Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (222046)	1/7/2022 10:32:05 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 354242

>> We start with you having criticized people for voting by paper rather than by computer The point is if you cannot manage voting fairly, legally, and securely on paper than you are compelled to do something different. As systems go, this one is not complex. I'm not criticizing "people" for voting by paper. I'm criticizing systems that are so fucking archaic that it is necessary. Where else do we do that in our lives today. At the DMV? At the drugstore? At the local restaurant? Why are we in a sea of great technology that can process millions of transactions per second with ease, do this stuff by hand? I don't see that voting machines are any improvement at all. >> We start with you having criticized people for voting by paper rather than by computer and my having criticized you for a false dichotomy given that computer voting is not an available choice. When I see a problem, I instantly question why the problem exists. Sorry, it is my MO. >> Which I watched. It was funny. It's old. I had seen it before. Didn't hear "democratic norms." Didn't hear anything that had anything to do with signatures or computers. Didn't hear anything that had anything to do with voting at all. What you witnessed was me throwing up my hands and saying, "You cannot just ignore half the voters in the country, who believe with good cause that the election was stolen." And yesterday's ridiculous display was one more example of it. It was absurd. When you steal an election, you can't just say, "Oh, it never happened". You alienate the people from whom you stole it either forever or until there is some reasonable action taken that prevents it from happening again at the very least. >> The only question I heard was "what, are we going to not think?" I'm sorry, but Peterson is the most articulate speaker in the business today. And the smartest. If you didn't take away an understanding of his message, I recogonize my limitations and I know I can't help.

To: Lane3 who wrote (222046)	1/7/2022 11:01:13 AM
From: CentralParkRanger	4 Recommendations Recommended By bentway Brumar89 combjelly Terry Maloney Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 354242

All these suggestions to create software system that will be fool-proof and fraud-proof are just stupid and unrealistic. Yes, such a system may be created, and it may be reliable and not very expensive, but: How do you supposed to have national electronic voting system in a country that does not have a national voting system at all? According to US Constitution, all the elections, including presidential one, are given to states and govern by states' rules and laws. Would all states agree to national electronic system? No way. Forget about it. USA is an only democratic country in the world where elections run by partisan states administrations, and people who run elections may be also on ballots. People who are counting ballots have their names on these ballots. Remember Florida 2000 where Governor was Bush's brother and secretary of state was on ballot. Yes, according to Constitution, elections must be based on trust. But we have a powerful propaganda machine that spent more than a year trying to destroy this trust. Thanks to Trump and i-node nobody will ever trust any elections results, even the perfectly clean ones.