Have you considered that in a system where proving cheating is so difficult, even weak evidence is powerful?

If cheating is difficult to prove then we would expect only minimal evidence even with material amounts of cheating.

moduspol 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Also, most crimes aren't uncovered by lawsuits. They're uncovered by law enforcement. The reason people resort to lawsuits is because law enforcement does not rigorously investigate or monitor. Voting laws vary by state / municipality, and they're mostly run by well-meaning volunteers acting in good faith.

When we're not sure how well the TSA is doing, we try to send prohibited items through, and infamously get abysmal results [1]. IMO the reason we don't see more election fraud cases is because *we're not looking for it*, so we just see the obvious cases like when dead people vote or people brag about voting twice publicly.

Until we actually do some "red teaming" of elections, we won't ever know. But the reality is, if we actually did, the results would reduce credibility of numerous prior elections.

[1] https://abcnews.com/US/tsa-fails-tests-latest-undercover-ope...

▲

trelane 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Red teaming, yes. But also, what other signals of fraud are we able to detect? What measures of validity (or signals that sending was attempted) are there? How are they distinguishable from honest voter errors?

	▲	moduspol an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It's going to be difficult with our current policies because we've erred on the side of making it as easy as possible for everyone to vote. We don't have a complete whitelist of citizens, it's against the law to require proof of citizenship to register to vote (unless that changed recently) and address verification in most jurisdictions isn't done more than the first time unless it's challenged. To be clear, though, I don't think non-citizens are voting en-masse. My concern is that if you aren't even verifying they're citizens, you probably aren't really verifying that they are a real and unique person that isn't already registered. Honestly I think if we actually wanted secure elections, we'd start with the red teaming and go from there. The signal to noise ratio of fraud is too meaningless to resolve without tightening up rules, which the results of the red teaming would give you the political capital to do.

▲

jfengel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sure. And the weak evidence still isn't powerful, because so much effort had to be expended to gain it. If cheating were widespread it would have been detected much more easily.

Instead, efforts to clean up the voter rolls never cause people to get caught. But they do cause many legitimate voters to lose the ability to vote.

▲

buckle8017 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Except people are actually getting caught.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2026/03/09/ice-arrests-criminal-ill...

▲

jfengel 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

THEY FOUND THE GUY! WOW!!!!!!!

	▲	buckle8017 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Nice goal post change, I see you got a friend to downvote all my comments too. Always nice talking to liberals. You gonna shoot me in the neck next?

▲

CaptWillard 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If cheating were widespread it would have been detected much more easily.

This is a ridiculous assertion.

▲

archagon 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Since we’re just considering things without providing any evidence, have you considered that we don’t have such a system?