SOUTH AMERICAN ELECTIONS

[two different people are being portrayed side by side]

Gabriela Rosa Sympatica
Elementary school teacher
Beloved by her community
Wants to improve lives
[portrait of a smiling woman in overalls]

Diego Hitlerio de la Junta
Son of a previous dictator
Went to jail for corruption
Wants to sterilize natives
[portrait of a frowning nasty looking character in military gear]

Temporary results (98% ballots counted):
[Gabriela] 49.9999%
[Diego] 50.0001%

https://thebad.website/comic/south_american_elections

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.worldEnglish
    252·
    2 days ago

    Almost makes you think of the recent US presidential election, where in swing states ONLY and for in-person voting ONLY (not mail-ins), statistically anomalous numbers of Trump ballots were Democrat all the rest of the way down, in numbers just high enough for him to win but just low enough not to trigger mandatory recounts, in places where voting machines received software updates just before and just after the election.

    • starsoaked_lily@lemmy.mlEnglish
      9·
      2 days ago

      i remember this theory - there were a few issues, if i remember right:

      the most obvious being there isn’t actually a way to know how many people vote red or blue down-ballot (for the very obvious reason that nobody knows how specific people’s ballots look) so the guy was making some wild assumptions,

      which isn’t shocking considering this same guy had run to the news crying wolf about a previous election (which it isn’t as popular to be conspiritorial about) with similarly massaged logic,

      and the very short list of districts which “inexplicably” voted as a block against democrats, if you literally just look at the election history, usually vote as a block and sometimes for republicans - claims it was statistically impossible or whatever really don’t hold up to basic scrutiny,

      genuinely i get it, it would be really comforting (in a way) to explain away trump getting elected again as the result of clandestine actors literally flipping bits or whatever, but they didn’t appear to have done that so please stop credulously believing things like this without taking a few minutes to look into it and check if it actually holds water.

      the dnc annointed deeply unpopular biden to run again and let him make a fool of himself long after it was clear he wasn’t up to it and didn’t have popular support, replaced him with his vp who wasn’t willing to distinguish herself from him on policy and who sought republican votes at the cost of building enthusiastic support from the whole big tent of democrats, literally refused to even record feedback they received specifically about voters being fed up with the genocide of palestinians when canvassing and conducting surveys, etc. and on the republican side they have engaged in very loud very public voter suppression increasingly for a long time - we don’t need to look for hidden (especially trivially disprovable) insight into what happened when there were such obvious reasons

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 day ago

        Dunno which guy you mean but he wasn’t anybody who cried wolf in a previous election. The facts he presented were exactly what I stated - statististically anomalous number of people voting for Trump and then voting for Democrats all the way down the ballot. That happens, but in several of the swing states it happened far more than it ever has, and yet just short of enough to trigger automatic recounts, and only with election-night voting. What you’re responding with is opinion and calling those observations “wild assumptions” without saying what’s wild about them, then some subjective opinion about Biden and genocide yada yada - pure opinion that I’m not here to argue about. The numbers are what they are.