9581
Comments (756)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
8
T__X 8 points ago +8 / -0

This analysis needs to be run on every significant election back several years.

Anyone found to have had this "elect" them needs to be absolutely hounded out of public office. Forced to resign immediately.

14
deleted 14 points ago +14 / -0
6
T__X 6 points ago +6 / -0

Same here. And I think that feeling of physical sickness is just a temporary sensory overload from the sudden combination of:

  • disgust at realization of what they have been doing
  • excitement at the realization that people are starting to wake up to realize it
  • fear/dread at the realization of the mess/trouble it is going to take/cause to address it...
1
polyglot 1 point ago +1 / -0

Me except the last part! I don't understand why blockchain couldn't be used to enhance chain-of-custody issues. Mail-in ballots should absolutely have some sort of identifier to verify when it was sent out, etc. I would really like to know how states like Florida do it.

1
polyglot 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ah, right! I forgot you don't need the actual ballots which will be gone. If the data is still out there which it should be, great! Granted, this was a state where you had straight-ticket and individual options. In Texas, for example, that is no longer the case. I'd LOVE to see that.

2
T__X 2 points ago +2 / -0

I suspect with a modification of the analysis you could still see the effect in places that don't have the separate straight/individual options. If you iteratively compare the performance of each candidate in a head-to-head race vs their party's overall performance as the denominator, the ramp-function factor I think would still show up wherever it had been used (just maybe not quite as starkly strikingly clear).

1
polyglot 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thank you for that - yes, sounds good!