hyperpartisan environment? After all, what's to stop people from claiming that the VoterID system has been hacked or compromised and they'll have to tighten restrictions even further? Will you keep eating it up?

The whole idea that there's a need for VoterID is based on an outright fabrication; that there is widespread voter fraud. There is no proof, only the suggestion that it happened. The burden of proof here is firmly and squarely on the claimant. Prove that it happened, and legislate with that proof. Don't legislate based on an unfounded rumour.

My counterproposal is that the USA simply adopt the Australian model. Compulsory voting upon a single, lifetime registration (no need to declare party affiliation), and elections to be overseen by an independent, nonpartisan federal government department.

Ugh this post is a hot mess.

...yup.

[Madmya]

I knew you'd use that for a cheap shot.

VoterID goes hand in hand with voter suppression and gerrymandering in the USA.

My main argument against VoterID is not gerrymandering, it's that it goes hand-in-hand with voter suppression.

The same post!

Basically what you're saying is that black people aren't capable of getting themselves ID within 4 years. Such an onerous task! Bigotry of low expectations?

...but you insist on proclaiming that there was voter fraud

I never said this. This is all a little confusing, my main point was not about supposed voter fraud, but to increase confidence in elections and yet you're on a rant about how I'm into conspiracy theories.

No, whataboutism is you dropping the CCP's-activities-in-Australia trope into a conversation only tangentially related to Australian politics.

You said we don't need it, I just gave one reason why I thought we should. It wasn't about stopping supposed "widespread fraud" in our elections, but being ahead of the game rather than waiting for something bad to happen before we react. That's not whataboutism, that's trying to at least give a scenario where it would be useful and then you've got on about a separate issue not related to voter fraud. Come on unfunk.

[Madmya]

Gerrymandering seems a separate issue, and one that I'm not interested in

Then you have no real interest in ending voter fraud.

I'm sorry, how is gerrymandering related to voter fraud?

Edit: And yes, I'm apparently very wrong about the Clinton concession thing.

[Ambrose Burnside]

Gerrymandering seems a separate issue, and one that I'm not interested in

Then you have no real interest in ending voter fraud.

I'm sorry, how is gerrymandering related to voter fraud?

Edit: And yes, I'm apparently very wrong about the Clinton concession thing.

It's a form of disenfranchisement:

Gerrymandering also has significant effects on the representation received by voters in gerrymandered districts. Because gerrymandering can be designed to increase the number of wasted votes among the electorate, the relative representation of particular groups can be drastically altered from their actual share of the voting population. This effect can significantly prevent a gerrymandered system from achieving proportional and descriptive representation, as the winners of elections are increasingly determined by who is drawing the districts rather than the preferences of the voters.

This is actual voter fraud, not "there were so many people voting multiple times using their dead dad's second cousin's name it flipped the state" which .,. Doesn't really happen as Trump's lawyers discovered. Don't get me wrong, it'll be great if it was eliminated completely, but the real voter fraud is everything else that's causing the issues in America that an AEC type department would solve.

[unfnknblvbl]

I knew you'd use that for a cheap shot.

I'm quite capable of laughing at myself, you know. I was empathising with the hot mess of nested quotes, not commenting on the quality of your post or argument there

VoterID goes hand in hand with voter suppression and gerrymandering in the USA.

My main argument against VoterID is not gerrymandering, it's that it goes hand-in-hand with voter suppression.

The same post!

And...? It's not like I've contradicted myself there. VoterID goes hand in hand with gerrymandering and voter suppression. VoterID is a form of voter suppression. Gerrymandering is a form voter suppression. My main argument against VoterID is not gerrymandering in and of itself it's that it's an additional form of voter suppression.

Basically what you're saying is that black people aren't capable of getting themselves ID within 4 years. Such an onerous task! Bigotry of low expectations?

Uhhh.... no? What I'm saying is that the American system is incredibly heavily stacked against allowing communities of the opposing political viewpoint (regardless of colour) to both register to vote and to actually vote. Introducing yet another opportunity for people's voting rights to be curtailed is.. well it's just silly.

I never said this [that there was widespread voter fraud]. This is all a little confusing, my main point was not about supposed voter fraud, but to increase confidence in elections and yet you're on a rant about how I'm into conspiracy theories.

Apologies. What you said was "I'm not saying widespread fraud took place, but just because none was found doesn't mean none happened." and "I'm even sympathetic with his [Trump's] view of why he feels the election was stolen."
Trump claims he lost because of wide spread voter fraud, sooooo... same same but different?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You said we don't need it [VoterID in Australia], I just gave one reason why I thought we should. It wasn't about stopping supposed "widespread fraud" in our elections, but being ahead of the game rather than waiting for something bad to happen before we react. That's not whataboutism, that's trying to at least give a scenario where it would be useful and then you've got on about a separate issue not related to voter fraud. Come on unfunk.

But as I said, VoterID wouldn't do a damn thing to prevent the CCP meddling with anybody's politics. That happens at the top end of the political spectrum, not at the voter level. You can argue until the cows come home that VoterID would increase election confidence, but it just wouldn't. Trump would still be whining about votes being counted outside of prime time TV hours. People could still have their names marked off the rolls at multiple booths here. Bent vote counters could still conveniently discard votes they deem to not be legitimate. Interested parties could still coerce people to cast votes for a specific candidate (or whatever, I don't know). We'd be right back at square one in no time at all only with more onerous voting restrictions, and then what?

The thing undermining election confidence in the USA is America itself. Fox News has basically spent the last four years deepthroating Trump and amplifying his every brain fart, along with those of every other rightwing lunatic that asks to be on there (they did the same thing with W. Bush too, but they weren't quite as bad then). VoterID won't do a damn thing to stop them from sowing and amplifying discord in future elections.

The whole USA political system is just beyond hope. They're all shoved so far over to the right that they're consumed by the narcissism of small differences and the only thing you can really bet on happening is that disadvantaged communities just keep getting suppressed while the political class (on both sides) makes themselves rich off it (and not knowing when to retire, ffs).

[Madmya]

Then you have no real interest in ending voter fraud.

I'm sorry, how is gerrymandering related to voter fraud?

Edit: And yes, I'm apparently very wrong about the Clinton concession thing.

It's a form of disenfranchisement:

That's voter fraud in a very, very loose definition.

[Ambrose Burnside]

I'm sorry, how is gerrymandering related to voter fraud?

Edit: And yes, I'm apparently very wrong about the Clinton concession thing.

It's a form of disenfranchisement:

That's voter fraud in a very, very loose definition.

It's also, you know, actually real.

And it's part of a bigger picture regarding votes not counting and people being prevented to vote. Actual real shit, not dead people voting and Hugo Chavez influencing the election from beyond the grave. If you want everyone's vote to count, that's where your focus should be.

[Madmya]

And...? It's not like I've contradicted myself there. VoterID goes hand in hand with gerrymandering and voter suppression. VoterID is a form of voter suppression. Gerrymandering is a form voter suppression. My main argument against VoterID is not gerrymandering in and of itself it's that it's an additional form of voter suppression.

Got ya! I personally think it's perfectly reasonable to assume a person has ID in order to vote, it is actually free to get ID in Georgia, but one more hoop to jump through is going to weed out some - you're right about that. The question in my mind is if it's worth that price to ensure smoother elections, and for me the answer to that is yes.

Apologies. What you said was "I'm not saying widespread fraud took place, but just because none was found doesn't mean none happened." and "I'm even sympathetic with his [Trump's] view of why he feels the election was stolen."
Trump claims he lost because of wide spread voter fraud, sooooo... same same but different?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes, I can't help what conclusions you jump to.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But as I said, VoterID wouldn't do a damn thing to prevent the CCP meddling with anybody's politics. That happens at the top end of the political spectrum, not at the voter level. You can argue until the cows come home that VoterID would increase election confidence, but it just wouldn't. Trump would still be whining about votes being counted outside of prime time TV hours. People could still have their names marked off the rolls at multiple booths here. Bent vote counters could still conveniently discard votes they deem to not be legitimate. Interested parties could still coerce people to cast votes for a specific candidate (or whatever, I don't know). We'd be right back at square one in no time at all only with more onerous voting restrictions, and then what?

Man, the CCP thing was just an example. My point was to future-proof possible bad scenarios, which I know you've stated won't make a difference and I'm definitely not interested in arguing against that because I know you may well be right. But it is a little short-sighted to say someone like the CCP could only meddle at the "top end of politics", since there's been multiple instances of people in the background of politics with strong ties to the CCP.

The thing undermining election confidence in the USA is America itself. Fox News has basically spent the last four years deepthroating Trump and amplifying his every brain fart, along with those of every other rightwing lunatic that asks to be on there (they did the same thing with W. Bush too, but they weren't quite as bad then). VoterID won't do a damn thing to stop them from sowing and amplifying discord in future elections.

The whole USA political system is just beyond hope. They're all shoved so far over to the right that they're consumed by the narcissism of small differences and the only thing you can really bet on happening is that disadvantaged communities just keep getting suppressed while the political class (on both sides) makes themselves rich off it (and not knowing when to retire, ffs).

Completely agree, but I wouldn't stop at Fox News.

[Madmya]

It's a form of disenfranchisement:

That's voter fraud in a very, very loose definition.

It's also, you know, actually real.

It's also, you know, still not voter fraud.

[Peppermint Lounge]

Interesting watch.

A six-month Times investigation has synchronized and mapped out thousands of videos and police radio communications from the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, providing the most complete picture to date of what happened — and why.

[Twiztid Elf]

Phew! Thank goodness we got rid of that terrible, fascist orange man.

[Reka]

Private companies censoring people on their own platforms: sure, it's their company and their choice. Just like the baker who doesn’t want to bake a gay cake, Social Media platforms should be afforded the choice of their customers and operate their companies as they see fit.

Private companies working hand in hand with the government to censor people: hmmmm… that's the equivalent of the government censoring its citizens using the tech companies as an intermediary. Governments directing Big Tech to censor its citizens is not the free market in action. It's fascism.

Also, these Social Media platforms essentially operate as monopolies, so there aren’t really any viable alternatives for those who are censored. They're effectively silenced. And because these companies are working hand in hand with the government, the government has no interest in rectifying this monopolistic situation. In fact, it works perfectly for them and if anything they’re incentivized to prevent competition to these big companies. Not that assistance is needed, Big Tech just buy out any upcoming platforms that might possibly challenge them for market share, further solidifying their monopolistic dominance.

Ah, but I'm over-reacting. They’re only silencing disinformation. I'm sure there's never been a regime that's censored the truth to allow their own lies to flourish unchallenged. Obviously anyone who questions their truth should just be silenced for everyone's good. After all, that's how they're justifying this, right?

</rant>

[Froggy]

Imagine where we'd be right now if it were Sean Spicer casually saying he's working with Facebook and Twitter to silence anyone who is posting what the administration deems is problematic. I thought the people screaming that he was a fascist would be able to pretty easily see the behaviour they've been fantasising was possibly going to happen to them the last few years when it actually does begin to happen to them?

[Reka]