this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
347 points (99.2% liked)

politics

20329 readers
4268 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 61 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Thats how they are gonna do it. The next election is going to be a sham one. They are going to rig it in their favor. Every fucking state shouls be going back to paper ballots

[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Of course the next election will be a sham. I keep asking people who think there will be legitimate elections in the U.S. from now on why the Republicans would ever give up controlling the entire federal government, "They just would" seems to be the answer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

But just legitimate-looking enough that Americans cannot seek political asylum abroad because you show up in the EU and the border agents be like "tHE uSa iS a dEMocRACy", and you get deported back to the US, and then the US border agents will refuse to recognize your citizenship, and you end up in guantanamo.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They've always been sham elections, they're just pulling down the curtains that kept most folks believing in the lie.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago

Really? This sham got both Jimmy Carter and Donald Trump in the Oval Office?

I guess the Illuminati don't have much of a plan.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The states run the elections. There is nothing stopping the states from hiring cyber security professionals to make sure their elections are secure. Most state elections are still run by very competent people who are motivated to provide a free and fair election.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

We get a "bloody kansas" moment with federal and state officials fighting each other.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

I think if the feds tried to take over elections it would just be bloody feds.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Every fucking state does have paper ballots.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Uhh, no they do not.

I have no option in Georgia for a paper ballot. I do it on a touchscreen computer each time. Yes that gets printed after i Digitally do it but not in an easy to read way. Then i put it into a bin that scans it and shreds it. No paper trail.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

The bin does not shred it.

But yeah the qr code being what’s scanned but the text being what you can read seriously compromises voter verifiability. So close, but not voter verifiable. Close enough to fool people.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

A digital that is printed and then shredded is not a paper ballot.

A paper ballot is a paper I vote on. That stays intact for historical accuracy.

From your stance I am invincible. I have not died in the last five minutes therefore i am invincible.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Well... Good then!

Seriously though, i hadnt considered that my balot gets saved even though its scanned by a machine.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

Yours does but not everywhere has a paper trail

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

As of the 2024 election all but a handful of counties in Texas and Louisiana have returned to paper. The Brennan Center for Justice estimates 98 percent of ballots were cast with paper records.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

Impressive! As the article says:

This represents an increase from 93 percent of votes four years ago.

Didn’t realize it had improved so much

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Ballots are controlled by counties. You can Google it?

[–] cyborganism 30 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (5 children)

Man I really hate these website where you have to have a subscription to read the article.

Every fucking conservative piece of shit toiletpaper rag is free, but anything to the left of these whether it's liberal or even socialist is all pay to read.

Here's the archive.org version: https://web.archive.org/web/20250215031214/https://www.wired.com/story/cisa-election-security-freeze-memo/

EDIT:

FUUUUUUU even the archive.org version has this javascript shit that hides the article. wtf!!!

EDIT2:

I added an extension to disable javascript for specific websites and I can now read it.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Every fucking conservative piece of shit toiletpaper rag is free, but anything to the left of these whether it's liberal or even socialist is all pay to read.

Did you consider that it might be because one is actual journalism and thus requires a lot of time and effort to perform, while the other one is petulant, bigoted crying in a way that a high schooler could write with zero or minimal fact-checking in 20 minutes?

[–] cyborganism 12 points 5 days ago

Yes of course. Doesn't mean we shouldn't have access to that information.

Where I live, (Québec) we have LaPresse, LeDevoir, LaTribune/LeSoleil/LeQuotidien/etc which are an information coop, which are all free but have the option to have a paid subscription or rather to support the paper. There's also tons of special federal and provincial measures to financially support journalism in Canada.

But I forget this is the US.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago

And, obviously, the parasitic "elites" are now than happy to sink whatever costs are necessary to spread their fear based propaganda.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That’s because their interests align with the mega-rich. They can afford to give away content and hire interns to sexually harass. Honest orgs have little funding by comparison.

[–] cyborganism 2 points 4 days ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

Use archive.is

way better than archive.org

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

FYI, uBlock with Annoyances: EasyList - Annoyances enabled did the trick for me.

I was generally happy with uBlock before, but then I found the dashboard and checked all the boxes for Annoyances and oh man! So much better!

Edit: Oh, bit thank you for the warning! You know, when I was younger I honestly thought the HTML tag was the worst...I kinda miss it now, isn't that fucked up?! But, I mean, in comparison...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

I was generally happy with uBlock before, but then I found the dashboard and checked all the boxes for Annoyances and oh man! So much better!

So... can you hook a guy up with info on this?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] cyborganism 2 points 4 days ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago

Ahh, typical MAGAt logic. Our elections are corrupt... So of course that means we have to remove the departments that ensure integrity in our elections.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

What, they put him in jail? How was he forced?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

They probably locked him out of computer systems and stopped paying him. That's pretty forceful.

[–] cyborganism 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I didn't read anything about putting anyone in jail or being arrested. Where did you see this?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago

If he's not in jail, then he should continue supervising elections.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 days ago

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has frozen all of its election security work and is reviewing everything it has done to help state and local officials secure their elections for the past eight years, WIRED has learned. The move represents the first major example of the country’s cyberdefense agency accommodating President Donald Trump’s false claims of election fraud and online censorship.

In a memo sent Friday to all CISA employees and obtained by WIRED, CISA’s acting director, Bridget Bean, said she was ordering “a review and assessment” of every position at the agency related to election security and countering mis- and disinformation, “as well as every election security and [mis-, dis-, and malinformation] product, activity, service, and program that has been carried out” since the federal government designated election systems as critical infrastructure in 2017.

“CISA will pause all elections security activities until the completion of this review,” Bean added. The agency is also cutting off funding for these activities at the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing & Analysis Center, a group funded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that has served as a coordinating body for the elections community.

In her memo, Bean confirmed that CISA had, as first reported by Politico, placed employees “initially identified to be associated with the elections security activities and the MDM program” on administrative leave on February 7.

“It is necessary to rescope the agency's election security activities to ensure CISA is focused exclusively on executing its cyber and physical security mission,” she told employees in the memo.

While Bean is temporarily leading CISA, she is officially the agency’s executive director, its top career position. CISA’s first director created the executive-director role to provide continuity during political transitions. Previously, Bean was a Trump appointee at the Federal Emergency Management Agency during his first term.

In justifying CISA’s internal review, which will conclude on March 6, Bean pointed to Trump’s January 20 executive order on “ending federal censorship.” Conservatives have argued that CISA censored their speech by coordinating with tech companies to identify online misinformation in 2020, during the final year of Trump’s first term. CISA has denied conducting any censorship, and the US Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit over the government’s work. But in the wake of the backlash, CISA halted most conversations with tech platforms about online mis- and disinformation.

CISA and DHS did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Since 2017, state and local election officials have relied on CISA’s expertise and resources—as well as its partnerships with other agencies—to improve their physical and digital security. Through on-site consultations and online guidance, CISA has helped election administrators secure voting infrastructure against hackers, harden polling places against active shooters, and create polling-place backup plans to deal with ballot shortages or power outages.

Election supervisors have always struggled to overcome serious funding challenges, but in recent years, their jobs have become even more stressful as intense voter scrutiny has given way to harassment and even death threats. Election officials of both parties have repeatedly praised CISA for its apolitical support of their work, saying the agency’s recommendations and free security services have been critical in boosting their own efforts.

But that bipartisan accord began fraying after the 2020 election, as some conservative election officials started criticizing the agency for its focus on mis- and disinformation. Congressional Republicans joined the fray as well, calling CISA “the nerve center of the federal government’s domestic surveillance and censorship operations on social media.” Their rhetoric echoed Trump’s own history of election denialism, which involved false claims of rigged voting machines and mass voter fraud and culminated in Trump supporters’ January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

With conservatives pushing to axe CISA’s election security mission, Trump’s election last November virtually guaranteed an end to that program, and employees have been bracing for retaliation against the people who participated in that work.

Bean’s memo indicates that CISA’s internal review will cover every agency position related to election security, as well as performance plans for employees involved in that work; all support services provided to the election community; and all election security guidance and publications. Bean wrote that CISA will describe any steps necessary to “correct any activities identified as past misconduct by the Federal Government related to censorship of protected speech,” including eliminating programs or roles.

After CISA completes its review, the agency will submit a report to the White House addressing how it plans to “deliver a more focused provision of services for elections security activities,” Bean told employees. The report will focus on three goals: streamlining the election security services that CISA offers to state and local governments, ensuring that its activities align with its new “mandate to refocus” on its core mission, and removing “all personnel, contracts, grants, programs, products, services, and activities” that conflict with Trump’s anti-censorship directive or exceed CISA’s authorities.

It is unclear if White House officials or DHS secretary Kristi Noem directly ordered Bean to launch the election security investigation or if she independently determined that Trump’s executive order necessitated it. The January 20 directive does instruct the attorney general to work with other agency leaders to investigate Biden-administration activities that are “inconsistent” with Trump’s vow to end online censorship, but it makes no mention of activities prior to Biden’s term, including CISA’s 2020 election work.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 days ago

"Efficiency"