1845
1846

Unacceptable SourceArizona Secretary of State Confirms Election Fraud (socialisttimes.com)

Schwa142 が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 259
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]baconbits1792 [スコア非表示]  (117子コメント)

I don't understand how you admit there was election fraud and the refuse to allow a re-vote.

[–]Fearlessleader85 [スコア非表示]  (76子コメント)

It's not a real election. The DNC is the only one with the authority to actually allow a revote, because it's their club. The State could do whatever they want and the DNC doesn't have to do shit with it.

[–]Sanic3 [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

The Arizona primary is administered entirely by the state with no role from the party.

[–]Fearlessleader85 [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

But the party doesn't have to acknowledge it. It's run by the elections office (unlike my state), but it's entirely for the parties.

[–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

This is correct. The state is acting at the direction of the party here. The party could decide to count all votes, regardless.

[–]Fearlessleader85 [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Or count none of them. They could even just say that Arizona doesn't get any votes this year.

[–]volares [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Completely omitting AZ delegates due to misconduct at the highest levels sounds like the most reasonable approach. Far too many Americans had their votes trashed but revoting has the potential of trashing just as many peoples votes that already put forward the effort to.

[–]TuesdayAfternoonYep [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Many states had their delegates removed in 2008 - but this time we have confirmed widespread election fraud and looks like they want it to stick, lol.

[–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That would work for me, too.

[–]seamonkeydoo2 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Not a lawyer, but what you're saying makes sense. However, isn't there a great deal of public funding involved in primary elections? The state certainly has a vested interest in ensuring that money is used properly, I would think.

[–]AT-Fields [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm not sure about Arizona but in Ohio there was more than just the primaries on the ballot. Voted for local judges and a levy too.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]jdscarface [スコア非表示]  (34子コメント)

    How did we get to the point where the process of deciding the president is in control of private clubs? I don't even understand registering to vote. It's America, every citizen is supposed to have a vote without jumping through hoops.

    [–]Fearlessleader85 [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

    Without proportional representation, it guarantees a 2 party system, thanks to math.

    [–]rottenmonkey [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

    So what you're saying is that we need to get rid of math.

    [–]BakingTheCookiesRigh [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    No, just use better systems that don't force such a narrow solution.

    [–]notoneoriginalidea [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Math does have a well known liberal bias.

    [–]maurosmane [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

    This is the best idea I have heard this entire election cycle. Would you like to be VP?

    [–]kiraxa1 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Hey thats the only way that Comrade Gutman's ideas make sense, why not go for it!

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–]jryt [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

      Preferential voting would help as well.

      [–]kinradite [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

      I like approval voting. A scheme like that would bust the two-party system wide open.

      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

        [–]GORDO_WARDO [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

        For someone who can't intuitively reach that conclusion on his own, any chance you could post a source/explanation showing that?

        (I remember having seen/heard the explanation before but I forget the details)

        [–]TFSC2 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        The U.K. Does FTPT and has 3 parties.

        [–]atsugnam[🍰] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

        It's the election of the parties leader, not election of government. Many parties in many countries don't even allow the public input. In many ways it interferes with the political process because it becomes about voting for the president, which for the vast majority of voters is not who their vote is actually for.

        For examples, see the uk, and Germany, where leaders were picked after the election from party coalitions.

        [–]EgoIpse [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        Portuguese here. That is mostly incorrect. While most parties don't do this sort of mediatic open primaries (the at the time main opposition and now government party did them last year, but it was a one day voting thing), they generally do closed primaries for the militants. Furthermore, since there is little gerrymandering (we don't even have the word) and a multi-party system with no winner takes it all bs, people are very free and have plenty of option to get their voices heard.

        The american primaries are in my outsider's perspective, a lacklustre way to remedy a broken electoral system. And when that patch is shown itself to fail...

        [–]Sanity_in_Moderation [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

        How did we get to the point where the process of deciding the president is in control of private clubs?

        It began in 1792, with the founding of the Federalist party nominating John Adams as their presidential candidate. There have been 57 presidential elections, and there have been political parties nominating their candidate in 56 of them.

        No one is voting for President now. No one is deciding who the president is going to be right now. The different private parties are deciding who their front man (or woman) is going to be. When November comes, if you can convince enough Americans to agree with you, you can vote for Zaphod Beeblebrox and elect him President.

        [–]jakwnd [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

        At least today the average American has at least some influence on who the party nominates. Which I dont think they had in 1792.

        [–]mikl81 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        It was also much harder for a citizen to stay informed about their national politics back then

        [–]manachar [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        If by that you mean white male landowner, then ... maybe? I suspect the average white male landowner actually had little influence on the party's choice as that was probably determined in a few centers of power.

        [–]amjhwk [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

        I mean when I registered to vote (in AZ off of all places) litterally all I had to do was put my name, address, and party affiliation and turn it into the post office. not exactly jumping through hoops

        [–]frankfmoney [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        You can register online as well.

        [–]SenorDieg0 [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

        Many people get interested to vote just days before elections too late to register, why not get enrolled automatically when you get and ID, passport or doing taxes?

        [–]Sanity_in_Moderation [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        It's happening in several states, mandatory registration when you get a drivers license.

        [–]bbordwell [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        Iowan here, anytime you get your license renewed they ask if you would like to register to vote as well. You just have to check the box yes and if you want a party affiliation check which one.

        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

          [–]Mono275 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          One of the big issues was that there were people who were registered as democrat or republican but somehow their registration changed on election day and they were not allowed to vote or given a provisional ballot which doesn't count.

          [–]Jess_than_three [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          First past the post voting guarantees that only two people, selected by the aforementioned private clubs, will get a chance to actually run for President and have a meaningful shot at it.

          A saner method, like range or approval voting, would do a lot to correct that.

          [–]ComebackShane [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          This is literally how it's been since the beginning of the country. Washington was the only non-partisan president in our history. Parties have been doing their thing for centuries, and really, until recently the primaries were far, far less open than they are now.

          Doesn't mean we can't do better, but there's no 'how did we get here' - we've always been here.

          [–]elreina [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Good chunk of it explained here. Worth your time.

          [–]thatoneguy889 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          How did we get to the point where the process of deciding the president is in control of private clubs?

          It was like that basically from the inception of this country until relatively recently. The first election year where primaries were widely adopted across the country was 1972.

          [–]BakingTheCookiesRigh [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          I believe America has always been run by "private clubs" of "powerful men".

          [–]JohnnyJonesIII [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          There are groups that advocate for taking away party control of primaries. Give it a look. http://www.openprimaries.org/

          [–]addysonclark [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Does it use a single penny of taxpayer money?

          If so, then a revote should be legally required.

          [–]GaryRuppert [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

          at this point, their only option is a caucus vote. Can you guess why the Dems aren't pining for that? because Sanders would win a caucus vote

          [–]Fearlessleader85 [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

          And they don't need any permission from the state to do that. They could set it up whenever they want.

          [–]itshurleytime [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

          Because caucuses aren't proportional to what the voters actually want. It overrepresents people who have nothing else to do and no pending responsibilities on a Tuesday evening.

          [–]eventhorizon82 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          So old retired Hillary supporters should be able to show up. No obligations there.

          [–]GaryRuppert [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

          and Dem primaries overrepresent people that vote off of name recognition. So.

          [–]HiiiPowerd [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          which is to say "more people show up to vote". so it's more representative of registered voters, you just don't like who they select.

          [–]xfactoid [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          So why do we even have primaries at this point?

          [–]antsmasher [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

          If DNC has the power to decide on a revote, I think there needs to be an organized effort to push them for a revote.

          [–]AlmightyOddGod [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          But that can only hurt their star candidate and ruin all their hard work rigging the whole thing in the first place. Why would they want that?

          [–]AT-Fields [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Was it though? In Ohio we had judges and a levy on our ballot. Did AZ only have presidential primaries?

          [–]inyouraeroplane [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

          Cut! That! Out! Basta! Take off your tinfoil hat and sexism-shades and stop acting like Hillary Clinton/Debbie Wasserman Schultz had any hand in participating in admitted election fraud

          コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

            [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

            That's because she did not admit election fraud. She acknowledged issues surrounding registration/party affiliation verification. Fraud requires intent, and if you read the quote and watch the video, you see that the AZ Secretary of State never says that anybody tampered with anything, or intended to deceive anyone.

            [–]micromonas [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

            you are technically correct, but if this report of an easily hackable SQL database holds up, that's certainly electron fraud

            [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

            Nah, I think it's evidence of proton negligence.

            [–]micromonas [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            dammit... I'm positron that I can blame that on autocorrect. I'll leave it up

            [–]havocjewel [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            That's quite some defense. Did they even bother to audit the voter registration changes?

            [–]BugFix [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Exactly, I'm looking at this thread and all the upvotes, and the video, and ... wha? They don't match. Nothing in that article is substantiated by the video, nothing at all. We've gone from "it's confirmed that some party registration data was wrong" to "OMG Clinton haxored all teh SQLz!".

            Shouldn't there have been some journalism in the middle there or something?

            [–]lost_send_berries [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

            They were still allowed to cast provisional ballots. Now that they know the registration information was incorrect on many of the electronic records, they will go and find the original voter registrations to check eligibility.

            It will be a problem if voters weren't offered the provisional ballot.

            Photo gallery of all testimonials at the hearing

            [–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

            Except we know that this database is in a bad state. They cannot check the registrations because it's all fucked up. They should just count every vote, no matter what. That would be a gesture of goodwill that the DNC could extend.

            [–]lost_send_berries [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

            They may have paper records.

            [–]blazze_eternal [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            They do, in a local news video they showed an official pulling up a digital paper copy of the registration form that listed 'D' even though the system listed 'I'.

            [–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

            Not for people who registered as Dems on February 21.

            [–]lost_send_berries [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

            Why not? Did they sign up electronically?

            [–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

            Yes. You can register to vote online in Arizona.

            [–]lost_send_berries [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

            Well, they may still have a way of identifying the correct records.

            [–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

            Not if they are using the same fucked up DB that they used at the polling places.

            [–]lost_send_berries [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            That depends on what tables and fields it has. The information might still be in there.

            [–]primalstef [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            BAM! ^

            [–]alexnoaburg [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            where is obama on this? heads should be rolling

            [–]no_dice [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            I don't understand how you admit there was election fraud and the refuse to allow a re-vote.

            Welp, given how she didn't admit there was election fraud...

            [–]PleonasticPoet [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Well, once you fraudulently install an unelected president, where do you even go from there?

            [–]Tungsten_Chucker [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

            Just like you can't replay the Superbowl when you find out afterward that someone cheated.

            [–]FantasyPls [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

            The NFL would invalidate it, take draft picks, and fine them.

            [–]lifeinprism [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

            So invalidate the delegates for both sides.

            [–]5two1 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

            Im with you on that. The part that doesnt make sense is this part of the statement.

            ", if voters can prove their registration was manipulated improperly."

            [–]Poets_are_Fags [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            i think they just need proof that they registered, which they should have in some form

            [–]Tungsten_Chucker [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            I assume so. I came from the racing world. If you find a cheater after the race they can get any number of penalties up to and including disqualification.

            [–]Schwa142[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            So, nobody would get rings...? Maybe nobody should get delegates (including supers).

            [–]amjhwk [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            they wouldnt invalidate the results, but they would take away picks and levy fines

            [–]SMIDSY [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

            Can't they be retroactively disqualified like if a guy tests positive for steroids in a bike race?

            [–]Tungsten_Chucker [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Of course they could. It is up to the party to find something reasonable. Another election would be too costly.

            [–]gdex86 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

            This isn't a case where one team (Clinton) cheated to beat the other team (Sanders). The refs ( The state of Arizona) just made a series of very bad calls. Like those games in the NFL where they had all those scab reffs who were awful. They didn't invalidate those game results because of it.

            [–]SMIDSY [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Urge to riot...rising...

            [–]inyouraeroplane [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Deciding the next President of the United States is clearly as inconsequential as one regular season football game.

            [–]Tungsten_Chucker [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            I like your analogy better than mine.

            [–]amjhwk [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            but the opponent in the game cant be declared the winner by dq because whos to say the team that lost to the cheaters in the quarterfinals wouldnt still beat the other SB team

            コメントをもっと表示する (5 返事)

              [–]Brodusgus [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

              We won't hold a new election but if you can prove your provisional ballot was tampered with we will allow your vote to count. Seems like Arizona is counting on people not caring.

              [–]Schwa142[S] [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

              How are people supposed to prove their registration was tampered with...?

              [–]Brodusgus [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

              That's the catch 22 and nothing being done about it despite the petition that reached its goal in a day. It's all feel good talk without results in hopes that people forget and don't bother.

              [–]Betterwithcheddar [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

              One must wonder... How many of the early voter ballots were thrown out because of party affiliation issues?

              There has been no mention of those ballots being screened.

              Day of voting was bad, but early voters got a pass and their vote counted???

              [–]Nanners90 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Not sure about Arizona but in NC during early voting we could register then vote at early voting therefore there would be no issue with registering. Once again not sure if this is how it works there or not.

              [–]fazzig [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              You wouldn't have been mailed an early ballot had your party not been correct. Ballots weren't thrown own, they may just never have been mailed.

              [–]admiralsakazuki [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

              Arizona should have it's results and delegates thrown out of the primaries and GE if they don't get it fixed. Fraud is fraud, you don't allow anyone to benefit from it or else you are perpetuating the same fraudulent system.

              [–]Chralemar [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              They should at least reduce their delegate count by half due to the AZ Sec. of State confirming election fraud. They did this to Michigan and Florida in 2008 because they moved their elections earlier without the consent of the DNC. With Arizona, you now 100% there was election fraud. Either not count their delegates at all due to their distribution being based on fraudulent results, count their delegates as half delegates like they did to Michigan and Florida in 2008 or do a re-vote.

              [–]pixelrebel [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

              I go a step further and say Arizona should be declared a state of emergency.

              [–]SouthernJeb [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              whoa, thats some 3rd world shit right there.

              [–]justgord [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              I urge you to spend 2 hours and listen to the council meeting.. it is visceral, and kind of hilites a lot of wider problems.

              I mean really if you want to capture the will of the people, why would you not have same day registration / open primaries. Idealy with independent audit mandatory. It should just be federal law.. its too open to abuse [ negligent or intentional ]

              [–]cockgobbler1 [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

              So if the voting database was hacked, isn't there supposed to be some kind of criminal investigation as to who did it?

              [–]Bearracuda [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

              Supposed to be, but today the same government officials who rigged the election apologized for the problems voters experienced, patted themselves on the back for a job well-done, and voted to keep the results, saying "We'll do better next time. Promise."

              They're as crooked as the wall street CEOs who used the bailout money to give themselves raises and paid vacations after blowing up our fucking economy.

              [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

              Uh, nobody said that it was hacked. What the article says is that there was an issue with verifying registration, and some Anonymous member proved that the database could be tampered with.

              [–]cockgobbler1 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              Well the article states that anonymous says the SQL database was exploited.

              [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              That's actually not what the article states. The article states:

              "Anonymous, a hacking collective, believes the SQL database used by Arizona, was the exploited weak link. The SQL server database is so easily hacked, that Troy Hunt of HaveIBeenPwned.com, showed his 3 year old child how to do it on YouYube. There is absolutely no good reason why the database should have been that easily hack-able. It’s embarrassing and demonstrates a level of ineptness reserved for amateurs."

              This is, again, the article apparently mischaracterizing a source. The anonymous guy apparently proved that it was easily hackable. He is not quoted as saying that they uncovered evidence that exploitation did occur.

              [–]badp4nd4 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Any Microsoft SQL database that is presented by a web application that does not have any input validation is likely vulnerable to SQL Injection which can allow anyone to read/write/modify the tables of the database.

              It just so happens that the voter registration database is one of these databases, and there is widespread belief that many people were changed to be independents from their long time democratic registration.

              This would be cake to do for anyone with an IT Security / SQL Database background.

              Edit : I would also like to mention that determining whether the database was tampered with would be very easy if proper logging and backups are setup.

              [–]TheMozone1 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

              The burden shouldn't be on individual the disenfranchised to prove it. They're not the ones in the best position to prove it, they don't have access to the equipment used. A revote is the only fair way.

              [–]DarthBotto [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              Whenever someone mentions a revote on /r/politics, a mod from /r/HillaryClinton swoops in to say you can't do that and it would be disenfranchisement.

              [–]Schwa142[S] [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

              Shortly after AZ Secretary of State confirms election fraud, Maricopa County certifies Presidential Preference Election results... Pretty fucked up.

              [–]mrpringlescan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Sorry, the headline is a lie. She said there were registration change issues with the drivers liense office. This is not a cob formation of voter fraud.

              Oh, yeah, socialist times, anonymous author. Got it.

              Meanwhile, there was real vote suppression that is bring ignored.

              [–]TheLightningbolt [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

              Election fraud is a crime. Knowing that there was election fraud and refusing to fix it is an even bigger crime. Allowing election fraud to continue in other states is an outrageous crime. People in NY, PA and other states who have had their registrations changed or cancelled against their will should make a huge scandal about this now, before it's too late.

              [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              The article does not state that there was fraud. The article states that something happened, as a result of which voter registrations were wonky. Fraud requires intent to deceive. We still have no idea what happened. Given that systems crash and glitch all the time, I think it's a bit sensationalist to jump to the conclusion that somebody intentionally rigged the election.

              [–]GibsonLP86 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              Bullshit. I'm sorry, but when shit like this happens, it's being done with a purpose. Doj needs to investigate who was the cause. Malicious or not, the person committing this should be in jail.

              You or I would get a speeding ticket if you were driving 65 in a 45, even if you didnt see the sign for the change.

              [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              We don't know that anyone did anything. All we know is that there was some tech issue. Who are you going to jail? You are assuming that someone did something.

              [–]Merax75 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              I love how the reporter states in one question that "it's the first I've heard of it!" Bitch you been living under a fucking rock?

              [–]theoryface [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              There needs to be another petition called "Do Something About It, Arizona."

              [–]facewand [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              "wide spread election fraud"

              Wrong.

              [–]colblitz [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Anonymous, a hacking collective, believes the SQL database used by Arizona, was the exploited weak link. The SQL server database is so easily hacked, that Troy Hunt of HaveIBeenPwned.com, showed his 3 year old child how to do it on YouYube. There is absolutely no good reason why the database should have been that easily hack-able. It’s embarrassing and demonstrates a level of ineptness reserved for amateurs.

              Just to clear some things about servers and reading comprehension:

              • The video (of the news broadcast) does not have any mention of any servers or of any hacking
              • There's no proof that anything was hacked, or that it was the servers
              • The YT video is of someone hacking a toy local server, nothing to do with Arizona
              • There are ways to guard against the attack demonstrated in the YT video - again, no relevance to the actual level of security that Arizona had

              [–]nonades [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

              SQL isn't a database.

              [–]Lucidview [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              SQL is a query language. SQL Server is a database.

              [–]nonades [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              I think they updated it since I first commented.

              When I commented it just said SQL database.

              [–]HarvestedSorrows [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Meh, if you say SQL database people know what you mean exactly. If someone points out something like that as a flaw they're just being a prick in my opinion.

              [–]CrunxMan [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

              Yeah that is a pretty shitty article... Obviously the author has no clue at all what SQL or an injection attack is.

              The SQL database is so easily hacked, that Troy Hunt of HaveIBeenPwned.com, showed his 3 year old child how to do it on YouYube. There is absolutely no good reason why SQL, should have been green lit by the Secretary of State.

              [–]i_smell_my_poop [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              SLICKLION from the SocialistTimes must not have done his/her due diligence.

              コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                [–]echeleon [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                Wait, wait, are you saying the Socialist Times is NOT a reputable source? This is shocking.

                /s

                [–]ChipStarfield [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                That's not what anyone here was saying. They're just saying the author is not a tech professional. This issue is found in any news source.

                [–]walrusboy71 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                I've got a very open mind, but seeing the source was the "Socialist Times" really made me question credibility.

                [–]popchi [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                This is so important for people to know. I have no idea why this isn't a more visible issue right now.

                [–]portrait_fusion [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                at work, don't have the time to read it yet; will anything be done about there being confirmed election fraud? is it actually legally confirmed that it in fact happened?

                [–]frosted1030 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Is it real, or is it fox?

                [–]indeft [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                As an Arizona resident and Veteran of the United States Infantry why in the FUCK was I denied my constitutionally protected right to vote??

                [–]justSomeGuy345 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Terrible article. She is quoted out of context and the possibility of the database being hacked via SQL injection is complete conjecture.

                [–]EdensQuill [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                I think now might be the perfect time for the president to demand an election reform bill from congress: -Both parties are a wreck -The election problems across the nation are an embarrassment. -There is no clear presumptive winner.

                A concensus might actually be possible during this chaos. The bill could take effect in 2017 not effecting the current cycle.

                I know this is just a case of wishful thinking.

                [–]DarK187 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                To sum it up. There was Election fraud in Arizona, but we will still count it. Sounds legit.

                [–]326874615678 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                SocialistTimes.com, no confirmation of election fraud, no citations, and speculation by Anonymous is the main reasoning.

                Saying there was a symptom (incorrect party affiliation) doesn't confirm the disease (election fraud). Fraud implies somebody purposely changed the database, which as far as I know hasn't been confirmed by anyone yet.

                Perfect "article" for the front page.

                [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                You're completely correct. The article is a joke. I watched the video and read the statement, and the OP, who responded to your comment, seems to have completely missed what you're saying. Nobody acknowledged fraud.

                [–]Schwa142[S] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                So, you didn't read the quotes or watch the video of her statement...?

                [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Did you? "It happened to somebody in my office." Not once in the video does she describe fraud. She states that voter affiliations were "affected." She stated that they do not yet know the cause. The article completely misrepresented what she said.

                [–]waste-of-skin [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                it doesn't matter what sanders or clinton want. if the dnc is truly impartial there should be a revote.

                [–]herticalt [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                A revote ends up disenfranchising more voters. The original vote tens of thousands were stopped from voting wrongly. A revote which is unprecedented would likely see much lower turnout. Instead why not just let any of the people who were turned away at the polls have an extra day to vote. This could be done after the state verifies their voter registry against the paper registrations.

                [–]waste-of-skin [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                if an election is a fraud the whole thing is a fraud and it all should be dumped. it doesn't matter who feels bad about it.

                [–]derek_j [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Socialisttimes.

                Seems like a legitimate source.

                [–]dualitynoted [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Start a petition to boycott the general election unless Arizona gets a fair re-vote/extension vote.

                Enough pressure and the DNC will follow suit

                [–]nicktod [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                What a fat tub of government employee..

                [–]thesmokingmann [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                The SQL server database is so easily hacked, that Troy Hunt of HaveIBeenPwned.com, showed his 3 year old child how to do it on YouYube. There is absolutely no good reason why the database should have been that easily hack-able. It’s embarrassing and demonstrates a level of ineptness reserved for amateurs.

                wtf!? why not just do a Facebook poll and call that the election. not much difference.

                [–]thesymbiont [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                That sounds more like sloppy processing or erroneous datakeeping, not fraud. Fraud requires intent. The disenfranchisement of AZ voters by limiting polling places is a scandal, but this sounds like incompetence on the part of the AZ Board of Elections, not malice.

                [–]PleonasticPoet [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Can someone ELI5 why it is at all acceptable not to count provisional ballots?

                [–]samplebitch[M] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Hi Schwa142. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

                • Personal blogs/vlogs: Personal blogs and personal media channels are not allowed.

                If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to message the moderators.

                [–]Zeeker12 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                You all will forgive me if I don't trust the socialist times

                [–]JumpingJazzJam [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

                I am still amazed that ultra conservative governed Maricopa County, Arizona provided so much assistance to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

                Who could have predicted that?

                [–]Internetologist [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                This is ridiculous. The Republican establishment hates Clinton as much if not more than the average Sanders voter.

                Many Clinton voters were hurt by this as well.

                [–]Insanity601 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                She's a real republican, the only one left in this race minus nut job Cruz.

                [–]Whyisnthillaryinjail [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                Oligarchy doesn't sit on the liberal-conservative spectrum and instead uses both sides to defend its position. A lot of people just don't get that.

                [–]JumpingJazzJam [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                I think you are confusing oligarch loving libertarians with liberals and falling for anti-liberal, they call us leftist, talking point attacks against liberals.

                Here is fact, U.S.'s most famous liberal, FDR created the most hated by the oligarchs safety net, called Social Security and taxed our oligarch's at a 90% rate and another famous U.S. liberal, LBJ created Medicare.

                [–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                No, that dude is saying that the oligarchs like Clinton and the Koch brothers have only one goal: more money and influence for themselves. All other things are secondary.

                [–]JumpingJazzJam [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                He/she said oligarchs don't sit on a split between liberal conservative I think he was positing that liberals and conservatives and or both parties are the same talking point.

                Sadly for me since most of our Democratic elected are now from the business friendly conservative third way group, there is too much truth in the "both parties are the same, talking point. Of course that is completely contradicted the current Republicans in Congress the the Democratic President.

                I agree with you, the Kochs will be fine with Pres. Hillary and the Clintons are business conservative third way Democratic, no liberal Democratic.

                [–]Cvillain626 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Makes sense, Trump does better against Hilary than Bernie.

                [–]thetrollfarmer [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

                Whatever. They just certified their election results today.

                [–]TheMozone1 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                What does certification even mean if it even happens after known fraud?

                [–]dr_pepper_35 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                It means our elected leaders dont give a fuck about democracy.

                [–]strikingstone [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                The article says that the AZ Secretary of State acknowledged issues. Nowhere do we see her acknowledging "fraud," which requires intent to deceive.

                [–]kyonu [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

                AKA they certified that hundreds of thousands of voters got the shaft.

                [–]metalkhaos [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Nothing will get people to get out and vote more than not even counting the votes they tried to put in in the first place.

                [–]herticalt [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                You don't even have any kind of proof for those numbers.

                [–]herticalt [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                You should edit your original comment to reflect that you were wrong. You claimed millions voted in 2008 there is no evidence of higher turnout in Arizona than 2008 and the numbers were around 455,000. At most we're talking about tens of thousands, Hillary Clinton won by 80,000ish votes there is no way Sanders would have overtaken her lead.

                [–]DarthBotto [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                Certifying an election does not mean the election fraud investigation is closed or that further action will not be taken.

                [–]DisarrayTheory [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                What does it mean? (Genuinely asking)

                [–]DarthBotto [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Basically that they can officially declare a winner of the state, but that the election fraud investigation is ongoing. I'm not sure what would happen if there are charges levied against someone, but I'm guessing it could induce a revote. Or... the election results could indeed be upheld and we're stuck with results from a fraudulent primary.

                [–]Wupta [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

                Perhaps Bernie should consider running as an independent during the actual presidential election.

                [–]Schwa142[S] [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

                Not happening...

                [–]Level_32_Mage [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

                If Hillary won the DNC, and Trump went Independent, then Sanders followed, who would win?

                [–]inkosana [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

                Likely whoever the Senate decides to choose after nobody wins a majority of the electoral college.

                [–]HandjobSally [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Neither Trump or Sanders would win. Besides I highly doubt that Sanders wants his legacy be that he helped Cruz or Trump reach the Whitehouse by running as an independent.

                コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                  [–]GeneWildersAnalBeads [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                  I hope he does. He should be the revolutionary. I would be happy to vote for him.

                  [–]gbinasia [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                  Try to think a little bit critically here...

                  Why would the Clinton team take the risk of hijacking a database? They would never take that kind of risk. Is there any proof of a hijacked database? No, at least not yet. Don't blame on fraud what can usually be explained by incompetence unless you got some proof of how it happened instead of just what happened.

                  [–]herticalt [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                  Hillary Clinton decided instead of spending money on ads in a state that heavily favored her. She would instead do a third rate hack job to target Sanders voters and keep them from the poll. Further she somehow manipulated the Arizona Republican party one of the most conservative in the country into doing her bidding. Even further she didn't use her dastardly powers in any of the other states?

                  It's a joke, people on here want to believe the worst about Hillary and there are a bunch of hack alternative media writers who are willing to give it to them.

                  [–]cmonster_75 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                  It's so sad that reasonable responses to this are buried so far down in the comments.

                  [–]herticalt [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  This whole website is full of people searching for an issue to get mad about and then write a barely legible screed against. They don't even care if it's accurate or worthwhile. Look at how this website flipped it's shit over gamer gate which was at it's core a problem between three people. It led to criminal charges, doxxing, ridiculous harassment, and people are still going strong on that outrage.

                  コメントをもっと表示する (20 返事)