Note: Print edition title is this “Liberal Voters Assert Their Own “Stop the Steal” Claims, Without Much Success”. The online title is slightly better, except they don’t investigate just how and why “top Democrats’ aren’t interested.
Why didn’t they talk to Jacky Singh? (cybersecurity lead on Biden and Harris campaigns) Or Doug Buell? Instead they cover Spoonamore who is dedicated but controversial.
The website for Sandy Summers of Hand Count the Ballots who was quoted is is https://handcounttheballots.org/
Send letters to the editor at letters@nytimes.com I was too late for comments but sent in this letter:
To the Editor:
Senator Gillibrand cosponsored the Protecting American Votes and Elections Act of 2019 (PAVE Act) . Among other things it would have banned internet, WiFi and cellular connections for voting machines, and given the Department of Homeland Security the authority to set, for the first time, minimum cybersecurity standards for voting machines, voter registration databases, electronic poll books used to 'check in' voters at polling places and election night reporting websites.
At the time, Gillibrand said “Congress has a responsibility to secure the integrity of our elections, and I am proud to join with Senator Wyden to introduce this bill that strengthens our country’s election infrastructure.”
The Senate failed to pass the bill, due to the filibuster. It was reintroduced as the Freedom to Vote Act in 2021 and failed again.
With all those security protections not in place, what could possible go wrong?
Allegra Dengler
From the New York Times:
These Voters Want to ‘Stop the Steal.’ Top Democrats Aren’t Interested.
Sandy Summers has concerns about electronic voting machines.Credit...Andrew Mangum for The New York Times
By Stuart A. ThompsonKaleigh Rogers and Steven Lee Myers
• Published Dec. 18, 2024Updated Dec. 19, 2024
The 2024 presidential election has set off a new wave of election denialism online — only this time, it is coming from voters on the left.
Much as many supporters of President-elect Donald J. Trump did after the 2020 election, some supporters of Vice President Kamala Harris are demanding recounts in key states in a bid to verify or even overturn the result. They are scrutinizing election results for signs of tampering, questioning whether election machines flipped votes and wondering whether digital technology could have injected fake votes.
“You know, I don’t agree with Trump on anything, except for this,” said Sandy Summers, a Harris supporter in Baltimore. “Like, yeah, don’t trust the machines. Why should we?”
Unlike 2020, though, the movement this year has nowhere near the organization or support of the Republican “Stop the Steal” campaign. Experts say that is largely because it doesn’t have an influential figurehead, like Mr. Trump was in 2020, to be its champion.
No one in the Democratic Party leadership has embraced the claims, which have been refuted by election officials. Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the House Democratic leader from New York, said in a statement after the election that he accepted the results and was “proud that the Democratic Party does not believe in election denial.” Ms. Harris has ignored pleas to challenge the result.
“It’s just clear that there’s a whole choir on the right that’s ready to sing,” said Bill Adair, professor of journalism at Duke University and founder of the fact-checking site PolitiFact, referring to supporters of Mr. Trump’s baseless claims. “And that just didn’t exist on the left.”
A post-election poll by Ipsos showed that 63 percent of Democrats thought the election was “legitimate and accurate,” compared with 91 percent of Republicans. In 2020, the trend was reversed, though Republicans were much more doubtful then than Democrats are now. In 2020, 88 percent of Democrats trusted the results compared with just 26 percent of Republicans.
Shifting confidence
More Republicans than Democrats now think the election results are accurate, a major shift from 2020.
Still, like the right-wing industry that grew out of Mr. Trump’s election denialism in 2020, this year’s claims are minting a new wave of influencers who are devoting themselves to the cause.
One of the most vocal of them is Stephen Spoonamore, a technologist in electronic data security and digital network architecture who has found a large audience for his claims on social media, spurring him to start a newsletter.
“Something’s wrong and I’m a dog on a bone,” said Mr. Spoonamore, who had also questioned the results in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, when Democrats also lost. “I want to live in a democracy, and I’m going to dig until I figure it out.”
An open letter he wrote to Ms. Harris and other Democrats in mid-November quickly spread among the movement’s supporters, earning nearly 2,000 likes on his newly created newsletter. In it, he focused on so-called bullet ballots, votes cast when people include only a choice for president but no other races. His letter included a bevy of calculations that he said demonstrated how what he called ghost voters may have been digitally injected into the process to favor Mr. Trump.
His claims were embraced online, including in Reddit groups followed by tens of thousands of users. Within days, Mr. Spoonamore retracted the bullet ballot idea because publicly available election data easily refuted his calculations. But he did not give up.
“It appears something other than Bullet Ballots is at play,” he wrote in his newsletter.
In the weeks since, Mr. Spoonamore and others have continued floating an assortment of other theories, including what they have called “improbable” election results fueled by possible machine manipulation and actions by the tech mogul Elon Musk or Russian agents that may have disrupted the voting.
“There was no coherent narrative,” said Danielle Lee Tomson, research manager for the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, which tracked the spread of this year’s election rumors. The skepticism on the left about the result “was everywhere” on social media, “but it didn’t go viral.”
Mr. Spoonamore has questioned, for instance, the share of voters who supported Mr. Trump for president but selected a Democrat in congressional or state races, breaking from historical norms. In North Carolina, Mr. Trump won the state while the Democratic candidates won the race for governor and attorney general — a quirk he suggested was a sign of fraud. Political experts have pointed instead to flaws in the Republican candidate for governor, Mark Robinson, whose campaign was derailed after lurid online messages were uncovered by CNN. Mr. Robinson has denied the claims.
Shiro Kuriwaki, a political science professor at Yale University, said shifts in voting patterns do not necessarily mean anything suspicious occurred, but they can generate confusion and conspiratorial thinking.
“What we would call ‘interesting changes,’ I think they’re calling evidence for fraud,” Dr. Kuriwaki said. “It’s really hard for administrators or researchers to disprove these kind of claims.”
Sandy Summers counts herself among Mr. Spoonamore’s supporters. A nurse in Maryland, she has long questioned the integrity of electronic voting machines, which she says are liable to be hacked. She is now leading Hand Count the Ballots, a group pushing to end the use of electronic voting machines entirely.
“Why is it a ‘conspiracy theory’?” Ms. Summers said. “Is it a conspiracy theory when somebody hacks your bank account or hacks your credit card? We believe in hackers, but why don’t we believe in hackers when it comes to elections?”
All electronic voting machines are subject to audits that follow standards set by the United States Election Assistance Commission, an independent federal agency. Mr. Spoonamore dismissed that process, saying the companies that conducted the audits were aligned with the voting machine companies.
No evidence ever emerged that any machines produced fraudulent results. Still, the claims persist.
When contacted by The New York Times, a spokeswoman for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the federal agency responsible for safeguarding elections, reiterated its initial assessment that there was no evidence of malicious activity affecting this year’s election.
The skeptics say that a hand count of some counties could prove them right, since the paper trail would show any digital alterations.
Nearly every state, however, already has some kind of requirement to audit election results, according to tracking by the Election Assistance Commission. The methods vary, but most audits take a random sample of ballots and compare the results from voting machines to results from paper ballots.
Audits completed in Pennsylvania, Nevada, North Carolina and Georgia found no discrepancies outside the margin of error expected in a hand recount. All but two counties in Arizona have completed their audits, also finding no issues outside the margin of error. Audits in Michigan and Wisconsin continue.
Audits abound
Most states have some requirement to conduct a post-election audit. Methods vary, but generally involve counting a selection of ballots (a traditional audit) or using statistical methods (a risk-limiting audit).Source: Election Assistance Commission
Similar audits in 2020 did not assuage election deniers then — and it is not clear they will this time.
“I think we are all still in that mindset of trusting in our institutions fully and that elections are, you know, free and fair in this country and that nothing can bastardize them,” said Cynthia Schames, a retired technologist in Chappaqua, N.Y., who started a petition to investigate the results that was eventually taken offline for violating a policy against misinformation. “And unfortunately, I am not 100 percent sure I believe in our institutions anymore.”
Stuart A. Thompson writes about how false and misleading information spreads online and how it affects people around the world. He focuses on misinformation, disinformation and other misleading content. More about Stuart A. Thompson
Kaleigh Rogers is a Times reporter covering election polls and the polling industry. More about Kaleigh Rogers
Steven Lee Myers covers misinformation and disinformation from San Francisco. Since joining The Times in 1989, he has reported from around the world, including Moscow, Baghdad, Beijing and Seoul. More about Steven Lee Myers
Comments 187
The comments section is closed. To submit a letter to the editor for publication, write to letters@nytimes.com.
deedee commented December 19
New York, NY
The election wasn't stolen in the way the Republicans accused Democrats of doing the last time around. This time, the Democratic vote was chipped away at by public means totally out in the open leading up to the election. There was radical gerrimandering. There were numerous cases of voters being disqualified on any pretext whatsoever. There were voting sites that were closed down or where the times to vote were restricted. All means possible were conceived and practiced to keep Democratic voters away. Has anyone done any calculations of how many were prevented from voting in the purple states? I'd definitely be interested to know those figures.
Julie commented December 19
Chico, California
Please address any investigations analysis of votes lost in some states due disenfranchisement tactics.
Fred Mertz commented December 19
Over The Rainbow
When Donald Trump lost his race, he exhausted all his legal means to find out if he won.I wish Kamala Harris and the Democrats had some of that fight in them instead of giving up.
Catheine White commented December 19
Ft Washington, MD
Please! All we have left is the moral high ground; let's not cede that too.
Zteve commented December 19
NZ
Stop the Steal began years ago for 'fringe' democats when Hillary won California primary over Bernie . It didnt help that California has an arcane election counting system ( still does) but boy the Bernie supporters made sure California voting officials - and the DNC....always the DNC- felt the BURN
Colenso commented December 19
Colenso
Homeless Dec. 19
Get over it. Thanks to Biden, the Dems have lost in 2024 just as surely as Trump lost in 2020. Take a leaf out of more civilised polities such as the UK and Oz that follow the Westminster system. Learn to lose gracefully. Do not riot. Do not go to jail.
Binoy Shanker Prasad commented December 19
Dundas Ontario
In democratic elections these days, the party that wins has a lot of confidence in the system but the ones who lose have little or none. Stories of voters' fraud, election-booths capture, ballot box stuffing, or election-related violence have been coming from third world countries for a long time. But it was unimaginable this fever would grip a section of American voters as well. To social scientists, this should be puzzling. Tech experts maintain that if your computer, credit card or bank account could be hacked, why couldn't election machines be manipulated to have ghost voters "digitally injected into the process" to favor one candidate against the other. Split voting isn't a new phenomenon where, as it happened in NC, voters voted Trump for president but selected a Democrat in congressional or state races. A tech expert called it 'a quirk' that 'was a sign of fraud.' That said, it appears the use of electronic voting machines has been raising a lot of doubts in voters' minds; the trust is tilting more toward the traditional hand counting of ballots. The US Election Assistance Commission might claim that it periodically got the EVMs audited. But the auditing agencies were untrustworthy because they were "aligned with the voting machine companies," In a new era of elections where results are decided sometimes in single digits, the system has to be above reproach. In any event, the outcome must be by counts or 'run offs' and not by a draw straw method or flip of a coin.
John commented December 19
California Dec. 19
We need a number of types of electoral reform, and it needs to be the 28th Amendment. End private voting machines, end unlimited private funding, end gerrymandering, end the electoral college, create a federal standard for voting and voter registration. The idea that states need an individual right to conduct elections every other state depends on is not sacrosanct and should become a thing of the past.
Judith D commented December 18
Vermont
I've found it distressing that despite known machine security breaches, 70-plus bomb threats, Musk giving money to low-engagement voters (which meant he had names and addresses of voters unlikely to show), Dominion machines' hard-wired password displayed on T-shirts, it has been taboo to even raise questions about the election. I refuse to be gaslit by the notion that posing questions makes one the equivalent of "stop the steal" folks. Many people, such as Susan Greenhalgh at Free Speech for People, have warned of election security breaches for years.
Sparkie commented December 19
Hot Springs, AR
@Judith D Amen and what can we do?
Kryzmaa commented December 18
Rock Hill, SC
I found the low turnout of Democratic voters in swing states to be very odd. I'm thinking that a technological hack wouldn't have been necessary. Just subvert some mail in ballets here and there and make them disappear. There was certainly enough money available to make it happen.
BayArea101 commented December 18
Midwest
@Kryzmaa Ironically, it was the Democrats who were buried in money this time around. They so far outspent the Republicans that it was remarkable, and little commented-upon for some strange reason. Apparently, the Republicans were the smarter party when it came to deploying billions in support of their candidate. Who would have thought it.
Zteve commented December 19
NZ
@BayArea101 It was in battleground states that the cash was splashed, and they didnt move as much to Trump as well...everyone else. Even NY city had a trump surge and the Harris campaign wasnt going to spend its money there
Andrew P
Austin
When journalists refer to Trump's claims as "baseless", it would be nice if they could describe their read of the source code of these voting machines, or at least the NDA they signed that allowed them to verify that the code was correct and secure. Because the rest of us see companies running software that they refuse to share with the world (the most generous description of this is "security by obscurity", which is still a derogatory term in the security research community). They see Dominion suing security researchers while denying wrongdoing (in its prior incarnation as Diebold, then renamed to "Premier Election Solutions", then purchased by Dominon). It's not a conspiracy theory to say that these are bad actors with a history of malicious activity who appear to have a bad track record on security. And it's hardly conspiratorial to wonder why elections officials continue to allow these machines to be used.
Zteve commented December 19
NZ
@Andrew P I understand they arent vote counting machines at all. They are ballot printing machines in that the choices ( maybe 25 different races) made by the voter on a touch screen produce a printed ballot paper that shows only the candidates names that are selected - which the voter can check. This becomes the vote and the paper trial
Susan McHale commented December 18
Greenwich CT
It's dangerous to keep questioning the integrity of elections and our vote counting. Trump has even now pulled back on his belief that 2020 was flawed. By pushing back on the peace of the numbers we have destabilized the faith in our country as a whole. As far back as Al Gore's push to recount in Florida - we have had to face these Constitutional Crises. While it is favorable to keep researching and upgrading our voting systems - after an election, the process of power transfer is a part of government that should not be stirred up if there is no real reason. The Bidens displayed a wonderful resiliency in accepting the Trumps into the White House (not an easy thing) that we should try to embrace. He was welcoming and respectful, so unlike what happened 4 years ago.
BigFootMN commented December 18
Lost Lake, MN
The involvement of 'foreign agents' is most likely limited to the lies and misinformation promulgated through (anti)social media, not by electronically altering the vote recording machines. I do wish other states would adopt the same procedures as Minnesota, which has a very high turnout rate. In MN the vote COUNTING machines (all ballots are paper) are NOT connected to the internet. Counts are tabulated locally and transmitted to the Sec of State over a secure connection. Having the paper ballots allows easy recounts, either by machine or by hand. I have full confidence in voting in MN, other states that don't use a similar system not so much. I do remember the old mechanical voting machines where you pulled a lever to record your vote but there was no paper trail. That is a bad set up.
Sandy Summers commented December 18
Baltimore MD
@BigFootMN Cyber-security experts say that the tabulating machines can also have their programming hacked. And since these tabulator companies do not allow us to examine their code, how do we know what it says inside? It could be programmed for 25% of Candidate A's votes to be given to Candidate B. What would allow us to know if that was the case? Precincts undergoing audits on these machines are often pre-announced, so those wanted to do bad acts can interfere with the count on machines they know will not be audited
Lindsey commented December 18
Philadelphia
With all of the concern for voting security from both sides of the aisle, I think a forensic audit would be beneficial. Democrats are likely to believe the results if conducted in a transparent way by data scientists, even if it proves Harris lost fair and square. I don’t understand why we can’t demand this as a democratic society.
Z. Zera commented December 18
NY
Here are some known facts: After the 2020 election, Trump supporters (acting with varying degrees of legality) acquired voting machine and tabulator software for both ES&S and Dominion, which jointly make up more than 70% of all voting machines in the US. In summer 2024—after Musk had hitched his wagon to the MAGA star—Trump repeatedly bragged about not needing votes. His speech at a convention of Christian voters in June merits at least a raised eyebrow: "We have the votes. We have more votes than we need. What we need...I tell these guys, I tell even RNC, tell Michael, I tell Lara, I don't care. We have all the votes. What I don't want is those votes to disappear. They disappear. And new votes appear, brilliantly appear. That's what we have to do. If we do that, we have it made. If we don't do that, we're fools." This is classic Trumpian weave, so who knows exactly what he was attempting to communicate—probably he didn't quite know himself. Perhaps he was just describing supposed Democratic election fraud. But bear in mind that this is the man who urged Brian Kemp to "find" 11,000 more votes for him back in 2020. Given Trump's decades-long history of lying and cheating, his open contempt for the principles of American democracy, you do have to wonder if he was weaving along the edge of an inadvertent confession here: "And new votes appear, brilliantly appear. That's what we have to do. If we do that, we have it made." We have no reason to trust, and we should verify.
Gravitea-ZAvacado commented December 19
NC
@Z. Zera, yes this! Also, there is an interview with musk, where his little human shield says and I quote "In Space X we can do whatever we want and they'll never know. *proceeds to laugh maniacaly* They'll never know!" who told him this, Santa Claus? no, Elon did. you can look up the interview.
E commented December 18
VA
Could it possibly be that voters weren't buying what the Democrats were selling in 2024? And could it possibly be the case that voters weren't buying what Republicans were selling in 2020? Dare I say, could it possibly be the case that voters change their minds, or vote in some elections but not others, or are otherwise fickle individuals? No, obviously when the election goes the way I want it to, it is perfectly legitimate and when it does not go the way I want it to, it must be because someone cheated because, obviously, the majority of people agree with me all the time. Truly, it is inconceivable that some people might vote for the candidate of one party for one office, but support the candidate of a different party for another office. And even more inconceivable that once someone has chosen a party, they could ever defect from it. I simply cannot imagine a person casting their vote on the basis of the candidates at hand and not on the basis of which letter was in parentheses next to their name on the ballot. How foolish could you be to do such a thing!
Lindsey commented December 18
Philadelphia
@E I’m an unaffiliated voter and I find it odd that in so many states Trump won at the top of the ballot while the down ballot races were swept by democrats. Why did the down ballot Republicans lose so badly? Why did so many people vote for Trump but only Dems the rest of their ticket? I agree with you to an extent, but I’m very curious about how these voters made their decisions. Maybe that’s more of a sociological question rather than a voter fraud one, I’m not sure.
Bill commented December 18
Colorado
@Lindsey Perhaps people vote for the candidate that they perceive as better. Not everyone is strictly R or D voters. I've always voted person before party. At the end of the day you have to trust someone and something. If your candidate lost, as did mine, accept it, grow from it, and move on. Living in denial accomplishes nothing and leads to anger, recriminations, and, eventually, violence.
Lindsey commented December 18
Philadelphia
@Bill I work in science and I never rely on someone’s word. An analytical sample will hold up in court, someone’s word may not. I just want transparency. Right now I feel like we’re just “believing” that everything is on the up and up. I know I’m in the minority but I have no problem believing virtually anything if the data is there to back it up.
Cari commented December 18
Oregon
Let's think about the state of things on election night: We had the most conflict-ridden candidate in modern history, an actual convicted felon who just about everyone—fans included—will readily admit he “doesn’t play by the rules” and had literally everything at stake with this election. Good or bad, voters knew exactly who they were voting for. However, we’re supposed to not question the fact that this divisive candidate swept every swing state? That hasn’t happened in 40 years. Furthermore, we’re saying there were a huge number of voters who voted dem down ballot but then for some reason chose Trump as president? Split ticket voting is rare, yet it somehow happened above and beyond for this contentious election? I don’t buy it, but that’s just my opinion. Not just my opinion: bomb threats to voting locations, missing absentee ballots, rejected provisional ballots, Elon's voter lottery, Ivanka Trump holding voting-machine patents, Trump saying he doesn’t need votes and that he had a secret to win, Elon saying he was going to prison if Trump didn’t win, confirmed Russian interference in other countries’ recent elections. None of these is a smoking gun, but these are all verifiable events, not tinfoil-hat conspiracies. Not worth alarm bells? It seems that all these people are saying is that where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Maybe it warrants investigation. If the results were confirmed as fair, it would be a huge PR boon for Trump. What’s the harm in a little digging?
Gravitea-ZAvacado commented December 19
NC
@Cari your totally right! Stuart, you better add this to your next entry!
Jake commented December 18
Pittsburgh
I don't believe in any conspiracies, but I do think the fact that I have heard Trump on tape attempting to blackmail a state into turning its votes over to him followed by a sophisticated scheme to replace electors and then a violent coup that people died during, all of which he faced zero accountability for, is probably contributing to people's skepticism.
George commented December 18
Flyover
Don’t want to expose their own cheating, eh?
Lindsey commented December 19
Philadelphia
@George I feel like if the Dems cheated before, they’d just keep on cheating. Why win in 2020 and not hang on to power for the next 4 years? Usually cheaters continue cheating…
Ryan commented December 18
Loomiz
It’s pretty simple. The election wasn’t stolen in either case. The Democratic Party leadership are a bunch of old, feckless, and calcified DINOS, who lost in 2016 and 2024 by abandoning working class voters. Biden, the most progressive president since FDR, did the party no favors by pardoning or commuting sentences of several corrupt individuals. Choosing to prioritize the wants of the wealthy donor class over the needs of the working class will end with losing every time. After Pelosi’s intervention to block AOC from leading the Oversight Committee, in favor of a 74 year old with cancer, I don’t know what the party expects. What they’re going to get is more and more young and working class people writing the party off, and for good reason.
Ma clark commented December 19
Kalamazoo Mich
@Ryan I disagree The problems are many and the tally should be looked at. However, Democratic “leadership” decided that the candidate chosen in the primary just wouldn’t do. If they felt the Joe Biden shouldn’t run or that the optics of Joe Biden were damaged by the press they should’ve talked to him before the primary and gotten a candidate that people would vote for. Secondly, they should understand the thinking of people and realize there were three or 4 million males of every description who wouldn’t vote for a woman. Also, when the Democrats have decided that women are second class citizens and males with gender fantasies, should hang out in their locker rooms and play their sports they’re going to lose the vote of every parent of females who participate in sport. The simple matter is the election does look highly suspicious, but also the Democrats have to start respecting their voters and respecting women and the science of the trans psychological pandemic they’ll just continue losing the votes of the average American, even to a criminal buffoon
deedee commented December 19
New York, NY
@Ryan All the events you cite occurred after the election. They couldn't have influenced it.
ConcernedAF commented December 18
Burbs
If you think for a second that the man who has cheated on everything his entire life, was facing multiple felony counts, had nothing to lose but everything to gain, AND had the world's richest man in his corner, you're kidding yourself. Of course he cheated. He is owned by Russia and his mission is to destroy our great country. Trump is Putin's puppet. Watch Active Measures (free on Tubi) if you don't believe it. "We don't need votes. We have the votes." ALL 7 swing states went red? From Chat GPT: If the candidates are in a dead heat in pre-election polls, the probability of one candidate winning all seven swing states is reduced. In a dead heat scenario, the chances of winning any individual state are close to 50/50, so the overall probability of winning all seven states is much lower. In the case of a 50/50 split in each state (i.e., a 0.5 probability of winning each state), the probability of winning all seven states is: 𝑃 ( Winning All States ) = 0. 5 7 = 0.0078 or about 0.78 % P(Winning All States)=0.5 7 =0.0078or about0.78% So, in a dead heat, the chance of winning all seven states would be less than 1%. This low probability reflects the increased uncertainty and competitive nature of the race. Check it out. We are entitled to that much. For democracy's sake.
Chandler commented December 18
Omaha
@ConcernedAF I think that calculation is flawed. Odds of winning each state aren't independent probabilities, like flipping a coin is, especially among states close together (ie the Rust Belt). TL;DR if Trump wins PA, he has a much higher likelihood than 50/50 in MI and WI. His odds of winning all seven states, while certainly not high, were definitely higher than 1% when you take this into account.
Izzy's mom commented December 18
Brooklyn, NY
@Chandler please then explain what kind of voting behavior would result in massive, evenly distributed undervotes across states—but only in areas with MAGA loyalists on the ticket (like Ohio, Montana, Texas, Georgia's 14th district), in swing states Trump needed to win, or in states he needed to boost his popular vote totals to create the illusion of a red wave (like Washington, NJ and New York)? It cannot be attributed to ticket splitting. The only plausible explanation seems to be that significant numbers of people (in consistent patterns across counties) voted for the entire Democratic down-ballot while leaving the presidential race blank.
MountainHeel commented December 18
Jefferson, NC
It shouldn't take off because just like in 2020 there are zero facts to support it. I'm glad elected Democrats aren't doing anything to feed these lies.
John commented December 18
California
Here again, elements of our society questioning our electoral system. An amendment to create a federal standard for elections would remove all the questioning. And yet if you search "constitutional convention" and read the 1,000+ comments from the OpEd the other day--most are misinformed: a convention cannot rewrite anything, it can only propose, and the only thing the right and left agree on is that our approach to elections can be improved. If we hold an Article V Convention, the only issue with any hope of being ratified is electoral reform.
Sixofone commented December 18
The Village
"Unlike 2020, though, the movement this year has nowhere near the organization or support of the Republican “Stop the Steal” campaign. Experts say that is largely because it doesn’t have an influential figurehead, like Mr. Trump was in 2020, to be its champion." More importantly, it doesn't have the blessing and support of the DNC, any congressional Dem leader or any significant proportion of Dem legislators. The difference is night and day. All they have in common is the incorrect premise.
Janet C. commented December 18
SanDiego
In Kamala’s book “The Truths We Hold” Chapter 9 Page 262 is explained How to hack an election explicitly. A mock election was done using George Washington versus Benedict Arnold. all the voters voted for George Washington And the voting machines tablulated the winner to be Benedict Arnold because They were tampered with.. don’t believe for a minute this didn’t happen in the 2024 Election. If Biden doesn’t do anything, the rest of the world will not tolerate Fascism and election hacking by Russia in United States, Romania, Georgia, Philippines, and other countries..