Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Another somewhat breathless article positing a planned executive-branch takeover of elections, this time declaring a "national emergency".

Another somewhat breathless article positing a planned executive-branch takeover of elections, this time declaring a "national emergency".

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
11 Posts 4 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    mattblaze@federate.social
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Another somewhat breathless article positing a planned executive-branch takeover of elections, this time declaring a "national emergency".

    There's no telling what Trump might include in an executive order, but whether he can actually carry any of these sweeping proposals out (constitutionality aside) is another story altogether.

    The midterms are less than 9 months away, which is simply not enough time to extensively alter voting tech or procedures.

    https://wapo.st/3N5cpEn

    mattblaze@federate.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
    1
    0
    • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

      Another somewhat breathless article positing a planned executive-branch takeover of elections, this time declaring a "national emergency".

      There's no telling what Trump might include in an executive order, but whether he can actually carry any of these sweeping proposals out (constitutionality aside) is another story altogether.

      The midterms are less than 9 months away, which is simply not enough time to extensively alter voting tech or procedures.

      https://wapo.st/3N5cpEn

      mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
      mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
      mattblaze@federate.social
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      The supposed draft order (which apparently was written by MAGA activists, not the WH itself) calls for eliminating "voting machines" and no-excuse mail-in voting. "Voting machines" isn't defined, but presumably means electronic ballot tabulators, which are used in some form almost everywhere. And mail-in voting has become either the primary voting method or a very popular one in many states.

      mattblaze@federate.socialM johnmashey@mstdn.socialJ 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

        The supposed draft order (which apparently was written by MAGA activists, not the WH itself) calls for eliminating "voting machines" and no-excuse mail-in voting. "Voting machines" isn't defined, but presumably means electronic ballot tabulators, which are used in some form almost everywhere. And mail-in voting has become either the primary voting method or a very popular one in many states.

        mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
        mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
        mattblaze@federate.social
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        Anyway, I don't think wild arm-flapping is a particularly useful response to this nonsense. Better, I think, to respond to specific proposals and orders rather than vague right-wing wish lists.

        jalefkowit@vmst.ioJ mattblaze@federate.socialM 2 Replies Last reply
        1
        0
        • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

          Anyway, I don't think wild arm-flapping is a particularly useful response to this nonsense. Better, I think, to respond to specific proposals and orders rather than vague right-wing wish lists.

          jalefkowit@vmst.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jalefkowit@vmst.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jalefkowit@vmst.io
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          @mattblaze Yeah. My first thought is that this plot (if a plot it is) has dropped at a really weird time: too late to ride on Trump's immediate post-election seeming invulnerability; too soon to work as an excuse to occupy polling places at the last minute by surprise.

          Of course all the people involved in these things are totally incompetent, so you can't rule out that they wanted it to come sooner or later but couldn't get their act together to make it happen

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

            Anyway, I don't think wild arm-flapping is a particularly useful response to this nonsense. Better, I think, to respond to specific proposals and orders rather than vague right-wing wish lists.

            mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
            mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
            mattblaze@federate.social
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that there *are* real risks involving electronic vote tabulators, but also that there are statistically rigorous, efficient methods for assuring high-integrity elections even when untrustworthy technology is compromised. Search "risk-limiting audits" for details.

            mattblaze@federate.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

              I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that there *are* real risks involving electronic vote tabulators, but also that there are statistically rigorous, efficient methods for assuring high-integrity elections even when untrustworthy technology is compromised. Search "risk-limiting audits" for details.

              mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
              mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
              mattblaze@federate.social
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              As to the substance of Trump's claims about the 2020 election: there are technical weaknesses in parts of US election infrastructure, but there is simply no evidence that any US election outcome has been altered through them. And none of these proposed "safeguards" being floated by the administration actually addresses real problems that elections have. But imposing them would cause significant disruption. (Whether that is an intended outcome is a question I can't answer.)

              hyc@mastodon.socialH 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

                The supposed draft order (which apparently was written by MAGA activists, not the WH itself) calls for eliminating "voting machines" and no-excuse mail-in voting. "Voting machines" isn't defined, but presumably means electronic ballot tabulators, which are used in some form almost everywhere. And mail-in voting has become either the primary voting method or a very popular one in many states.

                johnmashey@mstdn.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                johnmashey@mstdn.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                johnmashey@mstdn.social
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                @mattblaze
                Yes. I doubt that anyone who’s had mail-in voting would be real happy giving it up.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • mattblaze@federate.socialM mattblaze@federate.social

                  As to the substance of Trump's claims about the 2020 election: there are technical weaknesses in parts of US election infrastructure, but there is simply no evidence that any US election outcome has been altered through them. And none of these proposed "safeguards" being floated by the administration actually addresses real problems that elections have. But imposing them would cause significant disruption. (Whether that is an intended outcome is a question I can't answer.)

                  hyc@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                  hyc@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                  hyc@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  @mattblaze given the specificity of the measures, and the inevitability of their impact, you're not even willing to opine on the intent behind them?

                  It seems like saying "here's a living person, they're proposing to administer cyanide to them. This will be highly disruptive but I can't say if that's their intent."

                  mattblaze@federate.socialM hyc@mastodon.socialH 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • hyc@mastodon.socialH hyc@mastodon.social

                    @mattblaze given the specificity of the measures, and the inevitability of their impact, you're not even willing to opine on the intent behind them?

                    It seems like saying "here's a living person, they're proposing to administer cyanide to them. This will be highly disruptive but I can't say if that's their intent."

                    mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mattblaze@federate.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    @hyc I guess I’m just not very good at mind reading.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • hyc@mastodon.socialH hyc@mastodon.social

                      @mattblaze given the specificity of the measures, and the inevitability of their impact, you're not even willing to opine on the intent behind them?

                      It seems like saying "here's a living person, they're proposing to administer cyanide to them. This will be highly disruptive but I can't say if that's their intent."

                      hyc@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                      hyc@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                      hyc@mastodon.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #10

                      @mattblaze one has to wonder:
                      is there any possibility of a beneficial impact of their proposals?
                      is there any possibility they are unaware of the negative impact?

                      When both of those are vanishingly small, there's little else left to conclude.

                      mattblaze@federate.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • hyc@mastodon.socialH hyc@mastodon.social

                        @mattblaze one has to wonder:
                        is there any possibility of a beneficial impact of their proposals?
                        is there any possibility they are unaware of the negative impact?

                        When both of those are vanishingly small, there's little else left to conclude.

                        mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                        mattblaze@federate.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                        mattblaze@federate.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #11

                        @hyc I said what I said, based on the information that I have. I hope this background information and context is helpful to some. My speculation on anything else is no more or less valid than anyone else’s, and so I see no particular reason to include it.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups