← Back to context

Comment by hackyhacky

4 hours ago

> Survivorship bias

Huh? Survival of what? Are you claiming that Democrat fraud was not found only because the perpetrators are all dead?

he is implying that the focus on the republican cases (the survivors) is a red herring because the system is presumably such that an actual conspiracy cannot be detected.

I don't know anything about elections, a question worth asking is what would it look like if a conspiracy set out to exploit mail ballots? could detection only originate from a defector?

  • > I don't know anything about elections, a question worth asking is what would it look like if a conspiracy set out to exploit mail ballots? could detection only originate from a defector?

    Why don't you start with some research of your own and outline how such a conspiracy would work and how large it would have to be.

    Don't throw out a hypothetical "could it even be caught?" to try to bias people without doing any sort of even cursory glance at how things work.

    Hell, while you're at it, please outline other possible conspiracies, and think about if there are potential vulnerabilities that could very require less major coordination than mail-in ballots. (Not even including the 'have a president who constantly tells everyone that if he loses it will be due to fraud to stoke the flames in advance' strategy!)

  • > he is implying that the focus on the republican cases (the survivors) is a red herring because the system is presumably such that an actual conspiracy cannot be detected.

    Maybe GP is implying that, but that's not what they said, because what you describe is not survivorship bias.

    > I don't know anything about elections, a question worth asking is what would it look like if a conspiracy set out to exploit mail ballots? could detection only originate from a defector?

    You are asking the wrong question. The correct question is: If mail-in voter fraud cannot be detected, then why do people claim that mail-in voter fraud exists? If there isn't evidence that it exists, then the people who claim that it exists are making statements not based on evidence. In other words, their opinions are either not informed by facts, in which case we should disregard their opinions; or their statements are not sincere expressions of belief, in which case they are liars and we should not trust them.

    •     > because what you describe is not survivorship bias
      

      then you should look up what survivorship bias is. the visible group in this scenario are the individuals who were caught. which says nothing about any conspiracies or even other more competent individuals. the sampling is also poor.

          > mail-in voter fraud cannot be detected, then why do people claim that mail-in voter fraud exists
      

      isn't that obvious? if it were easy to counterfeit currency in an undetectable way for a conspiracy while stupid individuals can get caught. would you be asking this question or would you assume the currency is in a bad shape? this example may actually be too on the nose as there is reason to believe exactly this happens with respect to certain state actors while being mitigated by the relative low volume of cash.

      5 replies →

  • If Democrats were talented enough to rig an election with zero trace, they would have governed the country a lot more competently during Biden’s term.

    Also, why didn’t they rig it again in 2024?