This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Pratt has run an impressive campaign and will probably make it to the runoff given the current margin with the DSA candidate, Raman.
He probably won’t win in the actual election, though. LA’s demographics would make it very hard.
Accounting for demographics, California's heavy Democratic tilt is entirely unsurprising. There's no need to postulate vote fraud (against Republicans, at least), because they're going to lose anyway because of demographic headwinds. You need some other hypothesis to create space for vote fraud, e.g.:
Each of California's demographics are more conservative than the country as a whole, and to get observed California results you need vote fraud to counteract California's demographics' conservative lean.
The country as a whole has levels of vote fraud similar to California, across demographics.
I don't know of anyone who'd argue 1. As for 2, you'd get people arguing for it, but it doesn't make sense then to focus on California; Republicans should instead focus first on states they have any actual power in.
What’s your explanation for why it takes California a month to count votes and later-arriving votes always favor Democrats? Do you think it’s suspicious that late-arriving votes are favoring neither Bass nor Pratt but Raman, the exact outcome needed to knock Pratt out? And do what do you think is a better explanation than fraud for a system that combines no Voter ID with a willingness to mail out millions of unverified ballots?
It's pretty unsurprising if mail voters vote Democrat.
Why? In this case late-arriving ballots aren’t just favoring Democrats but Raman specifically, which is very convenient!
Edit: and it’s the same for the governor’s race! Results have been called for Becerra at 26.72%. Hilton at 26.38% is uncalled although the next trailer Tom Steyer is at 21.03%. Apparently it’s possible that Tom Steyer will overcome the 300,000 ballot deficit he needs to claim 2nd place, but not the additional 20,000 he would need to claim 1st.
Perhaps because Republicans think that their votes won't count if they mail them in. Perhaps because Democrats put off voting more often in lots of different races.
Do I really need to explain to you that LA is full of pinkos who want to elect a socialist? Do you think it's sus that Mamdani won in NYC? Where did the phantasm of the Based Angeleno come from? I can assure you that Angelenos are not Based.
This is not an explanation. Late-leaning ballots lean Democratic because Democrats vote late — therefore it can’t be because of fraud. But that’s indistinguishable from election fraud! That’s exactly what it would look like if it were fraud. Fraudsters would harvest late ballots that lean Democratic because that’s how they’re cheating.
Is there any reason for California to accept ballots weeks after the election?
Is there any other state on earth that conducts their elections this way?
Look, they’ve created a system where:
All it would take to steal an election is a political machine to harvest ballots, fill them out, and send them in the mail.it would take a few dozen people. This is literally legal in California because ballot harvesting is explicitly legal and there are rules about it. Ballot harvesters exist. They even have rules about “curing” ballots where you can chase down invalid ballots and have them fixed Ie the organization you would need to commit fraud already exists. This isn’t a conspiracy, it’s the literal law. We simply trust, without evidence, that every ballot filled out actually touched the hand of a unique voter.
Come on! This doesn’t bother you at all? You don’t have any explanation at all, except that Democrats happen to prefer voting by mail? Which is exactly how it would look if democrats are using mail to commit fraud.
Ballots break for Karen Bass, right up until the day after Election Day, when they start breaking for Raman. I guess the more left-wing you are the more likely you are to fill in a ballot late. It simply cannot be the case that when millions of ballots are floating around without any security at all that someone is stuffing a few ten thousand into mail boxes. That the results benefit one party the same way every time is a statistical artifact. That no other country on earth conducts elections this way is just a stylistic choice. That the same people who would benefit are the same people responsible is a coincidence. There is no evidence of fraud. Is that really what you believe?
Okay, but it's also indistinguishable from Democrats voting late.
Let me ask you a question. Do you live in a state with vote by mail? Do you vote by mail? Do your Republican friends?
"Harvesting" is a specific thing where people collect mail in ballots and turn them in. I don't like it, but it has to be done, or postmarked, by election day. You seem to be using "harvesting" in a different way that's unclear to me.
Well, no. Fortunately, they don't.
I agree this is bad.
Not really true, the signatures have to match.
This appears to be made up.
I'm not sure what this means.
Curing doesn't allow changing the actual contents of the ballot. Fairly few ballots even go through curing at all. In 2024, 120k ballots were rejected.
This would be pointless since ballots must be postmarked by election day. Or do you believe that USPS is in on this too?
This isn't really true. The proportion of votes in each batch going to Bass is pretty stable. Most batches after the first favor Raman more than Pratt, but not all the time.
You mean, the Democrats? You think it's weird that Californians elect Democrats? Pal, have you been to California?
This is naked special pleading. You seem to be confused about several things about how elections work in California (what harvesting is, how late ballots can arrive, whether they can just be shoved into mailboxes days after election day) - which is understandable since, as far as I know, you don't live here. However, that doesn't prevent you from being sure that the guy you like ought to win the race, and if he doesn't, it's because of FRAUD. If later arriving ballots don't look like the first batch of ballots counted, it's FRAUD. If later ballots should look the same as earlier ones, why even bother counting them? Either they look the same as the earlier ones, and it's a pointless exercise, or it's fraud and they shouldn't be counted.
I live in Virginia, where we do have vote by mail. I vote in person, where they at least check my ID, in a district that routinely votes
90% Dem. Among my Republican friends, those less-connected to official party politics they are least likely to vote. I would estimate50% of my friends who are Republicans and regularly opine about politics actually vote. I vote in every election but not out of any principled reason. And I don’t think my vote counts for much. But when I meet so many Virginia and DC Republicans who are in politics, I much prefer truthfully saying I voted to lying or inventing a complicated explanation for why I don’t. My local precinct is cute and it’s a pleasant drive. My boss has never given me a problem about taking an hour to vote. I think there’s a charge code for it but I’ve never asked.I hear all sorts of interesting things from my friends in Virginia politics. A friend who would know swears that Jason Miyares was presented with evidence of Democrats committing election fraud and he balked, saying that allegations like that are exactly what he had to protect Virginia from. Not the activities alleged, the allegations themselves. Obviously this isn’t any kind of proof that amounts to anything, let alone proving anything in a discussion here. I’m just adding this for color.
I know a lot of people with different views about the possibility of mail-in ballot voter fraud. I think most people assume some is happening, but probably not “a lot”. I think that Democrats would keep winning elections without it, especially in California. But I also think that they’re certainly doing some, because it helps them keep their grip on power. It’s the same tendency as unions taking a cut of their members’ wages and donating it to Democrats, who get elected and give the unions sweetheart pensions and deals. It’s been going on a long time. It’s part of Tammany Hall and Ellis Island. It’s how part of Truman and LBJ became VP.
The more of this you allow, the weaker your Democracy gets. California in a meaningful sense is ceasing to be a Democracy. The idea of Democracy is that the people choose in fair and free elections who is supposed to govern them. This is increasingly not how elections are conducted. When you allow ballot harvesting, the edge goes to whoever can spin up the largest political machine. The machine is always present in Democracy when it gets larger than the size of a few thousand Athenians raising hands on the public forum. But when we confuse elections with the ballots cast in those elections, the balance tilts toward the machine. We, informed citizens debating what kind of society we should live in, lose power to whoever can stake out the nursing homes, homeless shelters, welfare ghettos, and immigrant slums. The fraud is just a stalking horse. Democracy is already in trouble before it gets that far.
I’m not especially attached to Democracy, but I think it’s probably a good idea and we should fight for it. I’m not going to lecture anybody about the importance of voting or counting every ballot. But I think that overall it works. The system pioneered in California and spreading to Illinois and Virginia and New York clearly does not work. It gets you corrupt officials who can’t even build a train because everything is looted for parts. Karen Bass is a Communist who was trained in Cuba who allowed a beautiful part of a beautiful city to burn, and she can’t even be voted out of office because Democracy has already degraded to a bureaucratized ritual of hand sanitizing.
To address a few of your other points quickly: signature verification is a joke because nobody knows half the time what a signature is supposed to look like and when a ballot is rejected it can be “cured”; chain of custody means that even after a ballot has been ripped apart so that the voter’s name isn’t attached to his vote, you can prove it started life as a legitimate ballot, and if it’s not done it makes a mockery of postmarking ballots, and it’s frequently never done; postmarking itself is not a sacred human institution, robots aren’t staffing the post office, it would be cheap to fake; and it remains extraordinarily convenient that, after all this, Karen Bass has the same vote share, but Spencer Pratt’s goes down and Raman’s goes up.
If a stack of ballots arrived today, nobody knows from where, and they looked official and had the right postmarks, they would be counted.
If the same thing happened with a stack of $100 bills, your local gas station or 7/11 might accept them. But the FBI would find you, because we’ve made it incredibly difficult to counterfeit. But not for ballots. Ballots are sacred.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link