Comment

Comment on Does the US really have no instruments in case a newly elected president immediatelly and openly exposes he's a nazi?

dragonfucker@lemmy.nz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

But the people in charge didn’t check. Harris was told to ask for a recount, and she didn’t.

If the people responsible for security won’t do their due diligence, drag is going to play it safe and assume they fucked up.

Sort:hotnew top

merc@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
How do you know that the people in charge didn’t check? Just because there wasn’t a big announcement doesn’t mean that there weren’t sanity checks done on the process. It’s likely that was done and that the results seemed to be legit, so there was no need to do more.

source
- dragonfucker@lemmy.nz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  
  How do you know that the people in charge didn’t check?
  
  Because the letter we both read says so:
  
  Audits will be conducted in some of the most scrutinized states, but in key states they will not be conducted in a timely way that could reveal any concerns with the vote count. In addition, in most states the audits are insufficiently rigorous to ensure any potential errors in tabulation will be caught and corrected, and they cannot be considered a safeguard against the security breaches that have occurred.
  
  Given these facts, the only guarantee for rigorous, effective audits of the vote in the swing states will be through candidate-requested statewide hand recounts.
  
  source
  - merc@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    There’s a difference between an “audit” and a basic sanity check. You wouldn’t do an audit unless there was strong evidence there is something worth auditing.
    
    source