108

It was that speech where a female from CA I think told him "see you in court" around 22nd Feb, and this was regarding trans' rights I believe.

I watched some of it live. He talked about lots of things and said he wants to ban all voting booths and have paper ballots and that (in his typical self) "there won't be cheating, they have advanced technology, really advanced stuff. It's called... "watermark". It's really great".

Combined with the accusations that there were indeed cheating by paper ballots for some states, it's kinda the smoking gun that would mean he perhaps shouldn't be president?

Why is no one here talking about this? Why is no one outraged?

all 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 46 points 4 months ago

I never got how the hell the US ever accepted electronic voting machines without the software being completely out in the open. I do not oppose paper ballots, I do oppose for obvious reasons not being able to do your vote in secrecy

[-] Today@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Were the voting machines supposed to be an answer to hanging chads?

[-] einkorn@feddit.org 42 points 4 months ago

+1 for paper ballots (relevant xkcd )

-9999 for banning voting booths

[-] towerful@programming.dev 13 points 4 months ago

If the postal service isn't a political target, then post voting is excellent.
Ballots can be mailed weeks in advance, they can be collected by a deadline, they can then be counted.
But we've seen Americas right wing go after USPS, so - quite frankly - I don't see any way it is as fool-proof as in-person voting.
Voting day needs to be a holiday, or employers need to give PTO for voting.

None of which will happen.
Voting booths will be banned.
USPS will be compromised/defunded to the point it can't carry out it's duties.
Only the people that can schedule the time with Electoral College personnel will be able to actually register a vote.

[-] einkorn@feddit.org 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I am not 100 % sure I understand your point here. Using paper ballots doesn't mean you have to submit your vote via mail. You can still use local polling stations.

I assume you are from the US, so here is what we do in Germany:

  • You are notified via mail of the upcoming election you are eligible to take part in (No special registration required, only the usual registry with the municipality if you move to a new place)
  • Option A: You opt in for a (paper) mail ballot
    • You receive a ballot via mail that you fill out and then double wrap the ballot: The ballot goes into an official unmarked envelope that is later placed with every other mail-in ballot of the district. The unmarked enveloped goes into a regular envelope for transportation via mail (which is free of charge)
  • Option B: On the day of the election, you head to your assigned local polling station
    • You identify yourself by one of the official forms (Personal ID, driving licence, passport)
    • You are handed a blank paper ballot (example from northern Germany)
    • You make your choice behind a privacy screen
      • Law declares that the head of the local election council has to be able to view both the booth and the voter (but of course not the vote) except in some special circumstances.
    • The ballot is then placed in a sealed urn
    • After the deadline at 18:00 the urn is unsealed and votes are counted
      • Critically: This counting is public. While not many people do, it is explicitly allowed to watch the officials at this stage
    • After tallying the votes, the ballots are bundled up, sealed and handed to the officials on the municipality level.

One of the many issues with electronic voting are those last two steps: Examining the votes can never be public, as we are simply unable to look at the state of all electrons in a computer.

[-] Aux@feddit.uk 1 points 4 months ago

There are no issues with electronic voting.

[-] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago

No, from the UK.
I don't understand how the US can want to have 100% paper ballots, but ban voting booths (which to me means, in person voting). This essentially leaves postal voting.
And USPS has been repeatedly targeted by right wing politics.

What kind of paper voting system is left without in-person, if USPS is compromised?

President Donald Trump on Friday [21st Feb 2025, I think] said he may put the U.S. Postal Service under the control of the Commerce Department in what would be an executive branch takeover of the agency, which has operated as an independent entity since 1970. https://apnews.com/article/trump-postal-service-usps-what-to-know-672db6c590837411ca3ba36966e374e1

So paper votes only, no voting booths... Leave postal votes. And the government controls the postal service.
What else is there?

[-] vonbaronhans@midwest.social 2 points 4 months ago

I'll be the first to admit I have no idea what my Chucklefuck in Chief means by trying to get rid of voting booths.

But if I had to guess, I think he means literally the booths. As in, no privacy. Just paper on a desk where anyone can see what you're doing.

If it isn't clear, this fucker has no idea what a free and fair election is SUPPOSED to look like. He just wants to make sure whatever system we end up with favors him and him alone. And for some reason, voting booths are catching his ire. Maybe he feels insecure not knowing if Melania actually voted for him.

[-] Tuuktuuk@sopuli.xyz 24 points 4 months ago

Paper ballots make cheating much more difficult than electronic ones do. I'm not sure why Trump demands paper ballots, but in my opinion they are the only sensible option.

Where I live, all elections are always strictly 100 % paper ballots, and it is isn't really a problem. Yeah, you need people to count them, but those people are reasonably easy to find. And the ballot counting scales easily from a few hundred votes to several hundred millions of votes.

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Sounds great till you live somewhere like Texas where they have closed down large swaths of places to vote and you have to drive and/or wait hours outside in the hot sun. And they don't allow organizations to pass out bottled water.

[-] zonnewin@feddit.nl 10 points 4 months ago

That just means they need to open more places to vote. One shouldn't have to go far or wait more than a few minutes in order to vote. That the US allows these scandalous practices is beyond belief.

[-] Bunbury@feddit.nl 7 points 4 months ago

Problem is that lack of places to vote isn’t a bug. It’s a feature. It means people who don’t have access to transport or who have do work during the day have a more difficult time voting. Not everyone has the time to drive somewhere and then stand in line for hours. Republicans have used this as one of their techniques to discourage certain groups of people from voting at all.

[-] zonnewin@feddit.nl 2 points 4 months ago

And I don't understand why anyone is allowing them to do this. It's clearly anti-democratic abuse.

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

That just means they need to open more places to vote.

Better chance of winning the lottery a few times.

One shouldn't have to go far or wait more than a few minutes in order to vote.

In a fair and just system you would be correct. Not in America.

That the US allows these scandalous practices is beyond belief.

Did you see the piece of shit half of US voters thought "that'll do"? We have nearly half a billion guns but not enough brain cells to best an ameoba in a kindergarten trivia contest.

[-] zonnewin@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

You are right, of course. But that is deeply concerning.

[-] Tuuktuuk@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 months ago

I don't think it matters whether after those hours of travelling and queuing you need to press buttons on a touch screen or scribble two or three numbers on a piece of paper.

Neither case makes the drive any shorter.

[-] Xanza@lemm.ee 14 points 4 months ago

Because old people welcome it, regardless of how difficult it would be for everyone, and young people don't vote.

[-] adespoton@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 months ago

Because he’s flooded public discourse with plenty of other things people are outraged over?

[-] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 7 points 4 months ago

I'm actually for paper voting. The largest producer of voting machines in the US (ES&S) got in trouble in 2019 for having their voting machines connected to the internet with remote access software installed, denied it, and then later admitted that it was true for at least some of their machines.

Also their CEO insists that even when using voting machines, that there needs to be a paper record of every vote cast for it to be trustworthy and verifiable.

[-] don@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Shit, paper ballots are EZPZ af here in WA. You get your ballot pamphlet mailed way ahead of time to look up anything you want (and cross check online). Then your ballot arrives, you ostensibly fill out (or don’t, I’m not the boss of you), and mail it right back. Even comes with a tracking code.

No idea why I’d trade that for actually going to some place just to hope that the software devs didn’t back door the voting machine.

E: that said, I’ve heard that Estonia has (had?) electronic voting nailed down, so maybe they don’t have worry about the corruption we do in the states.

[-] HowRu68@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Sorry, wrong community. Better use " no stupid question " or "politics" .

this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2025
108 points (100.0% liked)

World News

48643 readers
2242 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS