The Ornery American Forums

General Category => General Comments => Topic started by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 12:57:04 PM

Title: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 12:57:04 PM
If we trust that online banking is relatively safe, why are we so concerned about online voting? If we trust mailing checks to each other, why are we so concerned about mail in ballots? Shouldn't there be an audit mechanism possible, just as there is counting paper ballots? And don't give me that crap about needing to ID someone. Most people don't even look much like the person in the picture from three and a half years ago. What average poll worker is going to look at the ID and say "that doesn't look like you". And if you think that there is a huge cabal working to stuff ballot boxes in an election that is spending a half billion dollars, but they can't come up with a fake ID for people, you are delusional.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Seriati on July 15, 2020, 01:09:29 PM
If we trust that online banking is relatively safe, why are we so concerned about online voting? 
 If we trust mailing checks to each other, why are we so concerned about mail in ballots?

Do you know how many bank accounts have been hacked?  It's not a small number.  When checks were regularly used (and accepted) they were bounced all over the place.  Used to be many stores had entire walls of pictures of people that had bounced checks.  Anyone with an found check book could walk out of a store with merchandise.

The truth is that mail-in ballots will contribute heavily to fraud.  Every politician knows that, their opposition or support has NOTHING to do with any principal other than whether they think that fraud will help or hurt them.

Quote
Shouldn't there be an audit mechanism possible, just as there is counting paper ballots?   And don't give me that crap about needing to ID someone.

What would that be?  Do you have a "neutral" person that is entitled to call you up, open your ballot and confirm that everyone you voted for is correctly indicated before its counted?  Like that won't be abused.

You already oppose voter ID, what do you audit against if you don't have voter ID?  In fact, the argument you are making is beyond absurd, to believe that you can simultaneously oppose IDs AND believe you're verifying the voter.  If you can do the latter, you'd already be able to do the former.

Quote
Most people don't even look much like the person in the picture from three and a half years ago. What average poll worker is going to look at the ID and say "that doesn't look like you". And if you think that there is a huge cabal working to stuff ballot boxes in an election that is spending a half billion dollars, but they can't come up with a fake ID for people, you are delusional.

Presenting a fake ID is a much bigger risk - and people get caught all the time - than falsifying a stack of mailed and not requested votes.

Go on record.  What is your acceptable level of fraudulent votes that will be counted.  There is zero chance that it won't happen under this plan, so that means you accept some "reasonable" level of it, what is that level?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 15, 2020, 01:10:10 PM
If we trust that online banking is relatively safe, why are we so concerned about online voting? If we trust mailing checks to each other, why are we so concerned about mail in ballots? Shouldn't there be an audit mechanism possible, just as there is counting paper ballots? And don't give me that crap about needing to ID someone. Most people don't even look much like the person in the picture from three and a half years ago. What average poll worker is going to look at the ID and say "that doesn't look like you". And if you think that there is a huge cabal working to stuff ballot boxes in an election that is spending a half billion dollars, but they can't come up with a fake ID for people, you are delusional.

In an online banking situation, (most normal) people don't object to a detailed virtual paper trail being generated which can forensically traced. In fact, most people expect that to be the case.

In a voting situation, you run into that whole matter of a secret ballot. The idea of a secret ballot that generates a detailed and forensically traceable trail of evidence back to the voter is a very extreme problem to overcome at the onset.

Then we get into problems of falsification of the data if you do somehow overcome the first problem re:secret ballot. A physical ballot can be audited to a degree, it either exists and can be examined, or it doesn't. A virtual ballot is incapable of being examined in any meaningful way, while it does clearly exist or not, you are going to be unable to decipher those bits to see if any tampering may have taken place.

There is more that can be gone into, but while there are valid physical security concerns that exist with paper ballots, mailed in or otherwise. That's still less of a risk factor at the macro level than completely virtual voting presents.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 01:14:07 PM
TheDaemon: damn, I forgot about the need for secrecy in voting. My entire argument is now destroyed, and I don't mean that facetiously.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 15, 2020, 01:18:22 PM
TheDaemon: damn, I forgot about the need for secrecy in voting. My entire argument is now destroyed, and I don't mean that facetiously.

Pretty much, the only way Virtual Voting works is if people decide they don't have a need to cast a secret ballot any longer, at which point a clear audit trail can exist. Although that isn't to rule out people lying when called out on voting for a particular candidate after the fact.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 01:22:08 PM
Quote
What would that be?  Do you have a "neutral" person that is entitled to call you up, open your ballot and confirm that everyone you voted for is correctly indicated before its counted?  Like that won't be abused.

Well, the way it is done now is to have two partisan people look at all the ballots. Remember the hanging chads?

As to the amount of fraud I'm willing to accept philosophically, zero. As to the reality, +/- 1% maybe? At that point it was a tossup anyway, subject to influences ranging from the weather to whose team is in the world series.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on July 15, 2020, 01:26:27 PM
Also online banks have fraud loss baked into their business model. They try to minimize it, but I still think its billions per year lost to fraudulent transactions. Its just the convenience to customers drives enough business that they can afford to lose a little money on the edges. There isn't much fraud loss acceptability in a close election.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 01:51:49 PM
In this case, the voters are the customers. If voting is hard enough, it stops being a fair election even if there is no fraud. If you get X% more engagement and participation, how much Y% are you willing to accept in fraud? As said earlier, we could give up the secret ballot (whether by mail or in person) and reduce fraud, but we'd lose engagement and participation.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 02:00:35 PM
Not to mention - for it to be effective, vote fraud has to be sufficient to sway an election, and the cost/risk of getting caught has to be outweighed by the benefits associated with the activity.

But the benefits are spread out over each state, as it is represented by the Electoral College, and nobody knows, even a few months ahead of an election, which state will be the tipping point for the presidency.

So an effective presidential election vote fraud program would need to span multiple states, each with their own particular processes, be of such a volume as to substantively change the percentages of votes cast, and be highly likely to not be discoverable.

This is a basic fence-post security issue - you do not alter the presidential election by fraudulently affecting some small subset of votes in a single jurisdiction.  The cost is far too high for any reasonably likely benefit.  And you do not affect the presidential election by fraudulently affecting a small subset of votes in multiple jurisdictions.  Again, the although the benefit increases slightly, but probably not sufficiently to change the election, the risk of getting caught increases exponentially.

Similarly, you don't alter a presidential election be fraudulently affecting large numbers of votes in a single jurisdiction - the likelihood of that jurisdiction being the tipping point is small, and the chance of getting caught is huge.

The only reasonable means of actually altering the outcome of a presidential election is to change large numbers of votes in several if not many jurisdictions, and keeping such a broad conspiracy secret, and keeping the mechanisms hidden, is well nigh impossible.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 03:07:07 PM
Voter fraud isn't just about the presidency also, its about every person running for Senate, Congress, Governor, Mayor, and Sheriff.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 03:15:32 PM
Yup, and the benefits of electing a particular Sherriff are far outweighed by the cost of a) getting caught in a vote fraud conspiracy and b) actually organizing an effective one, since the ballots are still controlled (correct me if I get this wrong) by a statewide organization.

Trying to game such a system from outside of the state level organization is almost impossible.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 03:29:07 PM
Well, if you look at techniques used by Daley's machine, it was pretty easy for a crooked precinct captain to just fill out ballots for anyone who didn't show up and send them on to the state for certification. They couldn't put Republican volunteers in every poll location, so the unsupervised guys just piled up the votes. Not sure there's anything that would prevent someone from doing the same today.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 03:55:14 PM
We are still talking about ballots mailed to people's homes, right? Or via an online method requiring some form of government/citizen controls?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 15, 2020, 04:09:28 PM
Yup, and the benefits of electing a particular Sherriff are far outweighed by the cost of a) getting caught in a vote fraud conspiracy and b) actually organizing an effective one, since the ballots are still controlled (correct me if I get this wrong) by a statewide organization.

Trying to game such a system from outside of the state level organization is almost impossible.

Only in the current system, you make the voting online, and anyone with an internet connection can go ham on it.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 04:19:51 PM
Yup, and the benefits of electing a particular Sherriff are far outweighed by the cost of a) getting caught in a vote fraud conspiracy and b) actually organizing an effective one, since the ballots are still controlled (correct me if I get this wrong) by a statewide organization.

Trying to game such a system from outside of the state level organization is almost impossible.

Only in the current system, you make the voting online, and anyone with an internet connection can go ham on it.
There is always a risk with untried software, but - no, not really.

Most hacks are wetware hacks, and that works fine if your goal is to make money.  But spending even 15 minutes to acquire 1 vote is not a good investment. 

Whereas hacking the system itself to override votes is completely controllable - unlike with money, which once stolen, is stolen, or personal information (same) the goal here is to write /overwrite data on a destination store, data that can be regularly archived, and can have levels of protections embedded, and which can be check summed in any number of different ways.

No system is perfect, but let's not pretend it would be easy, or even possible to do without the attack being identified and corrected.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 04:32:09 PM
You could certainly require multifactor authentication. The problem goes back to the secrecy issue. Now your ISP knows if you voted and when you voted, or RSA does, or anyone who hacks them. Or issues a national security letter requiring them to hand over the data. Right now, there's an air gap between the authentication by poll workers, and filling out the ballot. Absentee ballots do not have names on them, so they are also free from associating names with votes.

Once you've created a phishing email, it doesn't really cost you an incremental 15 minutes for each voter.

As for hacks being identified, you're still going to have half the country that won't admit it happened.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 04:54:12 PM
Phishing is good for acquiring information - but that information is rarely of such a nature as automation could take advantage of it for particular purposes.  Purposes which, in this case, would lead to duplication in many votes, at worst - not all, but most.

How would that work?
option 1Or the other way around, option 2
Such an attack would be highly visible, and evident even prior to the election cutoff date.  Sure, a bad actor if successful could use such attacks to gum up the system, but to affect the electoral outcome?  That is far more difficult to do.

Phishing attacks work because each instance of personal information successfully stolen is potentially very valuable.  Each separate vote, however, is of almost no value to somebody attempting to affect an election.  Attacking the end points like this, for electoral purposes, can be made far too expensive for the value expected.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 15, 2020, 06:39:07 PM
Phishing is good for acquiring information - but that information is rarely of such a nature as automation could take advantage of it for particular purposes.  Purposes which, in this case, would lead to duplication in many votes, at worst - not all, but most.

How would that work?
option 1
  • Phishing activity results in a bad actor being able to use an eligible voter's credentials to vote - and they do. 
  • Eligible voter attempts to vote - and their credentials are rejected.
  • Eligible voter complains that credentials did not work. Eligible voter has to identify themselves personally - annoying, I give you, and maybe not everyone will go through those hoops.
  • Initial vote is deleted; Eligible voter logs their vote successfully.
  • Lather, rinse, repeat.  Once there is a pattern, of course, the hack will become obvious.

"Initial vote is deleted; Eligible voter logs their vote successfully." Runs back into the problem of the vote being anonymous. If the vote is "being held" somewhere, for any length of time, the vote can be traced back to the credential used to cast the vote if the right person gets the relevant access and decides to find out. Which means anonymous voting isn't actually happening.

Quote
Or the other way around, option 2
  • Phishing activity results in a bad actor acquiring an eligible voter's credentials to vote. 
  • Eligible voter attempts to vote - and their credentials work.  Their vote is logged.
  • Bad actor attempts to use credentials to vote.  Fails
  • Fraud attempt is logged, but the eligible voter's choice still stands.
Such an attack would be highly visible, and evident even prior to the election cutoff date.  Sure, a bad actor if successful could use such attacks to gum up the system, but to affect the electoral outcome?  That is far more difficult to do.

Except you also have to deal with "operatoritis" and the matter that many voters are going to fumble through the process and likely trigger the system as attempted fraudulent voting as well.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 09:40:02 PM
"Initial vote is deleted; Eligible voter logs their vote successfully." Runs back into the problem of the vote being anonymous. If the vote is "being held" somewhere, for any length of time, the vote can be traced back to the credential used to cast the vote if the right person gets the relevant access and decides to find out. Which means anonymous voting isn't actually happening.
Absolute privacy is currently a fiction with paper ballots, never mind electronic.  There are controls that can be put in place, including the separation of data from meta-data, data distribution, encryption, tokenization and the use of unique keys that make electronic storage more anonymous than physical voting (it really isn't that difficult for someone with a modicum of training to palm and replace a paper ballot.)

And as far as absolute privacy, not just in practice but in the exceptional case of a hack on the voting infrastructure - what is the purpose of keeping the vote secret?  The secret ballot exists primarily so there can be confidence in the process of the vote collection - to safeguard choice - so that the outcome of an election is not the result of coercion.

The actual data point being guarded in this case is of little consequence on a personal basis - the government has access to, and electronically stores, far more sensitive information about each and every resident of the country, information if released that would be far more damaging.  Sure, if voters knew there was a strong likelihood that their voting choices would be easily accessible to just plain people - that would be bad.  But if it takes a security breach and a successful hack to access broad swathes of data that might or might not include a particular voter's selections during a single election cycle...? And all the hack gets out of it are how people voted (not financial records, bank account numbers, SSNs, passport info, etc...)  And even then, the only real risk is that the hackers are able, ahead of time, to convince people that the hack will take place, and to then use that knowledge to leverage voting choices... and of course, to keep that whole process itself secret, while making it broad enough to have actual electoral effects,  It seems like a truly trivial concern. 

Is this really the hill you want to die on? 
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Fenring on July 15, 2020, 09:49:49 PM
And as far as absolute privacy, not just in practice but in the exceptional case of a hack on the voting infrastructure - what is the purpose of keeping the vote secret?  The secret ballot exists primarily so there can be confidence in the process of the vote collection - to safeguard choice - so that the outcome of an election is not the result of coercion.

Gotta agree, if this is the only hitch in a 'futuristic' voting system that would in every other way be superior, it doesn't sound like much of an objection to me.

However, and this is only perhaps a related point, we are entering a future where people's individual choices are being used against them in the social sphere, so there is a danger of coercion taking place from other citizens. For instance suppose a hack occurred when voting records were released; it might not adversely affect the legitimacy of the election, but that information could be used against the individuals to, say, blackmail them, in the event that they'd have difficulties if it got out (for instance if a person voted for Trump among the wrong company).   
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 10:05:22 PM
I thought this would be obvious, but you really don't need to see someone's ballot to know their political position.

And seriously, the idea that someone could be blackmailed because of a single vote, after the fact, is the stuff of conspiracy theories.  Not to mention that by their very nature, hacked files could not be convincingly used to prove anything. It's not like a file will contain a photograph of a ballot with someone's signature on it, all their choices and maybe a picture or two.  There will be one dataset, necessarily decrypted, showing cross referenced binary data, another dataset, decrypted, showing binary data, a third dataset, decrypted, showing some kind of reference to the other datasets, and somebody is going to use those binary files to say "see, John Smith voted for Trump in 2020!"

If I'm John Smith, I tell them to go pound sand, and feel confident about doing so.  Posting that type of "evidence" on social media will be completely unconvincing to anybody not involved in designing the actual system (with the exception of those who want to believe, regardless)

You really want to make some money?  Just pick a bunch of people, anonymously contact them, telling them you know how they voted for Trump, and wait for the fools to bite. It's so much easier, and so much less dangerous.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 15, 2020, 10:15:54 PM
And seriously - people are going to hack into government servers on the off chance they'll be able to out people on social media?  Really? That's verging on paranoia.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Fenring on July 15, 2020, 11:23:52 PM
And seriously - people are going to hack into government servers on the off chance they'll be able to out people on social media?  Really? That's verging on paranoia.

I think it's more likely that the hack happens and the sale of the data is a secondary result, but I was mostly making a devil's advocate argument in favor of secrecy after already saying I didn't thinks secrecy should be the end-all of deciding how voting happens. My point was that if coercion was going to happen at this point in history it would be lateral, not top-down.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 15, 2020, 11:29:20 PM
Here's a good article about why the secret ballot was important and why it might not be now.

link (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/06/want-to-improve-democracy-abolish-the-secret-ballot/)

I agree with all the points about other options to expose someone's political views. You could worry more about someone hacking facebook, for instance. It wouldn't be a mystery what your views are.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: NobleHunter on July 16, 2020, 02:08:44 AM
The article has a very optimistic view about how hard it would be to fire someone for voting "the wrong way." Or the risk to people voting against the prevailing opinion in their area, especially since if there is a risk they may not be putting their political views out on social media.

It would be nice if making people have to support their votes in public meant a lot of open discussion but I'm pretty sure it'll mean intimidation and coercion.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 25, 2020, 07:14:17 PM
The Florida legislature had put into place a law restricting the rights of former felons to vote, based on the existence of outstanding debts associated to their incarceration. This was clearly in conflict with the ballot initiative amendment approved by Floridians that guaranteed former felons who had served their sentences the right to vote.

Now it seems like there is a grass roots initiative (https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/politics/lebron-james-florida-voting-rights-felons/index.html) to pay off those debts in order to allow the disenfranchised former convicts their say in the democratic process.

Although it shouldn't take paying a poll tax in order for the will of the majority of Floridians to be respected by their government, it seems like this particular attempt at voter suppression won't be quite as effective as some people had hoped.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Wayward Son on July 27, 2020, 05:10:00 PM
That may not work, since no one keeps track of what these felons owe. (https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article228821704.html)

Which means they provided a way for them to vote which could not be used.  Which shows who is really running Florida.  (Hint: it's not the voters.)  :(
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on July 27, 2020, 05:22:38 PM
This is an ugly court case as well.

Quote
Two felons challenged the law in court and initially won in both the federal district court and the court of appeals. In a second phase of the litigation, Judge Robert Hinkle held an eight-day trial and found that the "overwhelming majority" of felons would be too poor to pay the amounts owed, if they could find out what they owed. Hinkle said that the pay-to-play law had created "an administrative nightmare" and that it also amounted to an unconstitutional tax on voting.

His decision converted what had been a preliminary injunction barring the law from going into effect, into a permanent injunction.

But earlier this month, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, without explanation and two months after the court of appeals decision, stopped Hinkle's order from going into effect. At the same time, the appeals court, which now includes six Trump appointees, set a hearing in the case for Aug. 18, the day of the state primary.
...
The GOP-controlled Legislature, however, sought to limit the effects of the amendment by passing a law that conditioned the right to vote on payment of all fees, fines and restitution that were part of the sentence in each felon's case. The state, however, had no central listing of this information, and the Legislature created no system to help felons ascertain how much, if anything, they owed. Even the state ultimately agreed that it would take six years to create such a system.
...
The Supreme Court's failure to reinstate the status quo, said Sotomayor, "continues a trend of condoning disenfranchisement."

"Ironically," she wrote, the court majority has "wielded Purcell as a reason to forbid courts to make voting safer during a pandemic, overriding two federal courts because any safety related changes supposedly came too close to election day." And now, she concluded, "faced with an appellate court stay that disrupts a legal status quo and risks immense disenfranchisement — a situation that Purcell sought to avoid — the court balks."
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on July 27, 2020, 10:41:50 PM
One of the most important aspects is how the most corrupt machine politics are in Democrat strongholds. I've studied the record of vote-scamming for decades. What is always factual and proven is that almost all the illegal voting comes from the Left. Court case after court case has shown illegal Democrats cheating and sabotaging. The MSM also comes back with projected accusations that both sides do it, which has never been true. There is always 1 out of 100 vote scams done by a non-Leftist, and the media is sure to latch onto those, but they are few and far between - except you'd never know it by how it is reported.

According to Bob Haueter, chief of staff to the California Assembly Republican Caucus, and an expert on manual recounts, a Democrat lawyer intimately involved in "stealing" elections from Republicans through hand recounts admitted to the process and even shared the techniques involved.

Paid Democrat operatives charged with slashing tires of 25 Republican get-outthe-
vote vans in Milwaukee on the morning of Election Day.

Misleading telephone calls made by Democrat operatives targeting Republican
voters in Ohio with the wrong date for the election and faulty polling place
information.

Intimidating and deceiving mailings and telephone calls paid for by the DNC
threatening Republican volunteers in Florida with legal action.

Union-coordinated intimidation and violence campaign targeting Republican
campaign offices and volunteers resulting in a broken arm for a GOP volunteer in
Florida.

The record indicates that in 2004, voter registration fraud was mainly the work of so-called
“nonpartisan” groups such as Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now
(ACORN) and NAACP National Voter Fund. Examples:

Joint task force in Wisconsin found “clear evidence of fraud in the Nov. 2
election in Milwaukee,” including more than 200 felon voters, more than 100
double voters and thousands more ballots cast than voters recorded as having
voted in the city.

NAACP National Voter Fund worker in Ohio paid crack cocaine in exchange for
a large number of fraudulent voter registration cards in names of Dick Tracy,
Mary Poppins and other fictional characters.

Former ACORN worker said there was “a lot of fraud committed” by group in
Florida, as ACORN workers submitted thousands of fraudulent registrations in a
dozen states across the country, resulting in a statewide investigation of the group
in Florida and multiple indictments and convictions of ACORN/Project Vote
workers for voter registration fraud in several states.

In the 1980's, in New Jersey, the Republican Party was incensed with all the Democrat voter scams, so launched pro-active state agents to post signs and have a presence to threaten action in case of voter scams. Democrats alleged that the Republican task force hired off-duty police officers to monitor polls and posted signs in minority areas warning against vote fraud. The RNC denied these allegations and agreed to a “Consent Decree.” Under the terms of the Consent Decree the RNC agreed to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial composition of such districts is a
factor. This decree provided Democrats with a platform from which to charge Republicans with voter
intimidation in elections since 1982. Pure projection.

An internal Kerry-Edwards/DNC manual obtained by the press in October 2004 urged Democrat operatives to launch “pre-emptive strikes” alleging Republican voter intimidation against minority voters, “If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch ‘pre-emptive strike.’” IOW, We can do it, but accuse them even if they don't.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean charged that Republicans caused long lines at polling places on Election Day to suppress the minority vote. Others made the same charge. However; Democrat election officials in Franklin County and the U.S. Department of
Justice have refuted this allegation.

There is case after case of Democrats accusing GOP of trying to manipulate the vote - usually just before or during ballot season, which is always repudiated afterward and found to have been baseless. In my years of research, it is almost always the Left vote-xcamming - but projecting it onto the GOP.

The idea that generates this criminal action by Democrats is their mantra that "the ends justify the means." I've seen local cases where children of Democrat candidates have been so indoctrinated to their mantra, that they think slashing tires and throwing bricks through windows of GOP get out the vote centers is totally acceptable. You see that in current rioting and looting.

Since many IT experts and hackers are Left-wing AntiFa types, the odds that they will work overtime to subvert any system is a no-brainer. Only a fool would say they wouldn't do all they could to scam the vote.

In the outlawed in the UK book, Spycatcher", written by Peter Wright, the actual James Bond "Q" in both MI-5 and MI-6, he explained how the old KGB scammed the PM election to elect a Soviet mole. Anything can be done, so we must be alert.



Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 28, 2020, 02:23:40 PM
Since many IT experts and hackers are Left-wing AntiFa types, the odds that they will work overtime to subvert any system is a no-brainer. Only a fool would say they wouldn't do all they could to scam the vote.
Because... that's what you would do in their position?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 28, 2020, 02:51:02 PM
Republicans don't focus on illegal voting. They use legal methods to subtract Democratic Party voters. Including thwarting the return of ex-felons to the voting rolls, removing polling stations from blue counties, or scrubbing out active voters from registration rolls. It also is far from so lopsided as you suggest. You can do your own research.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

You'll find Republicans and Democrats in the list, though sadly there are no totals. Even if there were, I'm sure you'd dismiss objective evidence and just state that there are a lot more Democrats getting away with it. An awful lot of these involve mere handfuls of ballots, in the smallest case one guy voting absentee in two states.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on July 31, 2020, 08:23:00 AM
Republicans don't focus on illegal voting. They use legal methods to subtract Democratic Party voters. Including thwarting the return of ex-felons to the voting rolls, removing polling stations from blue counties, or scrubbing out active voters from registration rolls. It also is far from so lopsided as you suggest. You can do your own research.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

You'll find Republicans and Democrats in the list, though sadly there are no totals. Even if there were, I'm sure you'd dismiss objective evidence and just state that there are a lot more Democrats getting away with it. An awful lot of these involve mere handfuls of ballots, in the smallest case one guy voting absentee in two states.

Here is an analysis of the Heritage database (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/06/02/low-rates-of-fraud-in-vote-by-mail-states-show-the-benefits-outweigh-the-risks/), focussing on the 5 vote-by-mail states.

Ignoring the size of the states' populations, the worst rate of fraud was in Colorado, with an annual rate of less than 2.5 fraudulent votes per year. As the authors point out, this is inconsequential; such rates, if concentrated within a single neighbourhood, are unlikely to affect the outcome of even school board elections, never mind state-level or national elections.

And of course, Trump's own voting integrity commission (https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-voter-fraud-commission-20180803-story.html) found so little evidence of vote fraud that it was disbanded without even issuing a report...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 31, 2020, 11:15:53 AM
Meanwhile, in some mail in races, they've had a City Council election in New Jersey where multiple (Democrat) council members were charged with voter fraud because of antics with mail-in voting.

Some other areas were reporting something on the order of 20% of received ballots being invalidated because the signatures didn't match, among other disqualification criteria.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on July 31, 2020, 11:49:56 AM
Meanwhile, in some mail in races, they've had a City Council election in New Jersey where multiple (Democrat) council members were charged with voter fraud because of antics with mail-in voting.

Some other areas were reporting something on the order of 20% of received ballots being invalidated because the signatures didn't match, among other disqualification criteria.

Really, the signatures didn't match? Heavens to murgatroyd! My signature has devolved to a sideways E. Signatures don't matter. Have you seen anyone in retail lately who even looked to match your signature to ID? Or even asked for ID? Sure, there are a lot of ways that someone can steal a local election with 20,000 votes or less. That's not the conversation about the EC and millions of votes.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 31, 2020, 04:33:23 PM
Some other areas were reporting something on the order of 20% of received ballots being invalidated because the signatures didn't match, among other disqualification criteria.

Really, the signatures didn't match? Heavens to murgatroyd! My signature has devolved to a sideways E. Signatures don't matter. Have you seen anyone in retail lately who even looked to match your signature to ID? Or even asked for ID? Sure, there are a lot of ways that someone can steal a local election with 20,000 votes or less. That's not the conversation about the EC and millions of votes.
[/quote]

Yes, but with the margins with which some states were won in 2016, a 20% disqualification rate in the right districts could have a very significant outcome in which way the EC vote turns. And naturally adjudicating THAT is likely going to take longer than the mandated timeline for the choosing of electors and the casting of their votes.

But by the flip side, they probably DO have a longer timeline for resolving the outcome of congressional races however.

It's likely a number of Congressional seats won't have outcomes finalized until around Christmas, and then it becomes a game of what the final form of the Congressional Delegation decides to do with the likely to still be disputed Electoral College vote decisions. Where it will likely be congress, using shenanigans not seen since reconstruction to decide which EC votes they'll honor, and which they won't. And even then, they may just decide to "vote it out" on the House Floor depending on how many states have their ballots disqualified and which way they want to interpret things from there.

Whomever is Speaker of the House on January 4th may quite possibly be Acting PotUS on January 20th depending on how big of a mess things have become.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on July 31, 2020, 04:42:42 PM
Although I would say in many respects, I almost want to see a 5% or higher (mail in) ballot disqualification rate to happen in the initial count where the margin of victory is less than 2%.

Depending on controls in place, that means they should be able to start trying to contact the voter to validate they did in fact cast a ballot.

Won't it be interesting to find out how many of those either cannot be found, deny they voted, are found to have been deceased well before any voting was possible, or haven't lived in that area for years(and naturally deny they voted)?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on August 13, 2020, 05:03:00 PM
This should be interesting: Judge orders Trump campaign to produce evidence of voter fraud in Pennsylvania (https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/13/politics/trump-campaign-voter-fraud-lawsuit-pennsylvania/index.html)

Quote
(CNN)  A federal judge in Pennsylvania told the Trump campaign and the Republican Party that they must produce evidence they have of vote-by-mail fraud in the state by Friday.
...
"The Court finds that instances of voter fraud are relevant to the claims and defenses in this case," District Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan wrote on Thursday, telling Republicans that they need to provide evidence of fraud to the Democratic Party and the Sierra Club, which are part of the lawsuit.
...
Ranjan, the judge overseeing the suit, was appointed by Trump.

A hearing about the evidence is set for late September.
I think everybody wants to see this evidence. 
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on August 18, 2020, 06:29:35 AM
It is now a full business day after Judge Ranjan's Friday deadline for the Trump campaign to produce it's evidence of voter fraud (or to state that they have no such evidence) and I am unaware that the campaign has responded.  In fact, they had not as of the Friday deadline (https://www.timesobserver.com/news/local-news/2020/08/trump-campaign-compelled-to-present-voter-fraud-evidence-in-mail-in-voting-case/).

Quote
The order was in response to a motion to compel brought by the Sierra Club and Ranjan concluded that the “Court finds that instances of voter fraud are relevant to the claim and defenses in this case, particularly since (the campaign is) reserving their right to introduce such evidence or retail an expert regarding the same.”

Ranjan ordered that the campaign “produce such evidence in their possession, and if they have none, state as much.”

He said a deadline of Friday for the campaign to respond.

Nothing had been filed by the campaign as of 4 p.m. Friday.

Is anybody honestly surprised?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on August 19, 2020, 12:14:34 PM
Does anyone know where I can get an N95 mask that isn't a cheap knockoff? Since Texas doesn't have an absentee option unless you can prove you will not be able to get to a polling station, I'll be taking my chances at a polling station. I need protection, because I am an overweight asthmatic smoker over 50, and I've had pneumonia twice in the past year, one of which necessitated an ER stay with a pulseox of 89 requiring multiple rounds of treatment before release.

Naturally I'll look for early voting, maybe lurking in the parking lot until the lines go down. Why N95? Because the line is probably going to be about 40% jackass anti-maskers. Thanks Texas.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: cherrypoptart on August 19, 2020, 01:52:39 PM
No, I've only been able to get the KN95s but the latest one I got had a credible looking thing on its advertisement that it is one of those that have been FDA tested and approved.

"Disposable KN95 Face Masks, Non-Woven 5-Layer Disposable Mask, Elastic Ear Loops, Adjustable Nose Wire, Light Weight, Perfect for Office, 5 Units/Bag
Visit the Unknown Store
4.3 out of 5 stars    179 ratings | 24 answered questions
Price:   $14.99 ($3.00 / Count)  & FREE Returns
Disclaimer: This Disposable KN95 Non-Medical Face Mask is included on the FDA Emergency Use Authorization List. The FDA sampled and CDC tested a limited number of masks from this manufacturer and found that the filtration efficiency was above 95%.
Standard: GB2626-2006
5-Layer Non-Woven KN95 Disposable Protective Face Mask
Designed to offer more protection than a standard disposable 3-Ply mask
Comfortable to fit with elastic ear loops and adjustable nose wire, light weight"


I got it and have been wearing it and it seems okay. I don't have stock in the company so hopefully I won't get in trouble for posting all that. I'm actually looking for better masks too so if there is a problem with this one or people have better ones they know about I'd also appreciate that information.

Now what I do is double up on the masks and wear my copper mask with this KN95 mask, the copper compression mask on top.

"Copper Compression Face Mask - 2 Pack - Highest Copper Content Reusable Face Masks for Men and Women (White)"

The more the merrier. I tried with another mask on top of that, a cheap little mask I got for free, but it wasn't comfortable so I'll just go with the two. Part of the problem with the KN95s even if they do filter 95% is that the fit may not be tight enough especially when you use them for a while and the straps get loose so that's where the compression mask may help, to keep the KN95 snug, plus it's another layer of protection. If people have suggestions for added safety, much obliged. Most people are happy with wearing their mask to protect others just in case they have the virus and that's fine but that's not really enough for me. I want to wear a mask that doesn't just protect others from me but also is effective at protecting me from them.

I went to the dollar store one time right when it opened which is when I like to go to stores now to give the viral droplets time to settle overnight and I see the employees all maskless so when I come in they dutifully put on their masks but that pretty much defeated the purpose of my well laid plans.

I got some goggles but they are anti-fog which I thought was good but it turns out that means they have ventilation holes in them. I used them anyway since all I've been using before I got them was just sunglasses and a hat. Now I finally got my face shield so I may wear that next time with the goggles. Hopefully that will be enough. Quite an outfit already. I had someone take a selfie a respectable distance off but I'm pretty sure they did it to get me in the background. Oh well at least I had my mask and hat and stuff so hopefully it protects me not only from the risks of viruses but also from the risk of going viral.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on August 20, 2020, 03:55:38 PM
Wow.  So in their continuing effort to hijack citizens' ability to vote, Trump's Postmaster Bagman Louis DeJoy' Postal Service forbids employees from signing absentee ballots as witnesses while working. (https://www.adn.com/politics/2020/08/18/in-rule-change-postal-service-forbids-employees-from-signing-absentee-ballots-as-witnesses/)

Quote
In a nationwide rule change that went unnoticed this summer, the U.S. Postal Service has forbidden employees from signing absentee ballots as witnesses while on duty. The change could make it more difficult for Alaskans, particularly rural residents, to vote by mail.

It's bizarre how so many of the USPS changes recently either have the direct effect of impeding the ability to vote, or just coincidentally have that side effect.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on August 20, 2020, 04:09:31 PM
Wow.  So in their continuing effort to hijack citizens' ability to vote, Trump's Postmaster Bagman Louis DeJoy' Postal Service forbids employees from signing absentee ballots as witnesses while working. (https://www.adn.com/politics/2020/08/18/in-rule-change-postal-service-forbids-employees-from-signing-absentee-ballots-as-witnesses/)

Quote
In a nationwide rule change that went unnoticed this summer, the U.S. Postal Service has forbidden employees from signing absentee ballots as witnesses while on duty. The change could make it more difficult for Alaskans, particularly rural residents, to vote by mail.

It's bizarre how so many of the USPS changes recently either have the direct effect of impeding the ability to vote, or just coincidentally have that side effect.

Sounds bad, but shouldn't have any practical impact. From the Alaska voter website, which is the state mentioned in the article:

Quote
In the current pandemic, there are few situations where an official is reasonably accessible. If it isn’t easy for you to get to an authorized official, your ballot can be witnessed by anyone over the age of 18. The division just received confirmation from the USPS that postal employees are prohibited from serving as witnesses in their official capacity while on duty, due in part to the potential operational impacts.

Now, I'm not sure how they officially define "easy". It seems it would apply in the rural areas the article indicates where postal employees are the only reasonable option.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: rightleft22 on August 20, 2020, 04:26:07 PM
Wow.  So in their continuing effort to hijack citizens' ability to vote, Trump's Postmaster Bagman Louis DeJoy' Postal Service forbids employees from signing absentee ballots as witnesses while working. (https://www.adn.com/politics/2020/08/18/in-rule-change-postal-service-forbids-employees-from-signing-absentee-ballots-as-witnesses/)

Quote
In a nationwide rule change that went unnoticed this summer, the U.S. Postal Service has forbidden employees from signing absentee ballots as witnesses while on duty. The change could make it more difficult for Alaskans, particularly rural residents, to vote by mail.

It's bizarre how so many of the USPS changes recently either have the direct effect of impeding the ability to vote, or just coincidentally have that side effect.

Sounds bad, but shouldn't have any practical impact. From the Alaska voter website, which is the state mentioned in the article:

Quote
In the current pandemic, there are few situations where an official is reasonably accessible. If it isn’t easy for you to get to an authorized official, your ballot can be witnessed by anyone over the age of 18. The division just received confirmation from the USPS that postal employees are prohibited from serving as witnesses in their official capacity while on duty, due in part to the potential operational impacts.

Now, I'm not sure how they officially define "easy". It seems it would apply in the rural areas the article indicates where postal employees are the only reasonable option.

It may not have any impact however this missing with the post office is very much bad and should be troubling across the political spectrum.

Sadly the strongest voices on this site which should be coming out against this type of thing remain silent. The ends justify the means... but they have forgotten which ends they are aiming for.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on August 20, 2020, 04:42:00 PM
I'm not a fan of the postal changes, especially the timing of them. There's not a lot that can be done about it, since for once they are being careful to be able to legitimately claim that they are necessary operational changes to accomplish fiscal goals.

Some things are just silly to complain about, like routine mailbox removal. When the vast majority of people who receive mail have a way to send it without a blue box.

What can we do other than gnash our teeth? Well, for one thing, we could individually refrain from mailing or ordering anything that is not critically necessary in the month of October.

Letters to the Editor: Want an honest election? If it isn’t a ballot, don’t mail it in October (https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-18/if-it-isnt-a-ballot-dont-mail-it-in-october)
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: rightleft22 on August 20, 2020, 04:47:07 PM
Maybe
But it smells, and it smells bad and deeply troubling in a long line of things that are troubling.

When do we say enough
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on August 20, 2020, 05:01:31 PM
Maybe
But it smells, and it smells bad and deeply troubling in a long line of things that are troubling.

When do we say enough

Hopefully November 3rd.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Wayward Son on August 20, 2020, 05:07:19 PM
Speaking of voting mechanisms, if you (or someone you know) wants to know about how to vote by mail on Nov. 3, Represent.US has a page that details on how to go about it. (https://represent.us/how-to-vote-2020/)  It has a map of all 50 states.  You click on your state, and it takes you to the entry with deadlines, rules, etc. for your state.  It also provides links to the applications, including some downloadable pdf files you can fill out yourself.  One-stop shopping for your vote-by-mail needs. :)
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Wayward Son on September 01, 2020, 01:27:44 PM
Here's another good site/article: The Best Way to Vote in Every State.  An extremely comprehensive guide to making sure your ballot gets counted, no matter where in America you live. (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/08/2020-voting-guide.html)

Find your state and make sure your vote is counted! (No matter which side of the aisle you stand.)
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 10, 2020, 10:44:04 PM
Not an actual surprise, but GOP election lawyer issues stern rebuke to Trump Admin concerning mail in vote fraud (or the lack thereof).

Quote
Longtime Republican election lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg in a new op-ed issued a blunt rebuke to GOP claims of widespread voter fraud as President Trump looks to cast doubt over election procedures heading into November.

Ginsberg, who has represented four Republican presidential candidates and played a key role in cases like Bush v. Gore in the 2000 election, wrote in The Washington Post that a “lack of evidence” makes claims of fraud from Trump and other Republicans “unsustainable” and that the GOP is needlessly inciting concerns over the presidential race.

“The truth is that after decades of looking for illegal voting, there’s no proof of widespread fraud. At most, there are isolated incidents — by both Democrats and Republicans. Elections are not rigged. Absentee ballots use the same process as mail-in ballots — different states use different labels for the same process,” Ginsberg wrote.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 11, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
Not an actual surprise, but GOP election lawyer issues stern rebuke to Trump Admin concerning mail in vote fraud (or the lack thereof).

Quote
“The truth is that after decades of looking for illegal voting, there’s no proof of widespread fraud. At most, there are isolated incidents — by both Democrats and Republicans. Elections are not rigged. Absentee ballots use the same process as mail-in ballots — different states use different labels for the same process,” Ginsberg wrote.

Except where it isn't the same process. False equivalence. No verification of voter address prior to sending the ballot, no recent voter signature requirement on file(to cross-reference on getting the ballot back), and the list goes on.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on September 11, 2020, 06:04:40 PM
...No verification of voter address prior to sending the ballot, no recent voter signature requirement on file(to cross-reference on getting the ballot back), and the list goes on.

I just rewatched the James Collier interview showing some of the early vote-scam investigations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oA4nDuuBOg

Early on, he mentions the voting machines in Dade County and how the machines had been modified to stop the poll watchers from physically sseing the vote totals when the back of the mchine is unlocked and opened. They took all the keys away so no one could see, and had a wheel that rolled across the raised numbers which were then printed on a roll of paper. One machine malfunctioned and it was opened only to find the paper had been crumpled, but all the numbers were already emplaced. In that instance, 4,000 poll watchers walked off to protest the vote scamming. That it was done was proven.

Like I said, the Democrat vote scamming has been a major reason for their victories. It has been institutionalized. The early investigations back in the seventies have been ongoing, but try to find the info. Like the real vote totals, the scamming has been scrubbed. there have been many court cases that ruled scamming - but trying to find them is almost impossible - because the next important strategy for them next to scamming the votes, is hiding the fact that they have done so.

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on September 12, 2020, 02:16:44 PM
Did you post that yourself? Unconfirmed garbage not worth watching, which I didn't for a nine year old largely unwatched community TV link at best. Your credibility is beyond reproach, jackass.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on September 14, 2020, 12:58:48 PM
Did you post that yourself? Unconfirmed garbage not worth watching, which I didn't for a nine year old largely unwatched community TV link at best. Your credibility is beyond reproach, jackass.

No rebuttal, at all? I guess the "unconfirmed garbage not worth watching" is too solid and difficult for you to try to refute. Vote scamming has been here for a long time, and I have followed it from all sources. Actual court cases have found Democrat operatives guilty at a much larger rate than any other party.

As of today, the MSM is reporting that should the election extend past January 20, when the new President is Constitutionally required to be sworn in, Madame Pelosi will accept the interim Presidency and wield all power until the courts have decided who won, if ever. Like similar cases, they will probably order a new election to be held. If that occurs, the donkey will have already replaced the eagle on the Presidential seal.

But, you think you know best.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on September 14, 2020, 02:58:53 PM
To a 30 year old VHS tape, with no provenance, about a punch card voting system that no longer exists? There's nothing difficult at all about it, except tolerating a conspiracy theorist that would have joined QAnon if he had lived long enough. Check out his moon landing hoax expose (https://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/collier.htm) too, I'm sure you'll find it compelling.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 23, 2020, 09:25:19 PM
This should be fun: Democrats are roughly twice as likely as Republicans to vote by mail (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/18/election-2020-biden-voters-twice-likely-vote-mail-survey-finds/3394795001/)

Quote
WASHINGTON — More than one-third of Americans intend to vote by mail in the November presidential election, but Democratic voters are much more bullish about the option than Republicans, according to a new survey.

Thirty-seven percent of registered voters said they are likely to vote by mail in the November election, by receiving a mailed ballot and either mailing it back or returning it in person, according to a new survey released Tuesday by the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape project.

Among them, 48% of voters who plan to vote for Democratic presumptive nominee Joe Biden said they are likely to vote by mail, according to the survey. That's more than twice the 23% of voters backing President Donald Trump who said they are likely to vote by mail.

Almost half (!) of Biden supporters who intend to vote have stated a desire to vote by mail, as compared to less than one quarter of Trump supporters.  Ignoring any other shenanigans, this is going to lead to a very predictable situation on election night - Trump will almost certainly have a large election night lead in the electoral college based only on those votes processed on the day in question.

Why? Well, in addition to the 'regular' overtime count of late reporting precincts, provisional ballots and unprocessed mail in votes on the night of the election (which has trended more and more Democrat over the past 20 years) the votes not processed by the end of election day will be hugely bolstered by the millions of additional mail in ballots that will not have been counted by the end of the day, and some of which will not even have been received by the end of voting day.

Because many states don't allow mail in votes to be counted before election day, it is almost guaranteed that there will be millions, if not tens of millions, of un-tallied mail in votes received before election day, yet not counted until days later.  And those overtime count votes will strongly favour Biden - by about two to one, in the case of a tight election and if the above survey is roughly accurate.

But on election night?  Trump should, if he is at all in the running, have a huge lead, maybe on the order of 30% more votes than Biden.

In the ensuing days, and possibly weeks, Trump's lead over Biden will shrink. The good thing is that everybody is aware of this dynamic, and I have seen signs from both camps that they expect the count to take an unusually long time and have asked all parties to be patient in waiting for the final results...

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 23, 2020, 09:31:16 PM
In the ensuing days, and possibly weeks, Trump's lead over Biden will shrink. The good thing is that everybody is aware of this dynamic, and I have seen signs from both camps that they expect the count to take an unusually long time and have asked all parties to be patient in waiting for the final results...

Thoughts?

Wait you've seen signs from the Trump camp they expect and accept this fact?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 23, 2020, 09:33:58 PM
Oh absolutely.  Trump and his team are well known for their sense of fair play, honesty and ethics.

Just ask... well, you know.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 23, 2020, 10:33:53 PM
Projections:
1. Trump will have an electoral college lead on election night
2. Trump will claim immediate victory. Biden will call for the vote counting to be completed. Trump will demand that vote counting be terminated, and for Biden to concede.
3. Trump will  decry vote fraud associated to mail-in votes, and that they are trying to steal the election.
4. In the ensuing days, Trump's lead will be reduced; several state counts will flip in Biden's direction.
5. Trump will call on his supporters to protect democracy; he will also call for all mail-in ballots to be discarded and to go with the election night results.
6. Lawsuits contesting results will fall quicker than confetti at a wedding. Vote counting will be interrupted, stopped, restarted, re-stopped...
7. There will be protests.  There will be violence.
8. There will be open discussion of state legislators choosing electors directly, and discarding the tabulated votes; Trump will likely argue that the voting fraud is so rampant that they must do so.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 24, 2020, 01:23:48 AM
This should be fun: Democrats are roughly twice as likely as Republicans to vote by mail (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/18/election-2020-biden-voters-twice-likely-vote-mail-survey-finds/3394795001/)

Quote
WASHINGTON — More than one-third of Americans intend to vote by mail in the November presidential election, but Democratic voters are much more bullish about the option than Republicans, according to a new survey.

Thirty-seven percent of registered voters said they are likely to vote by mail in the November election, by receiving a mailed ballot and either mailing it back or returning it in person, according to a new survey released Tuesday by the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape project.

Among them, 48% of voters who plan to vote for Democratic presumptive nominee Joe Biden said they are likely to vote by mail, according to the survey. That's more than twice the 23% of voters backing President Donald Trump who said they are likely to vote by mail.

Almost half (!) of Biden supporters who intend to vote have stated a desire to vote by mail, as compared to less than one quarter of Trump supporters.  Ignoring any other shenanigans, this is going to lead to a very predictable situation on election night - Trump will almost certainly have a large election night lead in the electoral college based only on those votes processed on the day in question.

Why? Well, in addition to the 'regular' overtime count of late reporting precincts, provisional ballots and unprocessed mail in votes on the night of the election (which has trended more and more Democrat over the past 20 years) the votes not processed by the end of election day will be hugely bolstered by the millions of additional mail in ballots that will not have been counted by the end of the day, and some of which will not even have been received by the end of voting day.

Because many states don't allow mail in votes to be counted before election day, it is almost guaranteed that there will be millions, if not tens of millions, of un-tallied mail in votes received before election day, yet not counted until days later.  And those overtime count votes will strongly favour Biden - by about two to one, in the case of a tight election and if the above survey is roughly accurate.

But on election night?  Trump should, if he is at all in the running, have a huge lead, maybe on the order of 30% more votes than Biden.

In the ensuing days, and possibly weeks, Trump's lead over Biden will shrink. The good thing is that everybody is aware of this dynamic, and I have seen signs from both camps that they expect the count to take an unusually long time and have asked all parties to be patient in waiting for the final results...

Thoughts?

Major outlets have been calling it "The Red Mirage" scenario for several weeks now.

Although there is some more nuance to that story than what you're talking about.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 24, 2020, 01:30:54 AM
Projections:
1. Trump will have an electoral college lead on election night
2. Trump will claim immediate victory. Biden will call for the vote counting to be completed. Trump will demand that vote counting be terminated, and for Biden to concede.
3. Trump will  decry vote fraud associated to mail-in votes, and that they are trying to steal the election.
4. In the ensuing days, Trump's lead will be reduced; several state counts will flip in Biden's direction.
5. Trump will call on his supporters to protect democracy; he will also call for all mail-in ballots to be discarded and to go with the election night results.
6. Lawsuits contesting results will fall quicker than confetti at a wedding. Vote counting will be interrupted, stopped, restarted, re-stopped...
7. There will be protests.  There will be violence.
8. There will be open discussion of state legislators choosing electors directly, and discarding the tabulated votes; Trump will likely argue that the voting fraud is so rampant that they must do so.
3.a) Trump is going to decry the ballot verification process in many parts of the country as things go into overtime. (Poor or no Signature verification process, accepting late arrival ballots without postmarks, etc)
3.b) Some areas are likely to start bearing witness to "unusually high turnout" in some cases, possibly even having nearly every registered voter vote. Which in California could include more people voting than actually live in the community(there are a few counties in California where that is known that their voter rolls are larger than their population)
5.a)Trump will call for stronger verification of mail-in ballots, which include trying to contact the voter to verify the person actually exists.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 24, 2020, 10:00:32 AM
3.a) Trump is going to decry the ballot verification process in many parts of the country as things go into overtime. (Poor or no Signature verification process, accepting late arrival ballots without postmarks, etc)

Because everyone's signature is consistent over time and elections officials have the training and expertise to spot a fraud vs typical signature drift.

Lots of ballots aren't going to have postmarks because many (if not all) jurisdictions have ways to drop off mail in ballots at a drop box.

Quote
3.b) Some areas are likely to start bearing witness to "unusually high turnout" in some cases, possibly even having nearly every registered voter vote. Which in California could include more people voting than actually live in the community(there are a few counties in California where that is known that their voter rolls are larger than their population)

And yet Trump's voter fraud commission was disbanded without finding a single fraudulent vote cast. If it is so well known it seems like they could have found something. Also California isn't exactly in play.

I'm more concerned about the head of elections in Ohio deliberately trying to make it hard to return mail in ballots in person.

Quote
5.a)Trump will call for stronger verification of mail-in ballots, which include trying to contact the voter to verify the person actually exists.

Sure, "stronger verification," he'll call for throwing all the ballots out or not waiting for them to be counted. If he's ahead on election night he's going to try to have the counting of all mail in ballots stopped.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: rightleft22 on September 24, 2020, 10:31:27 AM
I don't see how the election isn't going to be contested and I don't see the Democrats winning if it is.

Unless the Democrats win by a huge margin on election day they are going to lose, and even then I'm not going to bet on it. 
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 24, 2020, 10:32:47 AM
What else has Trump done this week:
1. He refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power (the question was "win, lose or draw..."). Yes, some people are unable to actually process those words whatsoever, but the majority of Republicans can undoubtedly understand what Trump has said on this topic, and I expect they are also privately horrified.  The question is whether they will do anything about it, or ignore  this complete betrayal of the country's foundational principles.
2. His campaign is now encouraging an "army" of people to intimidate voters at polling centres.  ("We need every able-bodied man and woman to join Army for Trump’s election security operation").  Thousands of untrained, passionate Trump acolytes, 'patrolling' polling stations (I can only guess which ones), and doing what, exactly?  The intimidation is not the goal, I expect.  The real goal will be the resulting violent conflagrations and the closing of polling stations.

That Republican's are not decrying this as loudly as everybody else is not at all surprising, but it is very, very sad.  The USA is effectively in its death throes, and the world is looking on with a mixture of pity and horror.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: LetterRip on September 24, 2020, 10:39:33 AM
Quote
Because everyone's signature is consistent over time and elections officials have the training and expertise to spot a fraud vs typical signature drift.

There is actually bank software that can detect fraudulent signatures that isn't dependent on visual, but rather the placement of pressure (there are dimples where the pressure has increased and you will consistently increase pressure at certain points in your signature, basically impossible for all but the most skilled forgers to replicate).
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: rightleft22 on September 24, 2020, 10:58:57 AM
What else has Trump done this week:
1. He refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power (the question was "win, lose or draw..."). Yes, some people are unable to actually process those words whatsoever, but the majority of Republicans can undoubtedly understand what Trump has said on this topic, and I expect they are also privately horrified.  The question is whether they will do anything about it, or ignore  this complete betrayal of the country's foundational principles.
2. His campaign is now encouraging an "army" of people to intimidate voters at polling centres.  ("We need every able-bodied man and woman to join Army for Trump’s election security operation").  Thousands of untrained, passionate Trump acolytes, 'patrolling' polling stations (I can only guess which ones), and doing what, exactly?  The intimidation is not the goal, I expect.  The real goal will be the resulting violent conflagrations and the closing of polling stations.

That Republican's are not decrying this as loudly as everybody else is not at all surprising, but it is very, very sad.  The USA is effectively in its death throes, and the world is looking on with a mixture of pity and horror.

I think it begs the question. How are the Republicans defining democracy and rule of law? Is democracy something the membership wants anymore?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 24, 2020, 11:22:02 AM
I think it begs the question. How are the Republicans defining democracy and rule of law? Is democracy something the membership wants anymore?

Scary question. And looking back at how the Republican party has systematically tried to make voting harder (voter id, reduced early voting hours, bigger precincts in urban areas to cause long lines, ...). They did this in the name of voting security while at the same time being in charge of the states with the worst voting machines from a security perspective. Georgia is particularly egregious in the use of touch screen voting with no paper back up. Ohio isn't far behind. Hacking these machines is a much easier and harder to detect problem than in person voter fraud.

Republicans are also the current champs at extreme gerrymandering. Trump has been screwing with the census timeline, the senate is refusing to take up legislation to fix that. It's almost like they want a severe undercount as long as it seems likely to benefit them politically.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 24, 2020, 11:34:17 AM
I think it begs the question. How are the Republicans defining democracy and rule of law? Is democracy something the membership wants anymore?

At least a few R leaders are pushing back. At least for now anyway.

Quote
Shortly after his remarks, Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, tweeted his vehement disapproval: "Fundamental to democracy is the peaceful transition of power; without that, there is Belarus. Any suggestion that a president might not respect this Constitutional guarantee is both unthinkable and unacceptable."

Other top Republicans followed suit Thursday morning. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., wrote: "there will be an orderly transition just as there has been every four years since 1792."

Based on Mitch's current record of holding to his previous statements, I'll believe he'll take action to oppose Trump abusing power when I see it.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 24, 2020, 11:58:41 AM
Both of those statements are pretty meaningless without action.

Decrying potential violence (as did Romney) or ignoring the risk of violence being used to derail the voting process (as did McConnell) does little, if anything, to prevent it.

The risk, of course, is not that on January 20 there will be a refusal to accept reality; it is that bad actors will pervert the mechanisms by which the electorate makes known its decision.  Things exactly like voter intimidation at polling places, using propaganda to install doubt and distrust into the voting process itself, using the courts to delay counting votes until after the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, fomenting unrest and violence to further debilitate the ability to count votes, and pressuring state legislators to ignore cast votes, and to use the aforementioned chaos and distrust to rationalize that decision.

Milquetoast statements of optimism simply won't safeguard the electoral process.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 24, 2020, 05:23:29 PM
Senator Rick Scott attempts to ... pleasure Donald Trump (https://www.rickscott.senate.gov/sen-rick-scott-introduces-voter-act-prevent-election-fraud) with his proposed VOTER act to promote voter suppression.  The last line is especially pernicious:
Quote
  • Requires all eligible ballots to be counted and reported within 24 hours after polls close on Election Day to promote certainty in the outcome of a federal election
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on September 24, 2020, 06:52:38 PM
...The risk, of course, is not that on January 20 there will be a refusal to accept reality; it is that bad actors will pervert the mechanisms by which the electorate makes known its decision.  Things exactly like voter intimidation at polling places, using propaganda to install doubt and distrust into the voting process itself, using the courts to delay counting votes until after the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, fomenting unrest and violence to further debilitate the ability to count votes, and pressuring state legislators to ignore cast votes, and to use the aforementioned chaos and distrust to rationalize that decision.

Absolutely correct. The bad actors historically have always been the Democrats. They also historically blame the other side for making it hard to vote, when the other side insists we should make it easy to ensure fair elections. Who fights against voter ID to ensure fair voting? Who wants voters who are illegal to vote to become legal? Who has theatened to get rid of the Electoral College? Who has threatened to make DC and Puerto Rico States, for the sole goal of creating four new Democrat Senators? Who has threatened to stack the Courts? Who has said Biden should never concede the election under any circumstances? Since it is the Democrats who are voting using mail-in ballots, and GOP who will vote traditionally, the early totals will favor the GOP, and late vote by mail may come in weeks after election day. Therefore it will be the Democrat lawyers, who are already in place all over the country, who will file law suits to delay it.

Personally, after seeing so many man on the street interviews with alleged voters who can't name their Vice President, nor know who fought in the Civil War, I wish these dolts didn't have the vote. But they do. We shouldn't expand the idiot class to include scam votes.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 12:14:54 AM
The risk, of course, is not that on January 20 there will be a refusal to accept reality; it is that bad actors will pervert the mechanisms by which the electorate makes known its decision.  Things exactly like voter intimidation at polling places, using propaganda to install doubt and distrust into the voting process itself, using the courts to delay counting votes until after the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, fomenting unrest and violence to further debilitate the ability to count votes, and pressuring state legislators to ignore cast votes, and to use the aforementioned chaos and distrust to rationalize that decision.

I think your bigger chaos option will be that that there will be vote tallies still being disputed on Januart 20th, 2021; and that the Speaker of the House will refuse to carry out their legally mandated taskings they were supposed to perform on January 4th in the hope that the popular vote result in certain states will change, and justify their either invalidating electoral votes from certain states, or selecting "an alternative" set of electors a'la 1876.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 25, 2020, 06:41:31 AM
The electors will have long since been chosen - in mid-December latest. And since the majority of swing States are held by Republican legislatures it's highly unlikely that there would still be any counting being done anyway, not that it would make any difference.

The couple of exceptions would be where there's a Democratic governor, so possibly those States would send two distinct sets of electors. The challenge will then be which set of electors are eventually certified. But that will have nothing to do with the ongoing count at that point.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 11:52:16 AM
The electors will have long since been chosen - in mid-December latest. And since the majority of swing States are held by Republican legislatures it's highly unlikely that there would still be any counting being done anyway, not that it would make any difference.

The couple of exceptions would be where there's a Democratic governor, so possibly those States would send two distinct sets of electors. The challenge will then be which set of electors are eventually certified. But that will have nothing to do with the ongoing count at that point.

It would have everything to do with the ongoing count at that point from the position of the Democrats.

If there are ballots still in dispute on the 20th of January and Trump is still winning(in the relevant state), the Democrats could very easily say that "because the will of the people in (insert decisive state(s) here) is unknown" they cannot act on either set of electors, and as such are going to delay the congressional portion of the process until said legal processes complete.

Then they can scream about the Republicans being undemocratic when they push for ratifying the results as they are.

And you end up with the Speaker of the House as Acting PotUS with its own set on constitutional issues, unless they slip through some surprise changes to the presidential succession process between now and January, which is unlikely.

At this point, I really do think the Presidential Succession Act does need to be revised to skip over the Speaker of the House, and possibly the President pro Tempore of the Senate as well in the event that a presidential electoral dispute is still ongoing in Congress at noon on January 20th.

Because "Acting President and Speaker" is all kinds of constitutional nightmare, as it presumes a rogue "House of Representatives," which nobody should want to establish precedent for, the 25th Amendment becomes N/A as there is both no sitting Vice President to initiate anything, and the sitting President at that point also holds the title of Speaker of the House, who is one of the people who is supposed to certify the Presidential incapacity....

And as that Acting PotUS is Speaker, they have majority support in the House, which means impeachment is also out as a constitutional/legal option. The only solution at that point is for someone(SecDef, the Senate?) to declare what the House of Representatives is doing to be an insurrection and then go about arresting/killing a significant portion of the newly elected members of the House of Representatives...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: oldbrian on September 25, 2020, 11:54:25 AM
Does anyone know offhand when exactly (or even roughly) we decided that all votes must be counted on election day?  Way back in the 1700's and at least early 1800's we didn't care if it took a few days to count and announce.  Did that officially change at some point, or are we just so used to instant communication that we cannot now conceive of waiting?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 12:02:11 PM
Does anyone know offhand when exactly (or even roughly) we decided that all votes must be counted on election day?  Way back in the 1700's and at least early 1800's we didn't care if it took a few days to count and announce.  Did that officially change at some point, or are we just so used to instant communication that we cannot now conceive of waiting?

https://history.house.gov/Institution/Electoral-College/Electoral-College/

Quote
Since 1887, 3 U.S.C. 15 sets the method for objections to electoral votes. During the Joint Session, Members of Congress may object to individual electoral votes or to state returns as a whole. An objection must be declared in writing and signed by at least one Representative and one Senator. In the case of an objection, the Joint Session recesses and each chamber considers the objection separately in a session which cannot last more than two hours with each Member speaking for no more than five minutes. After each house votes on whether or not to accept the objection, the Joint Session reconvenes and both chambers disclose their decisions. If they agree to the objection, the votes in question are not counted. If either chamber does not agree with the objection, the votes are counted.

20th Amendment section 1:
Quote
The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
Section 3:
Quote
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Which is where the succession act of 1947 would make the Speaker of the House "Acting President"
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 12:06:57 PM
The previous is just the congressional side of things.

The Electors are supposed to have voted and transmitted their vote to Congress by the middle of the December, as previously mentioned in this thread. But at 1876 demonstrated, states can, and have, sent results from multiple sets of electors in the past, and this year may be no different. In which case Congress decides which set they honor.

And that will be the "backdoor" means for the Democrats to switch the results if they desire as that is the one situation where they can get things through on a simple majority vote. If they simply invalidate the electoral votes and send the vote to Congress itself, the laws in their present form require them to vote "by state caucus" which the Republicans control a majority of, despite being the minority in the House, which would likely result in a Trump win, so the Democrats will do everything they can to avoid that specific process.

Of course, this all becomes moot if the Republicans somehow get a majority in the House and keep their Senate majority. At that point, its possible that they could nullify the electoral votes they dispute which went for Biden and elect Trump instead, but I find that outcome highly unlikely.

But Democrats running the clock down to January 20th? I could see that happening if there are legal disputes still ongoing.

Taking it past noon on the 20th of January is questionable, but it is in the realm of possible.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: oldbrian on September 25, 2020, 01:51:10 PM
Did...did that actually answer my question?  Is there a statute or law or amendment somewhere that explicitly states that the ballots must be counted al on the same day?

Or is the deadline Jan 20th, and that is why they get sworn in on that day?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 02:10:36 PM
Did...did that actually answer my question?  Is there a statute or law or amendment somewhere that explicitly states that the ballots must be counted al on the same day?

Or is the deadline Jan 20th, and that is why they get sworn in on that day?

Deadline would seem to be January 3rd in all practical ways, as that is when the new Congress is to be sworn in unless otherwise stipulated by law(and if the votes for the House are done, it follows the Presidential votes should be too). The Electoral votes by proceedure/law is to be counted on the following day that Congress is in session, during a Joint Session of Congress.

As the 3rd falls on a Sunday this year, that likely means the 4th/5th of January this year.

That said, there are statutory laws saying the Electoral votes are to be cast in December, so the deadline for electoral votes is that date.

As a matter of strict constitutional law, the deadline is noon on January 20th, but as it actively provisions for an acting president in an unresolved succession scenario as per the 20th Amendment, it could be argued that there is no practical deadline on that front. Although the only other situation that would compare at that point is the 1876 Presidential election.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 02:27:44 PM
The challenge here is we're dealing with multiple layers of things going on.

1) We have the popular vote(broken down to a per state event), conducted in accordance with statutory law.
2) We have the selection of the electors who then cast their vote for PotUS and the VP "on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December." Which is basically the hard deadline for counting the popular vote as per statutory law. At this point, the matter leaves the courts, and becomes entirely political and rests in the hands of Congress.
3) We have a Joint Session of Congress accepting and ratifying the Electoral Votes received. By statute this is to happen during the second day they are in session. But that isn't a constitutional requirement. And while the courts could try to insert themselves into the matter of Congress ignoring their statutory obligations, that's unlikely to happen. So if Congress wants to ignore that law, they can ignore that law, nobody is going to be able to (legally) penalize them for it.
4) We have the 20th amendment mandating that the current President and Vice President's term of office ends at noon on the 20th of January of the relevant year. If there is no president of vice president selected at that time, the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 comes into play, and the Speaker of the House becomes Acting President.

So the only "hard deadlines" are December 14th for the electors submitting their electoral ballots to Congress, the electors themselves, the courts, and even Congress at this point cannot do anything to effectively change that.
Then the January 4th/5th date rolls around where Congress is supposed to do their thing, but there are no penalties for them if they fail to comply.
The on January 20th there is a very hard and firm deadline after which the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 determines who gets to be "the Acting President" while Congress decides what it is going to do.

Edit:

Off in the weeds we have the "January 3rd or other date as selected by Congress" deadline for the swearing in of the next Congress. There is no provision there for disputed Congressional seats and takes off into another different rabbit hole on what provisions, if any, there are for such an event.

Edit 2: If looks like, at least as it pertains to the Senate, that in the event of a disputed seat, the seat remains vacant until the winners credentials are accepted. This happened to two senators in 2010. Al Franken did not assume his seat until June 30th of that year. So it is possible that the next Congress could convene with a lot of empty Congressional seats depending on how extensively results are being disputed beyond the Presidential race itself.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 25, 2020, 02:35:52 PM
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916626848/florida-republicans-take-aim-at-efforts-to-pay-felons-fines-so-they-can-vote (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916626848/florida-republicans-take-aim-at-efforts-to-pay-felons-fines-so-they-can-vote)

Quote
Florida's attorney general is asking law enforcement agencies to open an investigation of a contribution made by billionaire and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg to help pay the fines and court fees of felons.
...
Florida's law requiring felons to pay fines before they can vote was recently upheld by a federal appeals court. Julie Ebenstein, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project, said that in court part of the state's defense was that if felons don't have the funds, others could always pay for them.

Republicans again showing they want to make voting more difficult.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 02:45:13 PM
Edit 2: If looks like, at least as it pertains to the Senate, that in the event of a disputed seat, the seat remains vacant until the winners credentials are accepted. This happened to two senators in 2010. Al Franken did not assume his seat until June 30th of that year. So it is possible that the next Congress could convene with a lot of empty Congressional seats depending on how extensively results are being disputed beyond the Presidential race itself.

Correction: 2009, and while the legal dispute ended on the 30th, his credentials were not accepted until the 7th of July.

Also of note: The delay in his case hinged on the counting of a few hundred disputed absentee ballots.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: oldbrian on September 25, 2020, 04:47:13 PM
Thank you, Deamon!  I did not want to do all of that work myself, and did not intend that you should do it on my behalf.  I would have accepted a shrug and a 'dunno'.  You went above and beyond.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 25, 2020, 04:51:12 PM
Electors must be chosen by early December, and the electors will cast their votes December 14.

After that, the vote tallies will be academic; there will still undoubtedly be power plays to be made, but any updates to the counts themselves will not figure into those actions. Could increases in margins of 'victory' put political pressure on state legislatures (or their parties) that have already chosen to ignore the vote counts?  Theoretically, but given they would be invested in characterizing the vote counts themselves as illegitimate, increases to the illegitimate vote counts could not be allowed to be seen to sway them from that position.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916626848/florida-republicans-take-aim-at-efforts-to-pay-felons-fines-so-they-can-vote (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916626848/florida-republicans-take-aim-at-efforts-to-pay-felons-fines-so-they-can-vote)

Quote
Florida's attorney general is asking law enforcement agencies to open an investigation of a contribution made by billionaire and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg to help pay the fines and court fees of felons.
...
Florida's law requiring felons to pay fines before they can vote was recently upheld by a federal appeals court. Julie Ebenstein, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project, said that in court part of the state's defense was that if felons don't have the funds, others could always pay for them.

Republicans again showing they want to make voting more difficult.
Further to that: in its defence of the law requiring that fines be paid prior to voting, the state also argued that those fees were not themselves related to voting, so could not be considered poll taxes (otherwise, using those unpaid fees to exclude residents from voting would be a priori unconstitutional.)  But now, the state is arguing that paying those fees could be a contravention of election law - implicitly admitting that those fees are related to the election and must therefore be poll taxes and illegal.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 25, 2020, 05:15:27 PM
FBI Director Christopher Wray:

Quote
we have not seen, historically, any kind of coordinated national voter fraud effort in a major election, whether it's by mail or otherwise... However, [there has been voter fraud at the local level] from time to time.

...

Certainly to change a federal election outcome by mounting that kind of fraud at scale would be a major challenge for an adversary, but people should make no mistake, we're vigilant as to the threat and watching it carefully because we're in an uncharted new territory.

Just more evidence that repeated attacks on the legitimacy of the vote by Trump and his acolytes have no merit.  I fear, however, that just as with the utter hypocrisy of the Republican party concerning SCOTUS confirmations, the vote fraud fig leaf is not really meant to garner majority support, just to cloud the waters sufficiently so can successfully ignore the voting results for long enough.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 07:06:47 PM
Electors must be chosen by early December, and the electors will cast their votes December 14.

After that, the vote tallies will be academic; there will still undoubtedly be power plays to be made, but any updates to the counts themselves will not figure into those actions. Could increases in margins of 'victory' put political pressure on state legislatures (or their parties) that have already chosen to ignore the vote counts?  Theoretically, but given they would be invested in characterizing the vote counts themselves as illegitimate, increases to the illegitimate vote counts could not be allowed to be seen to sway them from that position.

Except we all know the electors for each respective party have already been chosen. What remains to be seen is which set of electors get the "State Sanctioned" approval, which goes back to 1876, where several states sent results from two different sets of electors on to congress, and Congress decided which electors they would honor.

"vote tallies will be academic" ignores what the Democrats are likely to consider doing between December 14th and January 5th, or even the 20th.

That "academic" vote tally could be the difference between a state being majority/plurality in favor of Trump, or majority/plurality in favor of Biden. They're going to want the Biden option, and they'll be inclined to use any means needed to achieve that goal. So expect that where they're capable of doing so, the Democrats will likely have their Democrat Electors(under the aegis of either their Governor or State Legislature respectively) send in "their official electoral college votes" even though at the time they voted on the 14th of December, Trump was ahead in the polling. That way, if by January 4th it looks like Biden is ahead in the polling for that particular state at that time, they can disqualify the Republican electors from that state, and accept the Democratic Electors for that state instead.

If on the 4th of January a state where they have two sets of electoral ballots to choose from is still hotly contested and has "enough contested ballots" to possibly swing the outcome, they'll push to delay any decision until those contested ballots are addressed... Because "We're protecting the integrity of the Democratic Process, and no decision has to be made right now, as the President cannot assume office until the 20th.." (Read: We're trying to overturn Trump's win) and as such, they'll delay the Joint Session of Congress so that they don't have to fight over which panel of electors to select from those states. Which is how we possibly are looking at a Joint Session of Congress on the night of the 19th of January, or very early morning of the 20th to make a decision before the noon deadline. 

Unless there somehow still are enough contested ballots the Democrats are trying to get counted to change the electoral outcome. In which case we walk right into the Speaker of the House becoming Acting President on January 20th and remaining such until the ballot fights are done with. "Because we want the people's choice to be respected" and in this context, the national popular vote would likely have favored Biden, even if the Electoral College isn't so clear, but again, that's more fuel to motivate them to obstruct the Electoral College from doing its Constitutionally designed task.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 25, 2020, 07:21:19 PM
What the Democrats or Republicans choose to do at that point will be purely a political power play.  The results of the vote tallies will simply not matter anymore.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on September 25, 2020, 07:53:03 PM
The NY Times is panicking and put out a column enumerating their five worst fears of Trump soundly winning the election. Number one is the huge enthusiasm factor which is even greater than it appeared in 2016. Their numbers say the surge was unseen back then until it happened, but is even greater now. Second is the huge Latino vote growing for Trump. Third is the stupid Democrat buy-in of mail-in ballots, which historically are largely and easily thrown out due to mistakes and incompetency. They say it is a 60-40% difference between GOP vs, Democrats using sustainable voting practices, while Dems go for the easy but ephemeral mail-in balloting. The fourth is the solid down-ballot leaning to the GOP, and the last is Trump's personality being so much greater than Biden's, that Joe cannot compete.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 25, 2020, 10:43:54 PM
What the Democrats or Republicans choose to do at that point will be purely a political power play.  The results of the vote tallies will simply not matter anymore.

Do you remember 2016? I do.

They were all over the whole "But the popular vote!" thing.

If they can show the popular vote went for Biden, they'll use that as cover to drag things out to see if they can get some close races to flip, even if they have to make political power plays in January to try to make it happen. Because their activist base will support them, and that's all that will matter for them.

Would you be cool with the Democrats drawing out the validation of the Electoral Vote results should it come to that?

You seem to be preparing yourself for them doing exactly that re: Trump's going to try to invalidate mail in votes.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 25, 2020, 11:10:40 PM
Clinton conceded the night of the election. Fighting over electors in January after the legislators have already sent in their slates and possibly the governors have sent in dissenting slates, will have absolutely nothing to do with the vote count.

As well, in 2016 it didn't matter what the national popular vote count was because the electoral college clearly went to trump. The only arguments about the popular vote at the time were showing that once again the electoral college did not follow the popular vote. That's it.

Absolutely nobody was staring that Pennsylvanian or Floridian electors should have been redistributed because she won the nationwide popular vote.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 26, 2020, 02:05:23 AM
As well, in 2016 it didn't matter what the national popular vote count was because the electoral college clearly went to trump. The only arguments about the popular vote at the time were showing that once again the electoral college did not follow the popular vote. That's it.

Absolutely nobody was stating that Pennsylvanian or Floridian electors should have been redistributed because she won the nationwide popular vote.

Not what I'm talking about. In 2016, Pennsylvania and Florida didn't have tens of thousands of mail-in ballots being contested in a race which may have a razor thin margin, one where their polling suggests the skew would be in their favor.

They'd have every reason to fight tooth and nail to get those ballots counted if they have reason to believe it could change the final vote tally in their favor.

Of course, ironically enough, the validation process for some of those contested ballots may at last provide the proof Trump and the Republicans have been looking for about voter fraud.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 06:12:54 AM
Of course they'll fight tooth and nail. And it's almost a given that the Republicans are going to put up legal barriers to actually counting those votes. But once the electors have been selected, and that would only be based on the legislators overruling the in progress counts if they were not complete, then the counts themselves will become irrelevant. The legislators will have made the decision to ignore the counts. And the only reason to ignore the counts that they will give is that the vote had been compromised.

'Fraudulent' votes counted after the electors have been selected by the legislature will be completely irrelevant. The people who believe in the fraud will support the process and the people who don't believe in the fraud will believe their votes have been stolen, and it wont matter about the margin at that point.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 07:48:11 AM
Here's an interesting read in The Atlantic: (The Election That Could Break America (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/what-if-trump-refuses-concede/616424/).  It's long, and I'm not going to quote anything, but it describes one not even remotely impossible scenario that could lead to a constitutional crisis.

Some will discount the characterizations of Trump, and may also dispute some of the assumptions, but a review of some of the possible legal and political steps following the election and up to January 20 may be of interest.

As well, if anybody doubts the risk of violence during and following the election this article neatly encapsulates what happens when you have a country with more guns than people, a religion fetishizing gun ownership and use, the polarization of the electorate, and the escalation among radicals who are threatened by each perceived escalation of the "other side":  Duelling 'Militias' (https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/26/us/black-white-militias-violence-blake/index.html). This particular article focusses on "armed, far-right white" groups and radical, armed black groups, but there are other political tinder boxes out there as well:

Quote
A number of armed, far-right White groups emboldened by Trump's "law and order" message are confronting anti-racist protesters across the nation. And there is a growing Second Amendment movement among Black Americans who are forming their own armed groups.

With Trump calling on his supporters to join his "army" to defend the vote (especially in Democrat leaning areas) it is highly unlikely that a large number of armed Trump supporters will not be active during the voting and then trying to "monitor" the counting.  It is also highly likely that Trump opponents will rise to the perceived challenge, arm themselves as well, and "defend" the country from Trump's supporters.  In this environment, I find it highly unlikely that not a single untrained, hot-headed "patriot" of one flavour or another will make a "mistake" and set off at least a limited armed skirmish somewhere in the country.  It would be almost a miracle if that didn't happen.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 10:36:34 AM
and so it begins... Wisconsin State GOP leaders attempt to abuse the courts in order to suppress voting in Madison. (https://madison.com/news/local/state-gop-leaders-send-cease-and-desist-letter-to-madison-clerk-ahead-of-ballot-collection/article_16e113e2-5e7e-5ebf-b164-a630ab2daa3c.html)

Quote
The state’s two most powerful Republican lawmakers sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Madison City Clerk’s Office on Friday ahead of a ballot collection event to be held in city parks Saturday, calling the effort “illegal” and warning the ballots would be challenged in court and potentially invalidated.

<snip>

[City Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl] noted the program involves city poll workers, who are deputized to receive ballots. Ballot harvesting involves the illegal collection of ballots by non-poll workers to be delivered to election officials or ballot boxes. The event also does not amount to early voting because ballots will not be provided to voters who come out. The poll workers will be receiving ballots from those who requested and received absentee ballots.

Conservative lawyer Rick Esenberg, whose law firm has taken up several GOP-supported causes, said in an interview Friday he didn’t plan on challenging the event in court unless it involved non-poll workers or involved distributing ballots.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 03:30:05 PM
Donald,

“and so it begins... Wisconsin State GOP leaders attempt to abuse the courts in order to suppress voting in Madison.”

If your references are accurate, that regularly issued live ballots were brought by designated recipients to the “... ballot collection event”, and were then received by deputized ballot collection poll workers, I have to ask; what was the point of the party?

Other than creating a spectacle, no other utilitarian end seems apparent. All of those allegedly “suppressed” voters could have simply left the party, and dropped their ballots in the mailbox. I know there is an angle hidden in your story somewhere. What is it?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 03:52:39 PM
... Never mind, I just figured it out. These gatherings are to instruct voters on the correct ballot selections, undoubtedly Democratically “correct”.

What won’t you people do to avoid safeguards associated with the traditional secret ballot?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 26, 2020, 05:36:45 PM
Of course they'll fight tooth and nail. And it's almost a given that the Republicans are going to put up legal barriers to actually counting those votes. But once the electors have been selected, and that would only be based on the legislators overruling the in progress counts if they were not complete, then the counts themselves will become irrelevant. The legislators will have made the decision to ignore the counts. And the only reason to ignore the counts that they will give is that the vote had been compromised.

'Fraudulent' votes counted after the electors have been selected by the legislature will be completely irrelevant. The people who believe in the fraud will support the process and the people who don't believe in the fraud will believe their votes have been stolen, and it wont matter about the margin at that point.

Here is the crux of things: As per the New York Times in 2012 the Absentee ballot disqualification rate was more than double what the normal balloting process created.

Assuming that rate holds true for 2020, are you going to say anything about it when the Democrats declare that Trump was wanting to hold things to an unreasonable standard?

Of course, that's a big assumption, it'll likely be greatly exceeded, 2020 has already seen elections where the disqualification rate was over 20% which isn't to mention other issues--like one election being ordered by the courts to be redone completely,  but there will be plenty of chances for Democrats to put the mail-in-voting system under a microscope in the hopes of squeezing out a few thousand more Biden votes in key districts where their own people would likely have been inclined to disqualify those ballots in any other election year.

This is going to be a very messy election process, hopefully it only involves a couple of states in detail, but the process itself is going to be nightmarish, hanging chads will likely be preferable to what is coming.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 05:52:19 PM
Which has nothing to do with the relevancy of the vote counts once the electors have been selected.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 06:09:18 PM
Donald,

“Which has nothing to do with the relevancy of the vote counts once the electors have been selected.”

Just for clarification; are you suggesting a strategy of selecting electors prior to court reviewed vote count certification?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 07:20:09 PM
No - Electors are not necessarily chosen by vote counts.  Legislators in each of the states could take back that power, choose to set aside the vote counts and select their own electors directly.

This was affirmed in Bush v Gore: "When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors. See id., at 35 (" '[T]here is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated''')"
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 07:48:51 PM
Donald,

“ No - Electors are not necessarily chosen by vote counts.  Legislators in each of the states could take back that power, choose to set aside the vote counts and select their own electors directly.”

What is the underlying scam? Nullification of vote counts through induced process chaos, and substitution of state appointed electors?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 08:26:00 PM
Call it what you will: a scam, a strategy, a happy coincidence; legislatures have the ability to exercise this authority.  Does anybody really doubt that Trump would push for such a solution should he lose the electoral college due to vote fraud (in the same way as he fraudulently lost the popular vote in 2016) or if, as votes continue to be counted after election day, his lead over Biden in swings states starts to narrow dangerously due to all the fraudulent votes swamping the system? And does anybody doubt Republican legislatures would be open to such a solution, if Trump demanded it after riling up his base and mobilizing his army?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 26, 2020, 09:08:08 PM
No - Electors are not necessarily chosen by vote counts.  Legislators in each of the states could take back that power, choose to set aside the vote counts and select their own electors directly.

This was affirmed in Bush v Gore: "When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors. See id., at 35 (" '[T]here is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated''')"

Which brings us back to the scenario where two sets of electors cast votes, and as such the United States Congress then decides which set of ballots they're honor. And rest assured the Democrat's will side with the one that reflects the most recent vote tally rather than the vote tally as it stood on December 14th. Which is where they may be inclined to wait until January 19th, or even later, depending on what the situation is with counting disputed ballots at that point in time.

Remember, their "Red Mirage" scenario is that Trump wins during the in-person voting, and it is the mail-in/absentee voting where Biden comes back from behind to win. So for them, the plan is to delay the final decision for as long as possible.

They may very well game the system and create "disputed electors" on December 14th as a contingency for exactly this scenario, we won't know until the 14th of December. But at that point we'll have a pretty good idea of just how bad the mess might be in January. If only one set of electors votes for a state, it should be crises averted, but if one or more (important) state sends two even if (Trump) is winning on the 14th, watch out.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 09:53:19 PM
Uh, no - the Democrats will side with the electoral votes that most benefit themselves, and the Republicans will do the same.

That being said - if the state legislature is in the hands of the Republicans, and the the vote tallies have Trump in the lead in that state in mid-December, then there will only be a single set of electors, since even if the Governor overrules the legislature and certifies the original count, then that would still support a Trump slate of electors.  It's only in states where the legislature is held by the Democrats would that even matter.  But in all 6 of the most closely contested states - Arizona, Florida , Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin - the legislatures are held by Republicans. So if Biden didn't already have the plurality of votes in a state by mid-December, there would only be a single slate of electors to choose from - Republican. And if Biden's plurality increased in a particular state, that wouldn't make the Democrats choose the Democratic electors doubly-strongly.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 10:07:52 PM
Donald,

“Call it what you will: a scam, a strategy, a happy coincidence; legislatures have the ability to exercise this authority.”

Call it what you will, if Democrats have so little confidence in their candidate that they would nullify a vote to install him, leftist politics reek of third world corruption. I do not expect to see another serious post from progressives complaining of voter suppression.

“Does anybody really doubt that Trump would push for such a solution should he lose the electoral college due to vote fraud (in the same way as he fraudulently lost the popular vote in 2016)... “

Just for clarity; you are assuming critical mass “voter fraud“ by your political clones, and rationalize the tactic by countering that Trump would resort to autonomous state legislative authority? If the left is that committed widespread fraud, then Trump would not limit his constitutional remedies to that.

“... or if, as votes continue to be counted after election day, his lead over Biden in swings states starts to narrow dangerously due to all the fraudulent votes swamping the system?”

Same answer as before; if the left suppresses legitimate votes through constructive nullification, then it is a good thing that RGB assumed room temperature last week. As I recall, she got a particularly twisted knot in her panties over Bush vs. Gore 2000. It just dawned upon me why her demise has had such an emotional impact upon lefties. They lost a key ally in subverting constitutional government.

“And does anybody doubt Republican legislatures would be open to such a solution, if Trump demanded it after riling up his base and mobilizing his army?“

If your scenario occurred in any state, it would be a justifiable remedy to widespread fraud, however; legislative majorities are notoriously unreliable for acting out of principle. The best path forward would be through the SCOTUS. Amy Coney Barrett would have a 24/7 calendar for 77 days upon assuming office, but it would be doable.

Just out of curiosity Donald, wouldn’t it be easier to nominate a candidate that Democrats can elect, and stop screwing with traditional protections afforded by the secret ballot?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 10:34:40 PM
Just for clarity; you are assuming critical mass “voter fraud“ by your political clones
There will be, as in all other presidential elections over the past 30 years, minimal voter fraud - neither by Republicans nor Democrats.
Quote
Call it what you will, if Democrats have so little confidence in their candidate that they would nullify a vote to install him
None of the swing states are held by Democratic legislatures - as I mentioned earlier, the 6 closest swing states have Republican held upper and lower houses, and almost all states where there is a Democratic legislature also show double-digit leads for Biden, so there is no opportunity for Democrats to do as you suggest in your hypothetical.
Quote
If your scenario occurred in any state, it would be a justifiable remedy to widespread fraud, however; legislative majorities are notoriously unreliable for acting out of principle.
That sounds very Trumpy - legislative majorities are notoriously unreliable for acting out of principle, but if one of those state legislatures acted to resume its power to choose electors, that would necessitate there having been fraud in the vote, because state legislatures only ever act on principle - there is no other possible interpretation.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 11:05:46 PM
Donald,

“There will be, as in all other presidential elections over the past 30 years, minimal voter fraud - neither by Republicans nor Democrats.“

This is not a “minimalist” environment, even if I conceded equivalence in partisan fraud, which I do not.

“None of the swing states are held by Democratic legislatures - as I mentioned earlier, the 6 closest swing states have Republican held upper and lower houses, and almost all states where there is a Democratic legislature also show double-digit leads for Biden, so there is no opportunity for Democrats to do as you suggest in your hypothetical.“

Republican collective behavior is impaired by the same lack of accountability that all quasi-anonymous group decision making is afflicted by. The Supreme Court decisions are never in the same league, regardless of how a person feels about the outcome. Individual justices are glaringly accountable.

“That sounds very Trumpy - legislative majorities are notoriously unreliable for acting out of principle, but if one of those state legislatures acted to resume its power to choose electors, that would necessitate there having been fraud in the vote, because state legislatures only ever act on principle - there is no other possible interpretation.“

I think that you are projecting again Donald. Your hypothetical presumed widespread voter fraud, and fortuitous legislative preemption of a popular vote. Irrespective the rationale applied, in the real world this is an exploration into an ethical wilderness, which is why state legislatures don’t do it, however; I may be speaking out of turn given that I have no difficulty envisioning a Democratic legislature doing precisely that.

The solution lies in reliance upon the United States Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 11:07:54 PM
If your references are accurate, that regularly issued live ballots were brought by designated recipients to the “... ballot collection event”, and were then received by deputized ballot collection poll workers, I have to ask; what was the point of the party?
I am pretty sure you are just playing dumb, and expect you can come up with several reasons yourself, but just in case, here are a few:
As for the 'angle' in that post, I pointed it out very clearly - even though deputized poll workers were being used to accept the votes, and the votes were being brought by the voters themselves - ballots the voters had themselves requested ahead of time - and even though the Republican election lawyer who was quoted agreed that the process was completely legal, the GOP leaders in Wisconsin still attempted to use the courts to halt the voting process.  Of course, maybe they didn't expect to actually halt the process; maybe it was just a political stunt, but that does bring up another issue - abusing the court as a toy in playing electoral games.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 11:12:49 PM
Your hypothetical presumed widespread voter fraud
No, it didn't, and in the post to which you were responding, I clearly stated as much.  I would say "learn to read" but I'm pretty sure you have no intention of not misrepresenting people's statements, so there is not much point in engaging with you.

Quote
This is not a “minimalist” environment, even if I conceded equivalence in partisan fraud, which I do not.
There is no need to concede anything, since as any number of Republican groups who have investigated the topic have conceded, there is negligible vote fraud in presidential elections.  I could point you to Republican election lawyers, the Heritage foundation, the FBI, but I expect you will continue to ignore that and pretend that there has been such fraud, that it has been significant, and that it has been perpetrated primarily by Democrats.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 26, 2020, 11:34:17 PM
This is not a “minimalist” environment, even if I conceded equivalence in partisan fraud, which I do not.
There is no need to concede anything, since as any number of Republican groups who have investigated the topic have conceded, there is negligible vote fraud in presidential elections.  I could point you to Republican election lawyers, the Heritage foundation, the FBI, but I expect you will continue to ignore that and pretend that there has been such fraud, that it has been significant, and that it has been perpetrated primarily by Democrats.[/quote]

Okay, took me awhile to swing around to this one, but it is the elephant in the room that hasn't been addressed.

Yes, actual voting fraud has been basically undetectable for the past many decades. (Undetectable does not mean it was not present, just that it wasn't detected.

That said, voter registration fraud has been very common, and most commonly found among Democrat aligned groups. ACORN for example was busted for thousands of bogus registrations in Nevada less than 20 years ago.

Not with it established that voter registration fraud has been endemic in years past, regardless of if those fraudulent entries ever voted. The Democratic push for mail-in voting and the desire for ballots to automatically be sent to registered voters for this election cycle? I think Republicans have every right to be skeptical of what the Democrats may be trying to pull in some areas.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 26, 2020, 11:45:09 PM
Donald,

“No, it didn't (presume voter fraud). I would say ‘learn to read’ but I'm pretty sure you have no intention of not misrepresenting people's statements, so there is not much point in engaging with you.”

“(Donald): Does anybody really doubt that Trump would push for such a solution should he lose the electoral college due to vote fraud (in the same way as he fraudulently lost the popular vote in 2016)... “

“There is no need to concede anything, since as any number of Republican groups who have investigated the topic have conceded, there is negligible vote fraud in presidential elections. I could point you to Republican election lawyers, the Heritage foundation, the FBI, but I expect you will continue to ignore that and pretend that there has been such fraud, that it has been significant, and that it has been perpetrated primarily by Democrats.”

I was not making a quantifiable statement, but a qualitative one. Democrats have group characteristics that have provided grist for this entire thread. I am simply highlighting another unique propensity, disproportionately represented within liberal ranks.

“I am pretty sure you are just playing dumb, and expect you can come up with several reasons yourself, but just in case, here are a few:
To avoid mailing the ballots: for some reason, people don't have the same faith in the USPS as they did even a year ago.“


Dumb reason. Why not hand it to the same deputized poll worker on November 3rd, when they cannot legally advise voters on ballot selections?

“To avoid travelling to a possibly more distant collection point that is not as convenient to that particular voter.“

No, try again. I have never lived in a district where the polling place was beyond walking distance. I seriously doubt that the Wisconsin voting party location was any different.

“To ensure the vote was provided to poll workers well in advance of the election to avoid the vote arriving late.“

Utterly stupid; hand the ballot in yourself on November 3rd.

I suppose that if you expect to die prior to November 3rd, and don’t trust the USPS, then voting parties make sense.

“As for the 'angle' in that post, I pointed it out very clearly - even though deputized poll workers were being used to accept the votes, and the votes were being brought by the voters themselves - ballots the voters had themselves requested ahead of time - and even though the Republican election lawyer who was quoted agreed that the process was completely legal, the GOP leaders in Wisconsin still attempted to use the courts to halt the voting process.  Of course, maybe they didn't expect to actually halt the process; maybe it was just a political stunt, but that does bring up another issue - abusing the court as a toy in playing electoral games.“

All irrelevant in response to my statements.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 11:54:04 PM
ACORN for example was busted for thousands of bogus registrations in Nevada less than 20 years ago.
This is both untrue as it relates to ACORN, but also to the extent and substance if the 'fraud'.

ACORN was never charged ('busted') with anything; in fact, ACORN was the victim of the employees who were cheating their employer.

 In fact, the Republican prosecuting attorney, Dan Satterberg, in the largest ACORN case at the time, said that the indicted ACORN employees were shirking responsibility, not plotting election fraud.

So no, not really a good example, not if you meant to suggest that the voting system was somehow at risk of voting fraud.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 26, 2020, 11:58:37 PM
Noel, here's a hint: Trump didn't lose the popular vote in 2016 due to vote fraud. Suggesting fraud occuring in the same way as in 2016 is a clearly sarcastic way of saying that vote fraud will again not cost Trump.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 27, 2020, 12:02:26 AM
No, try again. I have never lived in a district where the polling place was beyond walking distance. I seriously doubt that the Wisconsin voting party location was any different.

The district I live in has its polling location about 1.5 miles from me I'm pretty sure others in the district could be up to 2 miles from it, and it's been there for decades at this point. At the time it was established, the school it was in was surrounded by cropland for the better part of a quarter-mile at the closest point, and as such had "rural road" infrastructure leading up to it, as the road was presumably built back in the 1950's or 1960's. Which meant no curb, no sidewalk, no shoulder, but it did have a ditch alongside the road! Not very walkable, heck the school itself prohibited students from walking to it and would discipline any that were caught doing so, you had to arrive by bus or parent. That area has since been developed and has sidewalk and all of the amenities along the way.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 27, 2020, 12:07:23 AM
ACORN for example was busted for thousands of bogus registrations in Nevada less than 20 years ago.
This is both untrue as it relates to ACORN, but also to the extent and substance if the 'fraud'.

So you're denying that thousands of fraudulent voter registrations were submitted and many of them made it through the system?

Intent to commit election fraud in that particular case doesn't matter, it is that that fraudulent voter registration entries were created, something which someone else could potentially capitalize on should said fraudulent ballots find their way into their possession should unsolicited ballots be sent to them.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 27, 2020, 12:09:19 AM
Donald,

“This is both untrue as it relates to ACORN, but also to the extent and substance if the 'fraud'.”

... Yet I read people, like you, going to great lengths to excuse mass voter disenfranchisement as, happy “coincidences“.

“Noel, here's a hint: Trump didn't lose the popular vote in 2016 due to vote fraud. Suggesting fraud occuring in the same way as in 2016 is a clearly sarcastic way of saying that vote fraud will again not cost Trump.“

I don’t believe he did, but given the extremely small margin, have no way of knowing that, and neither do you. I mistakenly concluded that you gave Trump the benefit of a doubt to simplify your hypothetical.

“The district I live in has its polling location about 1.5 miles from me, and it's been there for decades at this point. At the time it was established, the school it was in was surrounded by cropland for the better part of a quarter-mile at the closest point, and as such had "rural road" infrastructure leading up to it, as the road was presumably built back in the 1950's or 1960's. Which meant no curb, no sidewalk, no shoulder, but it did have a ditch alongside the road! Not very walkable, heck the school itself prohibited students from walking to it and would discipline any that were caught doing so, you had to arrive by bus or parent. That area has since been developed.”

One and one-half miles, right? When I missed the morning bus during high school, I ran further than that with books under-arm. Is this another democratic propensity to examine?

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 27, 2020, 01:01:49 AM
Joe Biden spent decades warning of voter fraud — now called a myth by Dems.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2020/09/19/biden-spent-years-warning-of-voter-fraud-now-call-a-myth/amp/

DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVE: THE RISK OF FRAUD WITH VBM IS REAL

https://www.rnla.org/democratic_operative_the_risk_of_fraud_with_vbm_is_real
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 27, 2020, 01:26:39 AM
Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots

https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 27, 2020, 07:27:23 AM
So you're denying that thousands of fraudulent voter registrations were submitted and many of them made it through the system?
I was making two points - first, that as you said, that was not an example of voter fraud - and you had already accepted that this was not the case, so I interpreted the point you were trying to make was that Democrats were primarily involved in illegal activities.  The substance of the fraud - low-level employees submitting false voter registrations and thereby also stealing from ACORN - is not actually an example of Democrat malfeasance, any more than say, the Wells Fargo widespread fraud by low level employees and middle management was the fault of Republicans.  Yes, I get it that Republicans have tried hard to make it sound like a Democratic Party conspiracy, but that is just as stupid as "banks are associated with Republicans/bankers stole from customers/Republicans defrauded customers".

It is also odd that you would bring the ACORN thing up as an example since, aside from it not being shown to have led to any voter fraud, it was also associated with the registrations that could only have been used in-person; basically, it is a point, if anything, in support of mail in voting.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on September 27, 2020, 08:27:02 AM
So people like to defend the institution of police with a "bad apple" argument. Why shouldn't that apply to people involved in voter registration or handling? If we shouldn't condemn the police based on a smattering of accepted bad actors, why should we condemn voting activists on the same basis of isolated anecdotes?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 27, 2020, 05:18:58 PM
Drake,

“So people like to defend the institution of police with a "bad apple" argument. Why shouldn't that apply to people involved in voter registration or handling? If we shouldn't condemn the police based on a smattering of accepted bad actors, why should we condemn voting activists on the same basis of isolated anecdotes?“

“Isolated anecdotes” like those that came from your pre-Obama corruption iteration of Uncle Joe? I grant that this man has never been particularly lucid, but he seemed to grasp the systemic nature of democratic voting corruption, specifically as applicable to mail-in ballots, when advising Jimmy Carter.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 28, 2020, 12:02:17 AM
Drake,

“So people like to defend the institution of police with a "bad apple" argument. Why shouldn't that apply to people involved in voter registration or handling? If we shouldn't condemn the police based on a smattering of accepted bad actors, why should we condemn voting activists on the same basis of isolated anecdotes?“

“Isolated anecdotes” like those that came from your pre-Obama corruption iteration of Uncle Joe? I grant that this man has never been particularly lucid, but he seemed to grasp the systemic nature of democratic voting corruption, specifically as applicable to mail-in ballots, when advising Jimmy Carter.

That was rather interesting. Joe Biden was very clearly opposed to mail in voting because of voter fraud concerns up through at least the 1990's, after which he may have gone silent on the issue for the most part(although his buddy on the issue, Senator McConnel has remained on track), until 2008 and becoming Obama's running mate, after which he became all for it.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 28, 2020, 07:22:43 AM
That was rather interesting. Joe Biden was very clearly opposed to mail in voting because of voter fraud concerns up through at least the 1990's,

In the face of mounting evidence to the contrary, wouldn't it be stupid not to change one's mind?  Unless, of course, people like McConnell have other motivations aside from the actual prevention of fraud for holding onto the disproven rationalization... given this, I wonder why McConnell is still pushing for regulations with such a small benefit (reducing already trivial levels of fraud) but with such high costs (disenfranchising non-trivial numbers of voters.)   There must be a reason, if only we could figure it out...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on September 28, 2020, 12:14:46 PM
How are you guys even finding material about Biden and mail in voting historically? I can't get past all the most recent news from this election.

I'd be curious to see what his objections were, and whether they are still valid. Although clearly his reasons wouldn't have lined up with noel's assertion that it was the "systemic nature of democratic voting corruption".
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 03:03:07 PM
Drake,

“I'd be curious to see what his objections were, and whether they are still valid. Although clearly his reasons wouldn't have lined up with noel's assertion that it was the ‘systemic nature of democratic voting corruption’.”

The article on New Jersey politics should fill in the blanks for you in relation to both ballot “fixing” methods used, and party orientation.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 28, 2020, 03:09:40 PM
How are you guys even finding material about Biden and mail in voting historically? I can't get past all the most recent news from this election.

I'd be curious to see what his objections were, and whether they are still valid. Although clearly his reasons wouldn't have lined up with noel's assertion that it was the "systemic nature of democratic voting corruption".

1st result in Google: "joe biden mail in voting fraud 1990's"

https://nypost.com/2020/09/19/biden-spent-years-warning-of-voter-fraud-now-call-a-myth/
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on September 28, 2020, 03:32:28 PM
I didn't see anything in the article about mail in voting. It said he welcomed higher penalties for fraud, and that he disliked the idea of same day registration. I clicked through to his speech in the congressional record, but it is 200 pages of unsearchable text. What is significantly lacking is a statement that he thought fraud was widespread.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 03:36:28 PM
Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots

https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 28, 2020, 04:23:56 PM
Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots

https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/
Wow.

Did you actually buy any of that?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 28, 2020, 05:27:59 PM
Project Veritas has a new video that has another demonstration of ballot fraud happening this past summer during the primary election cycle.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 06:44:43 PM
Donald,

“Did you actually buy any of that?”

In New Jersey, no problem. Those methods of vote fraud have been detected in elections already, including the Luzerne and Delaware County PA, incidents. All are at least as plausible as your “scam, strategy, and happy coincidence”., which, as a means of mass disenfranchisement, you are so giddy about.

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
Veritas video, with text:

https://www.projectveritas.com/news/ilhan-omar-connected-cash-for-ballots-voter-fraud-scheme-corrupts-elections/

The third-world Obama tradition continues...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 28, 2020, 09:37:27 PM
Project Veritas has a new video that has another demonstration of ballot fraud happening this past summer during the primary election cycle.
Project Veritas?  Is that really the hill you want to die on?  The group that has already paid settlements and apologized for defamation for deceptively editing video? The group that has defended itself by stating that they are not journalists at all: "O'Keefe stated that he was out to make a point and to damage ACORN and therefore did not act as a journalist objectively reporting a story"?

You're basically buying into highly edited video by a group that has admitted it selectively and dishonestly edits video in order to attack political opponents.

As an aside, ignoring all the pixelated anonymous faces, which laws do you think were broken - what specifically is the fraud that you are buying into?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 28, 2020, 10:02:20 PM
Project Veritas?  Is that really the hill you want to die on?  The group that has already paid settlements and apologized for defamation for deceptively editing video?

There is a reason I only mentioned it. But to my understanding the only case they "lost" was the one where they were caught out by a law in California which makes it illegal to film a person without their consent. So the "facts" of the video weren't ever disputed in court in a venue where the plaintiff won their case. What they won was a case brought to bear over being filmed without consent.... Which makes for an odd hill to try to attack them on. "This thing really did happen, but they lost in court because they weren't legally allowed to film it."
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 10:03:24 PM
Donald,

Is this the defamation suit that you are talking about?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/445091-libel-suit-against-project-veritas-thrown-out%3famp

Or this;

https://youtu.be/1g8sdkeBS2o

Or this;

https://earthfmwrth.com/content/national-news/project-veritas-wins-court-case-on-secret-recordings

There are about seven more, should I go on?...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on September 28, 2020, 10:09:20 PM
So ilhan Omar has a 37 point lead in a district described as extreme. So what exactly would the motive be to cheat? I'm going to go with Veritas hiring paid actors, at least until I see indictments. By the way, how many indictments have their exposures of illegal activity led to?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 10:19:09 PM
Drake,

“So what exactly would the motive be to cheat?”

Really? A talentless 37 year old African refugee, whose main qualifications stem from a family tradition of third-world “government service”, is pulling down $174,000/month, and you do not think she has competition from other aspiring dim-witted public servants?

She who lives by the scam, will die by the scam.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 28, 2020, 10:38:23 PM
James O'Keefe agrees to pay $100,000, apologizes to Juan Carlos Vera (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/08/james-o-keefe-settlement-acorn), who lost his job as a result of Project Veritas' dishonest manipulation of video.

O'Keefe, through Project Veritas, also settled a wrongful termination suit brought by an ex-employee who was sacked for warning a journalist that O'Keefe planned on luring the journalist onto a yacht and sexually propositioning her.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 28, 2020, 11:05:09 PM
Donald,

Does this sound like an admission of dishonest video manipulation; “‘Sadly, this is the cost of exposing the truth’, O'Keefe said by way of explaining the $100,000 settlement. ‘That's why so few people do it.’

I saw that video. If what O'Keefe's recording allegedly omitted was that Vera “contacted police“ after the meeting, it probably has something to do with the fact that he was already busted. You are skirting the fact that you are not personally opposed to voter disenfranchisement, just disenfranchisement of desirable votes. Your credibility based upon any principles of ethical behavior has to surmount that hurdle first.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 29, 2020, 12:06:43 AM
I was going to say "No, but this does:" "O'Keefe stated that he was out to make a point and to damage ACORN and therefore did not act as a journalist objectively reporting a story".

However, O'Keefe probably believes that dishonest manipulation of video to expose a greater truth is acceptable, so maybe "no" isn't quite right, either.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 29, 2020, 12:33:25 AM
it probably has something to do with the fact that he was already busted.

Or, we can read what the Attorney General's report had to say:

Quote
Immediately after the couple left, Vera telephoned his cousin, Detective Alejandro Hernandez, at the National City Police Department. He left a voicemail message for Detective Hernandez stating that some “crazy people” were in his office providing information. Vera did not explain the substance of the conversation and did not make reference to prostitution or human smuggling on the message. He asked his cousin to call him back. (Interview with Vera; Vera Phone Records, at p. 4 [reflecting a 2-minute call to Detective Hernandez’s cell phone at 6:40 p.m.]; Detective Hernandez Phone Records, at p. 132 [reflecting a call to voicemail at 6:45 p.m.].)
Later that day, Vera also reported the incident to fellow ACORN employee Cruz Acosta. Acosta had been away from the office while the couple was present. Vera explained to him what happened. Vera also reported the incident, either the same day or shortly thereafter, to Mar Murrillon, an ACORN board member. Vera told Murrillon that he had reported the incident to the police. (Vera Interview.)

And you also wrote this:
Quote
You are skirting the fact that you are not personally opposed to voter disenfranchisement, just disenfranchisement of desirable votes.

Why do you feel the need to lie about people's positions?  Do you think lying somehow makes you look good?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 29, 2020, 12:42:36 AM
Donald,

“However, O'Keefe probably believes that dishonest manipulation of video to expose a greater truth is acceptable, so maybe "no" isn't quite right, either.“

Try again, your quote does not establish, nor even suggest, admission of video manipulation by O'Keefe. Neither he is claiming to be the YouTube derivative of 60 Minutes. “Journalists” identify themselves. Declining to do so is not dishonest.

“Why do you feel the need to lie about people's positions?  Do you think lying somehow makes you look good?“

Why do you habitually project?

Defend your own equivocal ethics before throwing around terms like “dishonest manipulation”, so I will ask again; Is it okay with you if policy induced voting irregularities are employed to rationalize voter disenfranchisement through legislative usurpation; ‘happy coincidence’, or not?

“He left a voicemail message for Detective Hernandez stating that some “crazy people” were in his office providing information.”

Right; good CYA call.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 29, 2020, 02:02:41 AM
Donald,

I have got to ask; do you bother checking your references?

Juan Carlos could not even get his story straight after advising O'Keefe on how to place a group of underage El Salvadoran girls into secure housing for prostitution. His cover story was “I never do anything wrong... You can see when he say they have a pimp they bother me because he control me but I don’t want him to control me anymore.”. The video shows something otherwise.

Beyond that, this was not the first time Veritas stung ACORN. In an earlier episode ACORN staff advised O'Keefe on how to get housing assistance for the purpose of establishing a brothel with a dozen girls. The biggest concern that Acorn staff expressed was to ensure that the prostitutes “attended school“, for tax purposes!

Even Barry threw ACORN under the bus, but not you, right?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 29, 2020, 07:31:39 AM
... or one can instead believe the California Attorney General, rather than a fictitious characterization as is noel's usual modus operandi.

Quote
Our investigation revealed that Vera speaks limited English. The language barrier, combined with the couple’s peculiar story, left him confused over whether the couple was serious about running a prostitution business and smuggling young girls into San Diego. He felt the couple’s story was constantly changing and made little sense. At first Vera understood there was another pimp running the business and Giles needed help. Then the story evolved in such a way that Vera understood O’Keefe was actually the pimp. Vera felt something strange was going on and was not sure if the situation was legitimate. (Vera Interview.)

Vera went along with the conversation in hopes of getting information from the couple that he could provide to law enforcement in the event they were telling the truth. (Vera Interview.) He asked when and where the girls would be smuggled into the country. (San Diego Tr. 19, 25.) O’Keefe asked for advice about the best place to smuggle the girls in and Vera said Tijuana and that Vera had contacts in Tijuana. Vera stated that he believed O’Keefe was asking whether it was better to bring the girls in through the port in Tijuana or San Diego. He answered just to go along with the conversation and obtain more information from them. He did not give the answer any thought and does not have smuggling contacts. (Vera Interview.)
Vera had Giles write her telephone number and email on a piece of paper. (San Diego Tr. 21, 23.) He also gave them his cell phone number when O’Keefe asked for a contact number. (San Diego Tr. 29.) He told them he would contact them the following day in hopes of getting rid of the couple. (San Diego Tr. 24, 26; Vera Interview.) He took their information in order to provide it to police. (Vera Interview.)

Giles forgot her sunglasses in Vera’s office and Vera brought the glasses to the couple in the front stairwell of the office building. (Unedited San Diego ACORN Video.) Vera continued to speak with Giles and O’Keefe and O’Keefe also recorded this portion of the conversation. Vera asked Giles about her business. (Second San Diego Tr. 1-4; Vera Interview.) He told the couple that ACORN was hosting an immigration event that Friday. (Second San Diego Tr. 6-7.) Vera again told them that he would contact them the next day. He reassured them that they could trust him and that he would not tell anyone about the substance of the conversation. Giles and O’Keefe left a second time. (Second San Diego Tr. 4-7.)
Immediately after the couple left, Vera telephoned his cousin, Detective Alejandro Hernandez, at the National City Police Department. He left a voicemail message for Detective Hernandez stating that some “crazy people” were in his office providing information. Vera did not explain the substance of the conversation and did not make reference to prostitution or human smuggling on the message. He asked his cousin to call him back. (Interview with Vera; Vera Phone Records, at p. 4 [reflecting a 2-minute call to Detective Hernandez’s cell phone at 6:40 p.m.]; Detective Hernandez Phone Records, at p. 132 [reflecting a call to voicemail at 6:45 p.m.].)

Later that day, Vera also reported the incident to fellow ACORN employee Cruz Acosta. Acosta had been away from the office while the couple was present. Vera explained to him what happened. Vera also reported the incident, either the same day or shortly thereafter, to Mar Murrillon, an ACORN board member. Vera told Murrillon that he had reported the incident to the police. (Vera Interview.)
Vera eventually spoke with Detective Hernandez on August 27, 2009. He told Detective Hernandez that a self-admitted prostitute had been to the office and was discussing human smuggling. He did not know the exact location where the smuggling would take place.

Detective Hernandez said he would contact someone in law enforcement who dealt with that area and get back to Vera. (Interview with Detective Alejandro Hernandez, October 8, 2009; Detective Hernandez Phone Records, at p. 115 [reflecting 12-minute call between Vera and Detective Hernandez on August 27, 2009 at 5:07 p.m.].) The next day, Detective Hernandez and his partner, Detective Steve Villariasa, contacted Detective Mark Haas at the San Diego Police Department. Detective Haas works with cases involving human smuggling. He said he would need more information in order to work the case. (Detective Hernandez Interview; Interview with Detective Steve Villariasa, October 8, 2009; Detective Villariasa Phone Records, at p. 86 [reflecting 4-minute call between Detectives Villariasa and Haas on August 28, 2009 at 7:44 a.m.].) Detective Hernandez called Vera and left a message stating that he had information for him that might help. (Detective Hernandez Phone Records, at p. 115 [reflecting 1-minute call between Detective Hernandez and Vera on August 28, 2009 at 10:48 a.m.].)

Vera attempted to acquire more information as Detective Hernandez had requested. He sent O’Keefe and Giles an email at the address Giles had given him. The email asked them to call him. A short time later, O’Keefe called Vera’s cell phone. O’Keefe said the girls would be crossing in Tijuana, but did not give any other details. Vera told O’Keefe he would call him back and hung up. Vera called Detective Hernandez in order to give him the information. (Vera Interview.)

It sounds like Vera spent quite a lot of effort trying to sting O'Keefe, and there is that pesky $100,000 payment, so clearly, O'Keefe's lawyer at least thought Vera had a pretty strong case.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 29, 2020, 09:24:29 AM
Donald,

“... or one can instead believe the California Attorney General, rather than a fictitious characterization as is noel's usual modus operandi.”

Would fictitious characterization would that be, Vera lying to his employer? :

https://youtu.be/K9BmoET5w1A

“It sounds like Vera spent quite a lot of effort trying to sting O'Keefe, and there is that pesky $100,000 payment, so clearly, O'Keefe's lawyer at least thought Vera had a pretty strong case.”

You can safely say that a contingency fee agreement made fighting Vera more costly than $100,000. Why did Vera lie to his “supportive employer“ in the first place, to make his sting more believable? We know that it was good enough to get him fired. More broadly, given that this is the second time ACORN staff stepped into the subsidized prostitution conundrum, are you still sympathetic to the notion of their victim status?

Returning to the question which you persist in avoiding: Do you maintain that it is okay to sabotage confidence in election process and outcomes if it results in the “happy coincidence” of disenfranchisement through state legislative usurpation?

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 29, 2020, 09:27:42 AM
Returning to the question which you persist in avoiding: Do you maintain that it is okay to sabotage confidence in election process and outcomes if it results in the “happy coincidence” of disenfranchisement through state legislative usurpation?

Trump seems to be the only one trying to sabotage confidence in the election process.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 29, 2020, 09:38:31 AM
Donald,

“Trump seems to be the only one trying to sabotage confidence in the election process.”

I will take that as confirmation that you are projecting once more.

First ACORN sting :

https://youtu.be/cWRTYD26Kxc
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 29, 2020, 09:47:05 AM
“Trump seems to be the only one trying to sabotage confidence in the election process.”

I will take that as confirmation that you are projecting once more.

Trump.
Quote
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!

Quote
Breaking: Michigan sends absentee ballots to 7.7 million people ahead of Primaries and the General Election. This was done illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State. I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path.

Quote
The fraud and abuse will be an embarrassment to our Country

Quote
Anybody, you don't have to know politics, they're going to mail out 80 million ballots. It's impossible. They have no idea. Who's mailing them? Mostly Democrat states and Democrat governors. Well, supposing they don't mail them to Republican neighborhoods. That means they're not going to get them. So they're going to complain and the election's going to be over.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 29, 2020, 11:11:16 AM
Returning to the question which you persist in avoiding: Do you maintain that it is okay to sabotage confidence in election process and outcomes if it results in the “happy coincidence” of disenfranchisement through state legislative usurpation?
It's amazing how you continue to miss the point of that post.  "State legislative usurpation" is specifically what I was warning about - given that I was warning about that issue, it's odd that you think I might be "okay" with it - and sure, that would also end up sabotaging confidence in the election - a bit of a vicious cycle.  But Trump is also sabotaging confidence in the election processes every day, and the risk is that he is doing so in order to facilitate state legislatures overriding vote counts and the voting process - the "usurpation" you so fear in your post.

I am glad that you agree that states should not "usurp" the will of the people and should allow the voting process and results to speak for themselves; I am also hopeful that should such usurpation occur that you will fight against it wholeheartedly.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: rightleft22 on September 29, 2020, 12:22:07 PM
Quote
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!

Isn't this type of statement a kind of rhetorical loaded question suggesting that If Trump wins the election wasn't it will not have been rigged but if he losses it is.

On this forum no one would be allowed have such a statement stand so I find it odd that some are defending and or dismissing it.  (Dismissing it by redirecting focus to the debate on Ballots which is a valid debate however a distraction from what Trump is actually saying.)

If you disagree with me its a rigged discussion.

Trump has set it up so that unless the Dem's win big on Election-day they will lose. I don't see how that would not end any trust in the checks and balances within the system. A system that requires trust to run.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 29, 2020, 01:36:23 PM
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/918080844/philanthropies-asked-to-help-fund-election-equipment-purchases (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/918080844/philanthropies-asked-to-help-fund-election-equipment-purchases)

Quote
After Congress didn't provide additional funds to help run the election safely this year, cash-strapped cities and states are turning to private foundations for help buying needed equipment.

And guess what Republicans are doing, suing to prevent elections officials from using the money.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on September 29, 2020, 03:07:29 PM
Quote
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!

Isn't this type of statement a kind of rhetorical loaded question suggesting that If Trump wins the election wasn't it will not have been rigged but if he losses it is.

On this forum no one would be allowed have such a statement stand so I find it odd that some are defending and or dismissing it.  (Dismissing it by redirecting focus to the debate on Ballots which is a valid debate however a distraction from what Trump is actually saying.)

If you disagree with me its a rigged discussion.

Trump has set it up so that unless the Dem's win big on Election-day they will lose. I don't see how that would not end any trust in the checks and balances within the system. A system that requires trust to run.

On the flip side, if Trump wins, the Democrats are going to insist it was "because of voter suppression," and a general "Trump cheated!" outcry as well.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 29, 2020, 03:23:04 PM
On the flip side, if Trump wins, the Democrats are going to insist it was "because of voter suppression," and a general "Trump cheated!" outcry as well.
Not if the counts are not impeded significantly (or worse - ignored).

The Democrats won't be happy, but if the votes get counted, they get counted.  And sure, they will grumble about certain instances of voter suppression - as they have for years, because voter suppression is an actual Republican strategy - but there won't be a constitutional crisis.  The Democrats won't have the constitutional levers to impose their will on the country.

Whereas the Republicans are uniquely in a position to override the will of the voters if they so choose - as mentioned previously, I think 9 of the 10 most competitive (swing) states all have Republican legislatures, and Republicans hold the majority of federal Senators/states if it comes down to the Senate.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on September 29, 2020, 06:07:47 PM
"Voter Suppression" is a genned-up phrase out of Democrat focus groups and think tanks to give vote-scamming a nicer feel. Everyone thinks fair voting is the best result. Every time someone says we should not "force" voter ID on citizens, and allow non-citizens a chance to express their feelings, they are vote-scamming. Saying that if we document who is legal to vote makes it hard for poor people to vote, does a disservice to those poor people.

The idea that people should earn the right to vote has been ridiculed. It has been described as poll-taxes, or worse. Some people though ownership of property should be required, or a term of national service. Heinlein did.

It should be a privilege to vote, not a right. In the current times, it seems to be more a numbers game to get votes, not trying to get good leadership.  When I see those "Man in the street" interviews, where the average interviewee is an embarrassment to him/herself and acknowledges their lack of basic knowledge on national issues. Local issues are even worse.

Mail-in ballots are designed to secure more numbers of votes - and blame all the security breeches on Covid-19. It is a crock - and the one good thing is that after this latest exercise in futility, we will have a much greater understanding in the effects of the security failings.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 29, 2020, 06:41:14 PM
wmLambert, why do you assume you would be selected as one of the chosen? Because if critical thinking becomes a pre-requisite...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 29, 2020, 06:51:31 PM
"Voter Suppression" is a genned-up phrase out of Democrat focus groups and think tanks to give vote-scamming a nicer feel. Everyone thinks fair voting is the best result. Every time someone says we should not "force" voter ID on citizens, and allow non-citizens a chance to express their feelings, they are vote-scamming. Saying that if we document who is legal to vote makes it hard for poor people to vote, does a disservice to those poor people.

Anyone who cares anything about election security but only focuses on voter ID is either ignorant or really only interested in voter suppression. Touch screen voting machines without readable paper ballots are far and away the most dangerous thing to an accurate count of votes in the nation. Georgia according to the polls is a toss up. I would bet money Trump wins Georgia. Having a few people hack a few machines can get you an election and its almost impossible to detect. You need 10s or 100s of thousands of people to double or triple vote (things voter ID could prevent) in order to impact the outcome of an election. Which one of those scams can be kept secret?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 29, 2020, 10:13:15 PM
Donald,

“ ‘State legislative usurpation’ is specifically what I was warning about - given that I was warning about that issue, it's odd that you think I might be ‘okay’ with it - and sure, that would also end up sabotaging confidence in the election - a bit of a vicious cycle.”

These are your descriptors of that scenario. : “Call it what you will: a scam, a strategy, a happy coincidence; legislatures have the ability to exercise this authority.”

I do not think that a reasonable person could interpret your “happy coincidence” as anything other than a “strategy” to undercut, by your own statement, confidence in election results. I appreciate that you now distance yourself from earlier comments which I identified as a “scam”.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on September 29, 2020, 10:32:47 PM
Y-22,

“Trump.
Quote
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!

Quote
Breaking: Michigan sends absentee ballots to 7.7 million people ahead of Primaries and the General Election. This was done illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State. I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path.

Quote
The fraud and abuse will be an embarrassment to our Country

Quote
Anybody, you don't have to know politics, they're going to mail out 80 million ballots. It's impossible. They have no idea. Who's mailing them? Mostly Democrat states and Democrat governors. Well, supposing they don't mail them to Republican neighborhoods. That means they're not going to get them. So they're going to complain and the election's going to be over.“


I am going to climb out on a limb, and interpret your collection of Trump statements as causal of mistrust in a mail-in ballot vote result, rather than reactive to vulnerabilities of mail-in ballots per se.

Both sides of the political polarity could avoid the topic entirely by simple elimination of a change to traditional voting protocols. COVID-19 justifications for such a radical deviation are complete rubbish if the public were only educated. Remaining rationalizations are one form, or another, of “convenience” arguments... hardly compelling as an excuse to undercut this election. That is, unless, public violence is the actual objective (Donald).
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on September 30, 2020, 08:10:34 AM
I do not think that a reasonable person could interpret your “happy coincidence” as anything other than a “strategy” to undercut, by your own statement, confidence in election results. I appreciate that you now distance yourself from earlier comments which I identified as a “scam”.
Yes, I get that sarcasm doesn't travel well, and your reading comprehension is severely hindered by blind partisanship, but even you, if you read closely, would see the word "you" in "call it what you will". Yes, Republicans seem to be promoting a strategy of voter suppression and distrust in the election in order to facilitate ignoring the voting results later.  That you ascribe this strategy to me in a way that I supposedly support is just silly.  Unless... you think I support Republicans in this election cycle.  Is that it - do you think I would vote for Trump or Republicans for the Senate?

But again, even if you missed the sarcasm, I was making a clear warning about the risk of Republican states overturning the electoral will of the voters, and even explained how the Democrats have no opportunity to do the same in this election because of the structure of existing state and federal legislatures. It takes a very special kind of filter to miss the whole point of several posts to interpret them in the very opposite way that they read.  Congrats.

Oh, and if we get specific, "happy coincidence" is a characterization; it is not a strategy.  it is not even a tactic.  It does not suggest any actions, nor even a position.  You probably meant something other than "strategy"
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 30, 2020, 09:14:40 AM
I am going to climb out on a limb, and interpret your collection of Trump statements as causal of mistrust in a mail-in ballot vote result, rather than reactive to vulnerabilities of mail-in ballots per se.

Those quotes were in response to you saying I was projecting by saying Trump was undermining confidence in the results of the election.

Many of those quotes were just about fraud not specifically referencing mail in (though some were). How about this one?

Quote
The only way we're going to lose this election is if the election is rigged

Trump is clearly and consistently saying things like this that undermine confidence in the election (unless he's the winner).
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on September 30, 2020, 12:56:46 PM
Quote
Meanwhile, Trump is almost guaranteed to win the election if he wins the national popular vote, and he actually wins a majority in the Electoral College while losing the popular vote (12 percent) more often than when he wins the most votes (10 percent).

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-an-underdog-but-the-electoral-colleges-republican-tilt-improves-his-chances/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-an-underdog-but-the-electoral-colleges-republican-tilt-improves-his-chances/)

Current 538 analysis of the election. I think it overstates the odds of Trump pulling out a popular vote total win, but that is the uncertainty built into their model. I also think it understates the probability of Trump winning the electoral college. Without much changing I put his odds there around 25%. So I suppose in total I have the total odds of him winning at around the same as 538. But barring any major developments between now and election day I don't see Trump winning the popular vote at all.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 01, 2020, 12:03:06 AM
Donald,

“if you read closely, would see the word ‘you’ in ‘call it what you will’. Yes, Republicans seem to be promoting a strategy of voter suppression and distrust in the election in order to facilitate ignoring the voting results later.“

It only took three requests for clarification before your realization that I needed to pierce through your sarcasm, and see myself interpreting your hypothetical legislative voter nullification as a “happy coincidence”? Donald, the deficiency is in your writing. The most natural reading is that voter nullification is a happy face event.

“That you ascribe this strategy to me in a way that I supposedly support is just silly.  Unless... you think I support Republicans in this election cycle. Is that it - do you think I would vote for Trump or Republicans for the Senate?“

I think that you would be happy to throw the presidential election to any state legislature with a 3% Republican majority, which all swing states coincidentally have. Notwithstanding the 8% Republican majority in the Senate, Mike Pence has been the deciding Senate vote on thirteen occasions during the last four years.

The problem with Republicans is that they have become democratized. Not so with Democrats, however I grant that Democratic majorities in state legislatures would guarantee your prediction :

“In this environment, I find it highly unlikely that not a single untrained, hot-headed "patriot" of one flavour or another will make a "mistake" and set off at least a limited armed skirmish somewhere in the country.  It would be almost a miracle if that didn't happen.”

“But again, even if you missed the sarcasm, I was making a clear warning about the risk of Republican states overturning the electoral will of the voters, and even explained how the Democrats have no opportunity to do the same in this election because of the structure of existing state and federal legislatures. It takes a very special kind of filter to miss the whole point of several posts to interpret them in the very opposite way that they read. Congrats.”

It takes a very “special kind of filter” to forget your reaction to my opposition. If you actually meant to say the opposite, then would have been the time for clarification.

“Oh, and if we get specific, ‘happy coincidence’ is a characterization; it is not a strategy.”

If we get specific, you conflated the two in a single string of synonyms. Don’t lay your sloppy writing style at my feet.

“... it is not even a tactic.  It does not suggest any actions, nor even a position.  You probably meant something other than ‘strategy’ “

Voter nullification through state legislature preemption of SCOTUS review is a “strategy”, and one that would only serve Democratic ends.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 01, 2020, 12:23:55 AM
Y-22,

“Many of those quotes were just about fraud not specifically referencing mail in (though some were). How about this one?

Quote
The only way we're going to lose this election is if the election is rigged

Trump is clearly and consistently saying things like this that undermine confidence in the election (unless he's the winner).“


The people that Trump is presumably addressing, like me, need no convincing that fraud associated with unsolicited absentee ballot requests, and worse, unsolicited live ballots, will be rampant. I wish Trump would put a cork in it, and restate our concern properly; this election has been irreversibly compromised by state judges. No eventual “President” will be able to govern effectively. In the world that we live in, this is dangerous.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 01, 2020, 01:39:06 PM
Y-22,

“Many of those quotes were just about fraud not specifically referencing mail in (though some were). How about this one?

Quote
The only way we're going to lose this election is if the election is rigged

Trump is clearly and consistently saying things like this that undermine confidence in the election (unless he's the winner).“


The people that Trump is presumably addressing, like me, need no convincing that fraud associated with unsolicited absentee ballot requests, and worse, unsolicited live ballots, will be rampant.

How do you feel about touch screen voting machines with no paper back up?

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 01, 2020, 01:45:52 PM
Current 538 odds on different results:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/)
Quote
Trump wins the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 10 in 100

Biden wins the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 90 in 100

Trump wins more than 50% of the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 7 in 100

Biden wins more than 50% of the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 85 in 100

Trump wins in a landslide Defined as winning the popular vote by a double-digit margin <1 in 100

Biden wins in a landslide Defined as winning the popular vote by a double-digit margin 29 in 100

Trump wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College <1 in 100

Biden wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College 10 in 100
No one wins the Electoral College No candidate gets 270 electoral votes and Congress decides the election <1 in 100

Trump wins at least one state that Clinton won in 2016   33 in 100

Biden wins at least one state that Trump won in 2016   92 in 100

The map stays exactly the same as it was in 2016 Each candidate wins exactly the same states that his party won in 2016 <1 in 100

The election hinges on a recount Candidates are within half a percentage point in one or more decisive states 5 in 100
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 01, 2020, 09:28:06 PM
Texas governor Greg Abbott moves to suppress Democrat votes (https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/01/politics/texas-governor-drop-off-locations-ballots/index.html).

"How does limiting each county to a single drop off locations for ballots suppress Democratic votes, specifically?" one might ask... "each county gets one location - that should be completely fair!", am I right?

Of course, Abbott realizes that Democratic votes are clustered primarily in the largest urban centres in the state, as we saw in 2016 (https://www.texastribune.org/2016/11/11/analysis-blue-dots-texas-red-political-sea/) - Dallas, Houston, el Paso, Austin, San Antonio - each of which basically comprises single large counties that dwarf other counties in the state.  That means Abbott is limiting Houston, for instance, with its 3 counties (Harris pop. 4.7M,  Fort Bend pop. 810K, Montgomery pop. 610K) each to 1 drop-off location.  Think about that - Harris county, population of 4,700,000 people, which Clinton carried by 12% over Trump, gets one ballot drop off location. Dallas county, with a population of 2,600,000 and that Clinton carried by 26% only gets one drop off point. El Paso county, pop. 820,000 carried by Clinton by more than 33%, one drop-off point.  The exception to the large metropolises, Tarrant County (comprising Fort Worth) with a population of 1,800,000 was carried by Trump by 9% in 2016.

The remainder of the counties, rural and suburban counties where Republicans do better than Democrats?  Some examples that Trump carried: Randall County, pop. 120K, Cochran County pop. 3000, Hardeman county pop. 4,000.

One keeps hoping that Republican politicians will show the tiniest glimmer of morality, yet time and again, they choose to destroy the country.

We've all seen the electoral results: since 1992, the Republican presidential candidate has won the popular vote exactly once.

in 2016, Republicans won 55% of the seats in the House with just 49% of the vote
In 2018, Democrats won almost as many seats as the Republicans did in 2016 (54%) but it took 53.4% of the vote do so.

The Senate is, by design, even less representative.

These are the rules, of course.

But there is a problem when the minority party nationwide keeps using its status in government, afforded by those rules, to then further disenfranchise the majority in ways not foreseen by the rules that got them there in the first place.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 02, 2020, 03:39:55 AM
Y-22

“How do you feel about touch screen voting machines with no paper back up?”

Any method departing from the tried, and true, secret (paper) ballot, invites fraud. If electronic voting machines were made the national standard, we would have a situation closely approximating the one that we find ourselves in now.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 02, 2020, 03:52:15 AM
Donald,

“The Senate is, by design, even less representative.“

... And the Supreme Court even less so. How do you feel about major decisions handed down by the Warren Court?

“These are the rules, of course.”

Yes, that pesky Constitution again.

“But there is a problem when the minority party nationwide keeps using its status in government, afforded by those rules, to then further disenfranchise the majority in ways not foreseen by the rules that got them there in the first place.“

Yes, and the traditional solution has been winning elections.

Are you suggesting that the Democratic Party has historically objected to the rules governing our constitutional republic when they approved of “minority” government successes?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 02, 2020, 07:00:08 AM
Do you honestly not see a problem with what Abbott has done, noel?

I wouldn't want to misinterpret your post as a statement of support, but you didn't actually mention anything in your post about his decree.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 02, 2020, 07:35:12 AM
Y-22

“How do you feel about touch screen voting machines with no paper back up?”

Any method departing from the tried, and true, secret (paper) ballot, invites fraud. If electronic voting machines were made the national standard, we would have a situation closely approximating the one that we find ourselves in now.

Such bs. All states have basically decided to expand their absentee ballot measures. And it takes 1 insider to break an election with touch screens. It takes a massive wide spread effort to affect an election with mail in ballots. There is no evidence that mail ins are leading to massive fraud.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 02, 2020, 12:28:41 PM
How do you feel about touch screen voting machines with no paper back up?

Hate them.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 02, 2020, 12:33:36 PM
Y-22

“How do you feel about touch screen voting machines with no paper back up?”

Any method departing from the tried, and true, secret (paper) ballot, invites fraud. If electronic voting machines were made the national standard, we would have a situation closely approximating the one that we find ourselves in now.

Such bs. All states have basically decided to expand their absentee ballot measures. And it takes 1 insider to break an election with touch screens. It takes a massive wide spread effort to affect an election with mail in ballots. There is no evidence that mail ins are leading to massive fraud.

Some states went a bit beyond "just expanding absentee voting." I don't have a problem with absentee voting. I do have a problem with states going from absentee voting is basically not allowed to mailing people unsolicited ballots with just months worth of planning though.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 02, 2020, 01:09:50 PM
Y-22

“How do you feel about touch screen voting machines with no paper back up?”

Any method departing from the tried, and true, secret (paper) ballot, invites fraud. If electronic voting machines were made the national standard, we would have a situation closely approximating the one that we find ourselves in now.

Such bs. All states have basically decided to expand their absentee ballot measures. And it takes 1 insider to break an election with touch screens. It takes a massive wide spread effort to affect an election with mail in ballots. There is no evidence that mail ins are leading to massive fraud.

Some states went a bit beyond "just expanding absentee voting." I don't have a problem with absentee voting. I do have a problem with states going from absentee voting is basically not allowed to mailing people unsolicited ballots with just months worth of planning though.

The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 02, 2020, 01:21:59 PM
The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.
That's it?  Then what's with all the sturm und drang?  This sounds like a huge red herring that keeps getting thrown out as an excuse to attack the voting process.

First, there is no non-trivial amounts of ballot fraud and secondly, with the exception of Nevada, the putative, theoretical fraud would be limited to states that are not even in play in the presidential election?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on October 02, 2020, 02:45:00 PM
...The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.

When scamming is experienced, it just gets worse. The experts at scamming, sell their services to other places.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 02, 2020, 03:24:14 PM
...The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.

When scamming is experienced, it just gets worse. The experts at scamming, sell their services to other places.
Ah, except the argument is that this is a new thing, and the only reason mail in vote fraud was not rampant in the past is because mail in voting of this type wasn't even in those states, where they have no experience to control fraud..

So in all those states where it isn't a new thing, there has already been shown to be negligible levels of fraud.  I know I'm talking to a wall here but one lives in hope.

 
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on October 02, 2020, 05:19:37 PM
...The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.

When scamming is experienced, it just gets worse. The experts at scamming, sell their services to other places.
Ah, except the argument is that this is a new thing, and the only reason mail in vote fraud was not rampant in the past is because mail in voting of this type wasn't even in those states, where they have no experience to control fraud..

So in all those states where it isn't a new thing, there has already been shown to be negligible levels of fraud.  I know I'm talking to a wall here but one lives in hope.

But didn't you hear about the SEVEN MISSING BALLOT SCANDAL?

My biggest concern is that with operations this large, mistakes are inevitable. A handful of ballots are lost or misplaced, and suddenly it is total evidence of widespread malfeasance. Or even for that matter, actual small scale fraud is committed, and that is total evidence of widespread malfeasance. As if a multi-state large scale fraud conspiracy could ever be kept under wraps. Not one principled person coming forward, not one person spilling the beans to friends or family, not one investigative journalist finds anything out (or they are all part of the Conspiracy).
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on October 02, 2020, 05:20:23 PM
...The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.

When scamming is experienced, it just gets worse. The experts at scamming, sell their services to other places.
Ah, except the argument is that this is a new thing, and the only reason mail in vote fraud was not rampant in the past is because mail in voting of this type wasn't even in those states, where they have no experience to control fraud..

So in all those states where it isn't a new thing, there has already been shown to be negligible levels of fraud.  I know I'm talking to a wall here but one lives in hope.

The problem with that is that mail-in voting is NOT devoid of problems. Too many of these conversations have substituted "Absentee ballots" for mail-in ballots. The ballots going through the mail that follow traditional absentee ballot procedures are sometimes late, but usually follow the voter's own desires to vote. Unsolicited ballots are the opposite, with no way to really vet. They are dangerous by definition, aren't they? In Michigan, we keep receiving mail-in ballot requests for people that don't live here. If someone responded it would be illegal but probably go though.

The major factor is the sheer volume. What can be done in a small vote becomes uncountable with this one.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 02, 2020, 05:29:30 PM
The problem with that is that mail-in voting is NOT devoid of problems. Too many of these conversations have substituted "Absentee ballots" for mail-in ballots. The ballots going through the mail that follow traditional absentee ballot procedures are sometimes late, but usually follow the voter's own desires to vote. Unsolicited ballots are the opposite, with no way to really vet. They are dangerous by definition, aren't they? In Michigan, we keep receiving mail-in ballot requests for people that don't live here. If someone responded it would be illegal but probably go though.

The major factor is the sheer volume. What can be done in a small vote becomes uncountable with this one.
No - unsolicited ballots are already in use in a number of states, and the changes were noted above.  There is simply no evidence, none, of significant, non trivial voter fraud either by mail or in-person.  If you can find evidence of such, provide it.  And no, I'm not talking about mistakes made in registrations, or voter lists with dead people on - I am talking about votes that that were fraudulently cast in significant numbers.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on October 02, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
...But didn't you hear about the SEVEN MISSING BALLOT SCANDAL?

My biggest concern is that with operations this large, mistakes are inevitable. A handful of ballots are lost or misplaced, and suddenly it is total evidence of widespread malfeasance. Or even for that matter, actual small scale fraud is committed, and that is total evidence of widespread malfeasance. As if a multi-state large scale fraud conspiracy could ever be kept under wraps. Not one principled person coming forward, not one person spilling the beans to friends or family, not one investigative journalist finds anything out (or they are all part of the Conspiracy).

For sure. Every single misplaced ballot was discovered in that single trash can.  No one believes those seven were all of them. Since vote-scamming records have been kept, the trend is that in Democrat strongholds, especially with no GOP poll watchers - or poll watchers who signed in as GOP but were really not. the ballots are taken into backrooms and massaged until the outcome is what the counters want. In Dade County, they were breaking off chads to help Kerry. You've seen the same thing done since it was first filmed in 1978. The scamming exists.

Anything that makes it harder to vet ballots and easier to scam should be stopped. The result is usually a court challenge throwing out the numbers and ordering a new election. How many states has that already been done in the past few months?

In this election, many "old school" scammers have warned their Democrat leaders this year to urge their base to vote at the polls, because those are the votes that will be counted, while the mail-in ballots that are primarily Democrat may be thrown out. That gives a huge benefit to their opponents. This past few days have seen more and more calls for Democrats to go to the polls to vote.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 02, 2020, 08:58:54 PM
Donald,

“Do you honestly not see a problem with what Abbott has done, noel?”

Honestly, no, Donald.

Abbot took fire from Texas Republicans, Allan West among them, for allowing early voting by executive order at the stations you are concerned about. This is in addition to postal service delivery, or personal hand submission on November 3rd. I am limited to the later two in my state, and do not feel even slightly “suppressed“.

You still failed to answer my question (again). Do you have problems with constitutional allotment of two senators per state, and if so, would your issues vanish if Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia were admitted? Along the same lines of minority over-representation, do you believe that the Supreme Court should be structured in a way more politically responsive than it is at present?

“I wouldn't want to misinterpret your post as a statement of support, but you didn't actually mention anything in your post about his decree.”

I am actually neutral on the issue. Abbott claims mass ballot delivery (ballot harvesting) was taking place in early voting. Somehow, closing down satellite stations was supposed to alleviate the problem. I only care that controls exist to limit one ballot submittal per voter.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 03, 2020, 02:15:14 AM
Y-22,

“Such bs. All states have basically decided to expand their absentee ballot measures.”

Yes.

“And it takes 1 insider to break an election with touch screens.”

If your “insider” is to “break an election”, they must insert programming into a centralized computer well before. However, the central computer would have to connect to the internet at some point prior to reloading corrupted software onto voting machines. Ultimately, it is detectable.

Old fashioned paper fraud is easier to pull off where unsolicited ballots are involved, and is much harder to detect directly. Ballot harvesting from elderly communities, and retirement home settings, are among the more notable expressions of voter extortion. Purchased ballots come in all varieties, and along with ballot extortion, inflate both turnout and the percentage of winning votes detectable through statistical methods. The problem is that other causes can produce the same statistical results. That is why you are safe in asserting “there is no proof”, and I am justified in ignoring you under the premise that dollar bills will not remain unattended if left laying on the sidewalk. You lock your house, and car, for the same reason. This is not esoteric paranoia, and I am baffled the apparent need to resort to arguments grounded in common sense.

In elections recently won by less than one percentage point, my concern is not trivial.

“It takes a massive wide spread effort to affect an election with mail in ballots. There is no evidence that mail ins are leading to massive fraud.”

The fraud must be “widespread“, but does not require massive effort. How difficult is it to mail in your dead mother’s ballots?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-08-18/la-county-man-accused-of-voting-in-three-elections-as-his-dead-mother%3f_amp=true

As jobs go, canvassing retirement housing complexes, or homes, for unsolicited ballots is time consuming but not particularly difficult.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 05, 2020, 10:08:28 AM
If your “insider” is to “break an election”, they must insert programming into a centralized computer well before. However, the central computer would have to connect to the internet at some point prior to reloading corrupted software onto voting machines. Ultimately, it is detectable.

See Georgia.
https://apnews.com/article/877ee1015f1c43f1965f63538b035d3f (https://apnews.com/article/877ee1015f1c43f1965f63538b035d3f)
Quote
A computer server crucial to a lawsuit against Georgia election officials was quietly wiped clean by its custodians just after the suit was filed, The Associated Press has learned.

The server’s data was destroyed July 7 by technicians at the Center for Elections Systems at Kennesaw State University, which runs the state’s election system. The data wipe was revealed in an email sent last week from an assistant state attorney general to plaintiffs in the case that was later obtained by the AP. More emails obtained in a public records request confirmed the wipe.

This is still being litigated four years after the election. But the people "in charge" of the investigation at the state level are the ones who won the election so it hasn't seemed to be a priority of law enforcement to try to understand how the servers were wiped in response to a lawsuit. And the guy who oversaw that debacle won the governors race in the following election that he was overseeing. It is suspicious that Kemp outperformed polls by 1-2% points. Nothing definite in that, following within the margin of error of polls but based on past behavior and other irregularities I find it suspicious. Georgia is the only swing state I would bet money on. I bet Trump wins Georgia.

Quote
Old fashioned paper fraud is easier to pull off where unsolicited ballots are involved, and is much harder to detect directly. Ballot harvesting from elderly communities, and retirement home settings, are among the more notable expressions of voter extortion. Purchased ballots come in all varieties, and along with ballot extortion, inflate both turnout and the percentage of winning votes detectable through statistical methods.

Going around and offering to buy ballots requires none of the people you speak with decide to decline and call the police. To do this on the order of 10's or 100's of thousands of votes is a massive effort that would be very extremely difficult to keep secret. A republican in NC got busted for doing this on the order of about 1,000 ballots.

Quote
The problem is that other causes can produce the same statistical results. That is why you are safe in asserting “there is no proof”, and I am justified in ignoring you under the premise that dollar bills will not remain unattended if left laying on the sidewalk. You lock your house, and car, for the same reason. This is not esoteric paranoia, and I am baffled the apparent need to resort to arguments grounded in common sense.

If these ballot harvesting operations were being operated on a scale to influence state wide elections it is very hard to keep them secret. All it takes is one operative or voter to alert the authorities. To run an operation to harvest and fill out 100,000 ballots would take a dedicated team. Such large scale conspiracies are hard to maintain.

https://phys.org/news/2016-01-equation-large-scale-conspiracies-quickly-reveal.html (https://phys.org/news/2016-01-equation-large-scale-conspiracies-quickly-reveal.html)
Quote
He then looked at the maximum number of people who could take part in an intrigue in order to maintain it. For a plot to last five years, the maximum was 2521 people. To keep a scheme operating undetected for more than a decade, fewer than 1000 people can be involved. A century-long deception should ideally include fewer than 125 collaborators. Even a straightforward cover-up of a single event, requiring no more complex machinations than everyone keeping their mouth shut, is likely to be blown if more than 650 people are accomplices.

Quote
In elections recently won by less than one percentage point, my concern is not trivial.
Being concerned about the outcome is fine. But which states are you concerned about these unsolicited ballots in? Five states already had all mail in voting. 5 more are considering or have implemented some type of all mail in voting and Nevada is the only one in play for the presidential election. I have concerns with mail in voting as well. However mail in voting fraud or ballots purchased on a scale to impact a state wide race and keeping the conspiracy secret on a scale to influence any but the absolute closest state wide races is paranoia.

Ballot purchasing or voter intimidation is absolutely something we should try to watch out for. But doing those things on a scale to impact 100,000 or more votes is a massive operation and can be blown up by a single person reporting that someone tried to purchase their ballot.
Quote
“It takes a massive wide spread effort to affect an election with mail in ballots. There is no evidence that mail ins are leading to massive fraud.”

The fraud must be “widespread“, but does not require massive effort. How difficult is it to mail in your dead mother’s ballots?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-08-18/la-county-man-accused-of-voting-in-three-elections-as-his-dead-mother%3f_amp=true

As jobs go, canvassing retirement housing complexes, or homes, for unsolicited ballots is time consuming but not particularly difficult.

It takes a massive effort to make it widespread, particularly by a single political party. I'm of the opinion that people voting for recently (or not so recently) deceased relatives is likely to largely wash out in the final outcome. I'm sure this happens to some degree by people on both sides every election but unless the election is decided by less than 1,000 votes this type of fraud is unlikely to have an impact. And if this were happening on a massive scale it would be very detectable. Trump's voter fraud commission should have been able to examine voting records compared to death records and turn up lots of these deceased voters if it were widespread. But his voter fraud commission disbanded without finding a single fraudulent vote.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: noel c. on October 06, 2020, 06:18:00 PM
Y-22,

“This is still being litigated four years after the election. But the people "in charge" of the investigation at the state level are the ones who won the election so it hasn't seemed to be a priority of law enforcement to try to understand how the servers were wiped in response to a lawsuit. And the guy who oversaw that debacle won the governors race in the following election that he was overseeing. It is suspicious that Kemp outperformed polls by 1-2% points. Nothing definite in that, following within the margin of error of polls but based on past behavior and other irregularities I find it suspicious. Georgia is the only swing state I would bet money on. I bet Trump wins Georgia.”

And in conformity with what I said; we know exactly who the seven technicians responsible for deleting the data are.

“Going around and offering to buy ballots requires none of the people you speak with decide to decline and call the police. To do this on the order of 10's or 100's of thousands of votes is a massive effort that would be very extremely difficult to keep secret. A republican in NC got busted for doing this on the order of about 1,000 ballots.”

The main targets of this tactic are culturally insulated recent immigrant populations like Somalies.

“If these ballot harvesting operations were being operated on a scale to influence state wide elections it is very hard to keep them secret. All it takes is one operative or voter to alert the authorities. To run an operation to harvest and fill out 100,000 ballots would take a dedicated team. Such large scale conspiracies are hard to maintain.”

They are not secret. This is the reason limits are placed on how many ballots an individual can submit. Yet ballot troves always show up in post-election counting drives.

“Being concerned about the outcome is fine. But which states are you concerned about these unsolicited ballots in? Five states already had all mail in voting. 5 more are considering or have implemented some type of all mail in voting and Nevada is the only one in play for the presidential election. I have concerns with mail in voting as well. However mail in voting fraud or ballots purchased on a scale to impact a state wide race and keeping the conspiracy secret on a scale to influence any but the absolute closest state wide races is paranoia.

“Ballot purchasing or voter intimidation is absolutely something we should try to watch out for. But doing those things on a scale to impact 100,000 or more votes is a massive operation and can be blown up by a single person reporting that someone tried to purchase their ballot.”

You began by complaining that Georgia election officials were not appropriately motivated to investigate a data deletion. Is Florida, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, or the 5th congressional district in Minnesota different?

“It takes a massive effort to make it widespread, particularly by a single political party. I'm of the opinion that people voting for recently (or not so recently) deceased relatives is likely to largely wash out in the final outcome. I'm sure this happens to some degree by people on both sides every election but unless the election is decided by less than 1,000 votes this type of fraud is unlikely to have an impact. And if this were happening on a massive scale it would be very detectable. Trump's voter fraud commission should have been able to examine voting records compared to death records and turn up lots of these deceased voters if it were widespread. But his voter fraud commission disbanded without finding a single fraudulent vote.”

No, you are referring to an interview with Matthew Dunlap (D) of Main, and not even he supported your claim. :

“Dunlap’s findings received immediate pushback Friday from Kobach, who acted as vice chair of the commission while Pence served as chair.

‘For some people, no matter how many cases of voter fraud you show them, there will never be enough for them to admit that there’s a problem,’ said Kobach, who is running for Kansas governor and has a good chance of unseating the incumbent, Jeff Colyer, in the Republican primary Tuesday.

‘It appears that Secretary Dunlap is willfully blind to the voter fraud in front of his nose,’ Kobach said in a statement released by his spokesman.

Kobach said there have been more than 1,000 convictions for voter fraud since 2000, and that the commission presented 8,400 instances of double voting in the 2016 election in 20 states.“

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 06, 2020, 07:08:31 PM
Y-22,

“This is still being litigated four years after the election. But the people "in charge" of the investigation at the state level are the ones who won the election so it hasn't seemed to be a priority of law enforcement to try to understand how the servers were wiped in response to a lawsuit. And the guy who oversaw that debacle won the governors race in the following election that he was overseeing. It is suspicious that Kemp outperformed polls by 1-2% points. Nothing definite in that, following within the margin of error of polls but based on past behavior and other irregularities I find it suspicious. Georgia is the only swing state I would bet money on. I bet Trump wins Georgia.”

And in conformity with what I said; we know exactly who the seven technicians responsible for deleting the data are.
We don't know which of the 7 did it.

But we know who benefitted from this and who was in charge of that office and he's the governor of Georgia now. And we know 4 years on there have been no criminal charges filed. So I'm not going to hold my breath for this to be suddenly investigated with vigor.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 06, 2020, 07:21:09 PM
Kobach said there have been more than 1,000 convictions for voter fraud since 2000, and that the commission presented 8,400 instances of double voting in the 2016 election in 20 states.“

Why haven't there been 8,400 convictions since 2016 then?

We're talking about impacting more than 8,400 votes over 20 states if you want to consistently swing a presidential or any statewide race. What the commission found is that double voting is rare, even if you take their unsubstantiated 8,400 over 20 states that's 420 votes per state of fraud. And likely since its individuals double voting some of those people canceled each other out. This is so far from your claim of voter fraud on the scale to flip the upcoming presidential election. Seriously find evidence of this happening on a scale anything like you've claimed. Trump's commission couldn't find it. Trump's justice department hasn't found it. Trump is simply making these claims to give himself an excuse to dispute the election if he loses.

The biggest evidence of voter fraud is in NC perpetrated by a republican and that involved less than 1,000 harvested absentee ballots but was discovered because the race was close and people looked into it. His low wage network of ballot collectors flipped on him as fast as they could and talked with the media about it. So explain how someone could do the same thing on the order of 10's or 100's of thousands of ballots and go undetected in close races.

The biggest scandal IMO is Georgia elections over the last decade. But I've yet to see Republicans calling for massive investigations into that because Republicans have been the beneficiary of the results.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 09, 2020, 06:21:55 PM
Some states went a bit beyond "just expanding absentee voting." I don't have a problem with absentee voting. I do have a problem with states going from absentee voting is basically not allowed to mailing people unsolicited ballots with just months worth of planning though.

The only states that are doing that for the first time are California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.. The only swing state on that list is Nevada. So we wouldn't expect those ballots to have much impact on the race for president.

I brought up an Apple "to mailing people unsolicited ballots" to you giving an Orange in response "The only states that are doing that(expanded absentee voting) for the first time are"

Not a valid comparison? Absentee voting is not "sending unsolicited ballots to people."

They'll still be able to tamper with the popular vote totals, but I wasn't really expecting Trump to win the popular vote anyway because of California, New York, and New Jersey anyway.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 09, 2020, 06:39:57 PM
See Georgia.
https://apnews.com/article/877ee1015f1c43f1965f63538b035d3f (https://apnews.com/article/877ee1015f1c43f1965f63538b035d3f)
Quote
A computer server crucial to a lawsuit against Georgia election officials was quietly wiped clean by its custodians just after the suit was filed, The Associated Press has learned.

The server’s data was destroyed July 7 by technicians at the Center for Elections Systems at Kennesaw State University, which runs the state’s election system. The data wipe was revealed in an email sent last week from an assistant state attorney general to plaintiffs in the case that was later obtained by the AP. More emails obtained in a public records request confirmed the wipe.

This is still being litigated four years after the election. But the people "in charge" of the investigation at the state level are the ones who won the election so it hasn't seemed to be a priority of law enforcement to try to understand how the servers were wiped in response to a lawsuit. And the guy who oversaw that debacle won the governors race in the following election that he was overseeing. It is suspicious that Kemp outperformed polls by 1-2% points. Nothing definite in that, following within the margin of error of polls but based on past behavior and other irregularities I find it suspicious. Georgia is the only swing state I would bet money on. I bet Trump wins Georgia.

Weird you should mention that, "outperformed polls by 1 to 2 points" in the context of an election era at this point where Republican Voters are being shown to be twice as likely than Democratic Voters to lie/mislead on who they're voting for. Or where Trump won in 2016 by "outperforming the polling data"(but within their error bars).. Or where in the election cycle coming up it is also now being reported that self-identified independents are almost as likely as Conservatives to lie to pollsters about their picks. IIRC, it's something like 5.4% of Democrats fibbing to 10.2% of independents and 10.6% of Conservative/Republican voters.

Problem is if you believe that Republicans and Independents make up only half of the voter base, 10% of them lying gives you a 5% error bar from untruthful/"shy" voters alone, even before getting into methodology errors. The "shy democrats" would add another 2.5% to the error bar. If you make it 60% Republican/independent for an area, your error bar becomes 6% + 2% for a potential 8 point swing from that behavior, even assuming "they cancel each other out" to some degree, you're looking at 5-2.5= 2.5% error above their margin, or 6-2=4% error above their polling margins.

But in that context, Kemp beating the polling by 2 points as a consequence of "shy voters" not being truthful to the pollsters would account for the electoral win he had.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 09, 2020, 06:55:02 PM
The biggest evidence of voter fraud is in NC perpetrated by a republican and that involved less than 1,000 harvested absentee ballots but was discovered because the race was close and people looked into it. His low wage network of ballot collectors flipped on him as fast as they could and talked with the media about it. So explain how someone could do the same thing on the order of 10's or 100's of thousands of ballots and go undetected in close races.

New Jersey had an even bigger example just this year, and it involved Democrats.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 13, 2020, 08:31:55 AM
https://www.npr.org/2020/10/12/923090987/georgia-voters-face-hours-long-lines-at-polls-on-first-day-of-early-voting (https://www.npr.org/2020/10/12/923090987/georgia-voters-face-hours-long-lines-at-polls-on-first-day-of-early-voting)
Quote
Early voting opened Monday in Georgia for the 2020 general election — but the first day was marred by technical issues and lines that in some locations stretched more than five hours long, particularly in the Atlanta metro area.

Voters arriving in the morning at Atlanta's State Farm Arena, the home of the NBA's Hawks — and the state's largest early voting site, with 300 voting machines — encountered technical issues, which election officials blamed on problems with the electronic poll pads.

I'm shocked that the election issues in Georgia caused delays in the Atlanta area.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on October 13, 2020, 11:15:26 AM
https://www.npr.org/2020/10/12/923090987/georgia-voters-face-hours-long-lines-at-polls-on-first-day-of-early-voting (https://www.npr.org/2020/10/12/923090987/georgia-voters-face-hours-long-lines-at-polls-on-first-day-of-early-voting)
Quote
Early voting opened Monday in Georgia for the 2020 general election — but the first day was marred by technical issues and lines that in some locations stretched more than five hours long, particularly in the Atlanta metro area.

Voters arriving in the morning at Atlanta's State Farm Arena, the home of the NBA's Hawks — and the state's largest early voting site, with 300 voting machines — encountered technical issues, which election officials blamed on problems with the electronic poll pads.

I'm shocked that the election issues in Georgia caused delays in the Atlanta area.

I'm very curious as to who would decide to go to the very first day of early voting, seems like a bad idea. I also have to question whether any of those people really did the work necessary to cast an informed vote for county officials or if they just dry heaved their way thinking only of Trump.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 14, 2020, 02:13:21 PM
It turns out that the GOP is just fine constraining boards of elections, the entities tasked with actually running a secure election, from setting up more than 1 official drop off location for 4.5 million people in Houston, while at the same time actually installing on their own Unofficial Ballot Drop-Off Boxes Deemed Illegal By California State Officials (https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2020/10/12/california-republicans-set-up-unofficial-ballot-drop-off-boxes-deemed-illegal-by-state-officials/#27f531511995) that they also mislabel as being "official" drop boxes.

Quote
After being flagged about the issue on Twitter, Orange County Registrar Neal Kelley responded:"We are looking into this and the CA Secretary of State has also issued guidance confirming unofficial ballot drop boxes are not in compliance with state law.” Kelley noted that while third party ballot collections were allowed, “a voter must designate someone to return their ballot on their behalf."

Here is an interesting question: if, as the Democratic California Secretary of State Alex Padilla contends, these unofficial ballot boxes are in fact illegal, might the ballots collected to-date be required to be discarded?  Although there is no longer a signature requirement for designating somebody to collect one's ballot, there is still a "person" requirement, i.e., the law allows voters to designate a person to return their ballot on the voter's behalf; but by depositing the ballot in an unauthorized box, they have seemingly neither provided the ballot to an appropriate election authority, nor have they technically designated a "person" to return the ballot on their behalf.

This could be messy.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 14, 2020, 02:18:48 PM
It turns out that the GOP is just fine constraining boards of elections, the entities tasked with actually running a secure election, from setting up more than 1 official drop off location for 4.5 million people in Houston, while at the same time actually installing on their own Unofficial Ballot Drop-Off Boxes Deemed Illegal By California State Officials (https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2020/10/12/california-republicans-set-up-unofficial-ballot-drop-off-boxes-deemed-illegal-by-state-officials/#27f531511995) that they also mislabel as being "official" drop boxes.

Quote
After being flagged about the issue on Twitter, Orange County Registrar Neal Kelley responded:"We are looking into this and the CA Secretary of State has also issued guidance confirming unofficial ballot drop boxes are not in compliance with state law.” Kelley noted that while third party ballot collections were allowed, “a voter must designate someone to return their ballot on their behalf."

Here is an interesting question: if, as the Democratic California Secretary of State Alex Padilla contends, these unofficial ballot boxes are in fact illegal, might the ballots collected to-date be required to be discarded?  Although there is no longer a signature requirement for designating somebody to collect one's ballot, there is still a "person" requirement, i.e., the law allows voters to designate a person to return their ballot on the voter's behalf; but by depositing the ballot in an unauthorized box, they have seemingly neither provided the ballot to an appropriate election authority, nor have they technically designated a "person" to return the ballot on their behalf.

This could be messy.

It will be. Could impact a few congressional races. Luckily for the country California isn't a swing state so other than potential causing Trump to lose the popular vote by even more this won't be something the presidency is hinging on.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on October 14, 2020, 02:30:11 PM
Quote
With three weeks to go until election day, it's estimated that some 11 million Americans have already voted.

...

The long queues have prompted a huge global reaction.

One Canadian commenter in Ontario wrote that unlike in the US, a nonpartisan national commission runs the elections.

Another Canadian wrote: "I've waited longer for a bus than I have ever waited to vote."

A British man wrote: "Dear USA, I'm 58 and not once in my life have I had to queue to vote. Sort it out!"

Another person suggested that election monitors from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) should intervene.

One man in India pointed out that his country handles more election ballots than any other democracy in the world.

In a country with a higher level of illiteracy than the US, no such long queues have been seen in previous elections.

I have voted in Indian elections, where voting percentages are much higher than US. A lot more people vote in India than in US, but still have not seen such long queues on any Election Day! Must say that US can do a lot better in its election management!

— Hiron (@hironmoy001) October 13, 2020

In Texas, where early voting began on Tuesday, social media users were reminding each other to come prepared with water, a chair and snack.

"Texas! Get in line early tomorrow! And vote! Yes! Turn the tv off! Eat a good breakfast at 5am! Take water! Chair! Umbrella! And stay in line!" wrote one man.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 18, 2020, 04:49:41 PM
Here's an article (https://newrepublic.com/article/159755/republican-voter-suppression-2020-election), interesting not in that it says much that is new, but rather that it goes through the recent history of the Republican party so systematically in the ways that the party has moved away from striving for popular support based on steadfast ideals, and instead became a party depending on voter suppression and gerrymandering in order to maintain its own semi-permanent rule despite only minority support.  In so doing, I think we'll see how the party has painted itself into a corner where, once the voter suppression fails, the house of cards will collapse leaving the party without either the gamed system nor any significant natural base on which to rebuild.

Of course, this may or may not happen soon - and if sooner, will depend on SCOTUS not defanging a new Voting Rights Act...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 22, 2020, 11:28:48 AM
Trump's Army has kicked off their voter intimidation program (https://www.wfla.com/news/pinellas-county/armed-guards-at-st-pete-early-voting-site-told-deputies-they-were-hired-by-trump-campaign-election-officials-say/):

Quote
The Sheriff [Bob Gualtieri] told me the persons that were dressed in these security uniforms had indicated to sheriff’s deputies that they belonged to a licensed security company and they indicated—and this has not been confirmed yet—that they were hired by the Trump campaign,” said Marcus in a video interview with 8 On Your Side’s Chip Osowski Wednesday night.

There is almost no chance that these men were actually hired by the Trump campaign, and the Trump campaign has denied they were involved. Of course, this was completely expected to happen, and people warned about it happening, after Trump encouraged people to do just this on numerous occasions.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Lloyd Perna on October 22, 2020, 12:31:16 PM
https://www.unionleader.com/news/politics/voters/trump-supporters-in-milford-brookline-receive-threatening-letters/article_313effdb-ed1b-5199-80df-4e1c0f7c0170.html?block_id=664693 (https://www.unionleader.com/news/politics/voters/trump-supporters-in-milford-brookline-receive-threatening-letters/article_313effdb-ed1b-5199-80df-4e1c0f7c0170.html?block_id=664693)

It's happening on the other side as well.   People in New Hampshire with Trump signs on their lawns have been receiving threatening mail.  Though I think in this case what the leftists are doing is far more egregious.

Quote
Dear Neighbor,

You have been identified by our group as being a Trump supporter.

Your address has been added into our database as a target for when we attack should Trump not concede the election.

We Recommend that you check your home insurance policy and make sure that is current and that it has adequate coverage for fire damage.

You have been given "Fair Warning".

Always remember, that it was "you" that started this Civil War.

Be prepared to face the severe consequences of your pre-emptive actions against democracy.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on October 22, 2020, 12:37:31 PM
https://www.unionleader.com/news/politics/voters/trump-supporters-in-milford-brookline-receive-threatening-letters/article_313effdb-ed1b-5199-80df-4e1c0f7c0170.html?block_id=664693 (https://www.unionleader.com/news/politics/voters/trump-supporters-in-milford-brookline-receive-threatening-letters/article_313effdb-ed1b-5199-80df-4e1c0f7c0170.html?block_id=664693)

It's happening on the other side as well.   People in New Hampshire with Trump signs on their lawns have been receiving threatening mail.  Though I think in this case what the leftists are doing is far more egregious.

Quote
Dear Neighbor,

You have been identified by our group as being a Trump supporter.

Your address has been added into our database as a target for when we attack should Trump not concede the election.

We Recommend that you check your home insurance policy and make sure that is current and that it has adequate coverage for fire damage.

You have been given "Fair Warning".

Always remember, that it was "you" that started this Civil War.

Be prepared to face the severe consequences of your pre-emptive actions against democracy.

So when the Michigan militia plots to kill cops and kidnap the governor, it's just a group of crazies, but when one nutjob sends letters to Trump supporters in an obscure NH town, its evidence of a giant plot to overthrow America?

Quote
At least four people with Trump signs in their yards have received threatening letters mailed to their homes in Brookline and Milford, according to police.

Egregious, yes. Terrifying, no.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on October 22, 2020, 12:40:27 PM
Here's an article (https://newrepublic.com/article/159755/republican-voter-suppression-2020-election), interesting not in that it says much that is new, but rather that it goes through the recent history of the Republican party so systematically in the ways that the party has moved away from striving for popular support based on steadfast ideals, and instead became a party depending on voter suppression and gerrymandering in order to maintain its own semi-permanent rule despite only minority support.  In so doing, I think we'll see how the party has painted itself into a corner where, once the voter suppression fails, the house of cards will collapse leaving the party without either the gamed system nor any significant natural base on which to rebuild.

Of course, this may or may not happen soon - and if sooner, will depend on SCOTUS not defanging a new Voting Rights Act...

But there is no recent history of Republicans trying to suppress legal voting or any hint of intimidation. That intimidation is 100% on the Democrat side. Attempts to prevent illegal voting is not voter suppression. The illegal voting is the suppressing. When Trump says he will look at what happens is a genuine response in the face of Democrat vote-scamming. Hillary just said "no concession under any circumstance."
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on October 22, 2020, 12:46:23 PM
...when the Michigan militia plots to kill cops and kidnap the governor, it's just a group of crazies, but when one nutjob sends letters to Trump supporters in an obscure NH town, its evidence of a giant plot to overthrow America?

When the anarchists calling themselves "Michigan Militia." Anarchist are on the Left side of the scales - certainly not on the side of law and order. The same side as the "nut jobs." They are all yours, don't try to hand them over to someone else. Governor Whitmer is so reviled here, that even anarchists on her side don't like her.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 22, 2020, 04:59:51 PM
Quote
The Supreme Court has sided with Alabama state officials who banned curbside voting intended to accommodate individuals with disabilities and those at risk from the COVID-19 virus.

The high court issued its order Wednesday night, without explanation, over the dissent of the court's three liberal justices.

More evidence Republicans just want to make voting harder.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 22, 2020, 07:21:38 PM
Trump's Army has kicked off their voter intimidation program (https://www.wfla.com/news/pinellas-county/armed-guards-at-st-pete-early-voting-site-told-deputies-they-were-hired-by-trump-campaign-election-officials-say/):

Quote
The Sheriff [Bob Gualtieri] told me the persons that were dressed in these security uniforms had indicated to sheriff’s deputies that they belonged to a licensed security company and they indicated—and this has not been confirmed yet—that they were hired by the Trump campaign,” said Marcus in a video interview with 8 On Your Side’s Chip Osowski Wednesday night.

There is almost no chance that these men were actually hired by the Trump campaign, and the Trump campaign has denied they were involved. Of course, this was completely expected to happen, and people warned about it happening, after Trump encouraged people to do just this on numerous occasions.

And wouldn't it be ironic if they either never find who hired them, or they were connected to left-wing groups?

edit: and I guess its a good thing that information likely won't come to light until after the election.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 28, 2020, 11:51:27 AM
https://www.npr.org/2020/10/27/928385599/a-newly-sworn-in-justice-barrett-faces-a-motion-to-recuse-herself-in-election-ca (https://www.npr.org/2020/10/27/928385599/a-newly-sworn-in-justice-barrett-faces-a-motion-to-recuse-herself-in-election-ca)

Quote
It arises in an effort by Pennsylvania state Republicans to get a second bite at the apple in an election case decided by the court last week by a tie vote. The issue last week: whether to allow absentee ballots to be counted up to three days after the election, as long as the ballots were postmarked by election day. Chief Justice Roberts sided with the court's three liberals in the case based on his view that in a situation like this, close to the election, state courts should be able to interpret state law. The court's other conservatives wanted to block the state court ruling, but a tie vote means the state court ruling remains in place.

What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law? Since conservatives are "textualists". Give me the passage of the constitution or federal law that would support their overruling a state court in this way.

Its such crap the Republicans want as few votes to be counted as possible.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 28, 2020, 12:35:13 PM
What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law? Since conservatives are "textualists". Give me the passage of the constitution or federal law that would support their overruling a state court in this way.

Its such crap the Republicans want as few votes to be counted as possible.

Equal protection clause, as it pertains to a federal election.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 28, 2020, 12:40:19 PM
What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law? Since conservatives are "textualists". Give me the passage of the constitution or federal law that would support their overruling a state court in this way.

Its such crap the Republicans want as few votes to be counted as possible.

Equal protection clause, as it pertains to a federal election.

And accepting ballots postmarked up to the day of the election violates the equal protection clause in what way?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: msquared on October 28, 2020, 12:41:36 PM
If taxes can be accepted if they are post marked by a certain day, I think votes should be able to be counted if they are post marked by a certain day (election day).
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 28, 2020, 12:50:08 PM
it is not unheard of for some mail to be delivered within 2 days, and some mail to take week or even two.  The idea that somehow, votes cast and mailed 7 days in advance should be discarded if USPS has a glitch is ridiculous.

Does that limitation also pertain to military ballots cast that only arrive after election day? And if not, why not?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDeamon on October 28, 2020, 01:03:54 PM
What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law? Since conservatives are "textualists". Give me the passage of the constitution or federal law that would support their overruling a state court in this way.

Its such crap the Republicans want as few votes to be counted as possible.

Equal protection clause, as it pertains to a federal election.

And accepting ballots postmarked up to the day of the election violates the equal protection clause in what way?

Well, obviously the Court was split on that matter. And that also is outside the scope of the question of "What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law"" The Equal protections clause allows the SCotUS to overturn state court decisions on matters of state law, if they can justify the relationship of that law to the US Constitution in some way. Unless you want to assert that SCotUS has no grounds to overturn things like Jim Crow laws?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 28, 2020, 01:18:32 PM
What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law? Since conservatives are "textualists". Give me the passage of the constitution or federal law that would support their overruling a state court in this way.

Its such crap the Republicans want as few votes to be counted as possible.

Equal protection clause, as it pertains to a federal election.

And accepting ballots postmarked up to the day of the election violates the equal protection clause in what way?

Well, obviously the Court was split on that matter. And that also is outside the scope of the question of "What part of the federal constitution requires the SC to override a state court on a state law"" The Equal protections clause allows the SCotUS to overturn state court decisions on matters of state law, if they can justify the relationship of that law to the US Constitution in some way. Unless you want to assert that SCotUS has no grounds to overturn things like Jim Crow laws?

You're correct, my original question wasn't specific enough. I understand the SC can rule on state issues if the state is in violation of the constitution or federal laws.

What specific part of the constitution is violated by accepting mail in ballots postmarked by election day up to 3 days after the election? The strict textualist is the conservatives on the benches stated philosophy. Unless the state is violating the constitution or federal law then by their own judicial reasoning should defer to the state court. Or is their judicial philosophy is just a bunch of post hoc reasoning that generally arrives at their preferred positions but can be discarded when the correct conclusions aren't reached.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: wmLambert on October 28, 2020, 11:24:45 PM
...What specific part of the constitution is violated by accepting mail in ballots postmarked by election day up to 3 days after the election? The strict textualist is the conservatives on the benches stated philosophy. Unless the state is violating the constitution or federal law then by their own judicial reasoning should defer to the state court. Or is their judicial philosophy is just a bunch of post hoc reasoning that generally arrives at their preferred positions but can be discarded when the correct conclusions aren't reached.

The basis is from the writings of our Founders as they explained their reasoning in the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers. Much of their concern was for timely action while still protecting the voters. That is why Absentee Ballots have secrecy inner envelopes and verification numbers to help keep the process honest. The idea is to get the Electors in the Electoral College the info they need to understand their State's preferences so they can select the President at a given point in time. There are very few who think votes that come in late need to be counted. It is similar to the complaint by Dems that Voter ID is unimportant. It is very important. We have poll watchers for a reason. Stringing out collection and harvesting of ballots in both place and time allows scrutiny to be by-passed.

Since the CDC said that Coronavirus should have no effect on voting in person, there is no rationalization for unsolicited ballots being harvested after the fact. The chain of evidence is as valid for votes as for legal items being admissible in Court.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on October 29, 2020, 10:07:18 AM
...What specific part of the constitution is violated by accepting mail in ballots postmarked by election day up to 3 days after the election? The strict textualist is the conservatives on the benches stated philosophy. Unless the state is violating the constitution or federal law then by their own judicial reasoning should defer to the state court. Or is their judicial philosophy is just a bunch of post hoc reasoning that generally arrives at their preferred positions but can be discarded when the correct conclusions aren't reached.

The basis is from the writings of our Founders as they explained their reasoning in the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers.

Fail. Not in the constitution or federal law. Get on the textualist bandwagon.

Quote
Much of their concern was for timely action while still protecting the voters. That is why Absentee Ballots have secrecy inner envelopes and verification numbers to help keep the process honest. The idea is to get the Electors in the Electoral College the info they need to understand their State's preferences so they can select the President at a given point in time.

Double fail. Founders didn't care about a 3 day delay. Counting ballots for 3 days following the election is not going to cause a delay so large as to cause a constitutional crisis. During the time of the founders it may take people 3 days or more just to travel to report results from remote parts of the state to the state capital.

Quote
There are very few who think votes that come in late need to be counted.

Triple fail. The state election commission and state supreme court of Pennsylvania think all votes postmarked by election day and received within 3 days of election day should be counted.

Quote
It is similar to the complaint by Dems that Voter ID is unimportant. It is very important. We have poll watchers for a reason. Stringing out collection and harvesting of ballots in both place and time allows scrutiny to be by-passed.

Are you claiming the post office is going to be applying fraudulent post marks on ballots after election day to allow votes to be counted? And professional election workers who processed all the other ballots can't be trusted after election day to count mail in ballots postmarked by election day?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: NobleHunter on October 29, 2020, 11:21:44 AM
The Founders would have thought it normal for elections to take days if not weeks. There's a reason why your elections takes months to take effect where the rest of the democratic world can install new governments in weeks (assuming majorities for the various parliamentary systems anyways). There's nothing originalist about insisting on same day results.

I think it was another forum that posted an extract from the Federalist/Anti-Federalist papers about how the Electoral College was intended to diffuse the passions over an election by providing each state with a separate focus for election results instead of all hinging on one man. Spacing out State's definitive vote counts would be in accordance with that original intent.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2020, 11:34:04 AM
I wonder how many military ballots will show up after election day? What's that now? You want to keep allowing those?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 29, 2020, 01:15:44 PM
Starship Troopers (https://starshiptroopers.fandom.com/wiki/Starship_Troopers_(novel)).  We thought it was speculative fiction, but maybe...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2020, 03:10:12 PM
Quote
There are very few who think votes that come in late need to be counted. It is similar to the complaint by Dems that Voter ID is unimportant.

So the vast cabal of Socialists bent on the destruction of America and the establishment of a police state to enslave us all are thwarted by the inability to do what college students have been doing for decades - the fake ID! Let's face it, poll workers aren't going to turn people away because they don't quite look like that person. They also lack electronic checks. I used my US passport to vote this year. At the airport, that goes into a scanner and the bar code has to match something in a database. Without it, I could easily paper over my name and that poll worker isn't going to get weird about it. Bars and restaurants in many states have similar scanners. Poll stations don't.

ID laws won't stop the vast conspiracy, but they sure will stop legitimate voters. In what numbers, I have no idea.

Of course, we could establish a national ID like an internal passport that is consistent, and tie it to a database. Guess who is going to oppose that. The same conservatives who are clamoring for ID checks to vote. The extreme libertarians refuse to use air travel because the TSA demands to see their ID and logs their whereabouts.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: msquared on October 29, 2020, 04:36:39 PM
So here is my question. In the past 2 weeks two gentlemen that I know personally have died (they were 83 and 89 years old). If they had voted by mail, should their vote count? I am fairly sure they would have voted for Trump (and they may have done so, I do not know if they voted early or not).

I mean there is all this talk about verifying the vote. How do you handle this?
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on October 29, 2020, 04:55:30 PM
What if somebody voted in the morning of election day, but died before the ballot boxes were opened?

I see no effective difference.  Valid votes were cast, they should be counted.  If their signatures were found not to match, they might have difficulty addressing that issue, though...
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: cherrypoptart on October 29, 2020, 05:33:32 PM
I agree all votes should be counted even after the election. There is certainly nothing in the Constitution to prohibit or even discourage that.

The only problem is that some people ruin good things for everyone. Example? Lyndon Johnson. The issue is that Democrats have been known in the past to wait until after all the votes are cast, find out how many votes they lost by, and then miraculously manage to "find" just enough votes to put them back over the edge and win.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: LetterRip on October 30, 2020, 09:48:26 PM
Different states have different rules for dying after casting a ballot.  Some don't count it others do.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on November 01, 2020, 02:25:10 PM
https://www.npr.org/2020/11/01/930052598/republicans-seek-to-toss-out-127-000-ballots-in-democratic-leaning-texas-county (https://www.npr.org/2020/11/01/930052598/republicans-seek-to-toss-out-127-000-ballots-in-democratic-leaning-texas-county)

And more Republican voter suppression lawsuits.

Quote
Republicans in Texas have asked the courts to toss out some 127,000 early ballots cast by voters in Harris County, arguing that the votes — delivered via drive-through in the heavily Democratic area — violate the U.S. Constitution and should be deemed invalid.

The plaintiffs argue that the drive-throughs are an illegal extension of curbside voting, which is available at all county voting locations and is designated for people who have an illness or disability.

So curbside voting from your car is okay but drive through voting from your car violates the US Constitution. More crap. We're reaching a dangerous point in our democracy. The Republican party is systematically trying to make it harder to vote. This should scare everyone, disenfranchisement is going down a dark path.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Grant on November 01, 2020, 02:43:11 PM

And more Republican voter suppression lawsuits.

 The Republican party is systematically trying to make it harder to vote. This should scare everyone, disenfranchisement is going down a dark path.

Counterview:

Steven F. Hotze is a conservative nutjob with no actual position within the Texas Republican Party.  Steve Toth is the only actual Republican with a job in the TX House of Reps.  Wendell Champion would probably get away with whatever he could to defeat Sheila Jackson Lee, and who can blame him? 

The lawsuit was denied by an all Republican Texas Supreme Court. 

So:  "Wacko Republicans are stopped by normal old-school Republicans" might be a better headline. 
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on November 01, 2020, 03:03:38 PM
Quote
The plaintiffs, all Republicans, are conservative activist Steven Hotze, state Rep. Steve Toth of The Woodlands, congressional candidate Wendell Champion and judicial candidate Sharon Hemphill.

So conservative money man and three Republican candidates file the lawsuit. Still doesn't sound much better.

This is a new one after a similar lawsuit got thrown out.

Quote
In the pending cases on drive-thru voting, the state’s highest civil court could rule on the pending case at any time, and U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen has scheduled a hearing for Monday morning.

So a Monday hearing. I'm guessing the judge will toss this lawsuit out like the other similar ones. You can try to let the Republican party wash their hands of this but there are lawsuits with similar goals in Pennsylvania and other places all to make voting more difficult or to try to invalidate votes.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: Grant on November 01, 2020, 03:23:29 PM

So conservative money man and three Republican candidates file the lawsuit. Still doesn't sound much better.

You can try to let the Republican party wash their hands of this but there are lawsuits with similar goals in Pennsylvania and other places all to make voting more difficult or to try to invalidate votes.

The differences in our approach is that I don't see the Republican party as a monolithic entity with a single devious mind in control.  I don't see the Democratic party that way either.  You have all kinds of wackos at all sorts of levels making all kinds of weird lawsuits all over the place.  Tulsi Gabbard sued Hillary Clinton for calling her a favorite of the Russians.  I don't lead with "Democrats sue Hillary Clinton".  Are we going to ennumerate every single thrown out lawsuit and then tally them up and blame the entire Republican and Democratic parties?  Not me.  Have fun if you feel like it.  I'm more of the guy that would call out specific individuals for specific insanities.  But whatever.  If it motivates you to know that the Republican Party is some dark malevolent force out to repress the vote of democrats, have at it.  I'm sure Chase Manhattan and the Federalist Society is involved somehow. 
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: yossarian22c on November 01, 2020, 04:18:35 PM

So conservative money man and three Republican candidates file the lawsuit. Still doesn't sound much better.

You can try to let the Republican party wash their hands of this but there are lawsuits with similar goals in Pennsylvania and other places all to make voting more difficult or to try to invalidate votes.

The differences in our approach is that I don't see the Republican party as a monolithic entity with a single devious mind in control.  I don't see the Democratic party that way either.  You have all kinds of wackos at all sorts of levels making all kinds of weird lawsuits all over the place.  Tulsi Gabbard sued Hillary Clinton for calling her a favorite of the Russians.  I don't lead with "Democrats sue Hillary Clinton".  Are we going to ennumerate every single thrown out lawsuit and then tally them up and blame the entire Republican and Democratic parties?  Not me.  Have fun if you feel like it.  I'm more of the guy that would call out specific individuals for specific insanities.  But whatever.  If it motivates you to know that the Republican Party is some dark malevolent force out to repress the vote of democrats, have at it.  I'm sure Chase Manhattan and the Federalist Society is involved somehow.

Its a long term systematic effort of the Republican party to restrict early voting, make it more difficult for many people to vote (voter ID), make it harder for people to get voting rights restored (Florida), limit polling places, and lots of other lawsuits that similarly make it difficult for peoples votes to be counted. Also all the lawsuits about not counting mail in ballots that are postmarked by election day but not received until after.

Along with those lawsuits about mail in voting we have the fact that the mail is being delivered more slowly in a couple democratic strongholds in swing states.

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/31/929826650/delays-still-plague-mail-deliveries-as-election-day-nears (https://www.npr.org/2020/10/31/929826650/delays-still-plague-mail-deliveries-as-election-day-nears)

Quote
In metropolitan Detroit, for example, in the swing state of Michigan, the on-time delivery rate was 77.2%. In the rest of Michigan, the rate was higher, 88.67%.

In the pivotal state of Pennsylvania, a state seen as key to both President Trump and Democrat Joe Biden's election, the on-time rate was 55.82% in metropolitan Philadelphia.

If it were this one lawsuit you would be correct to call me out on attributing this action to the entire Republican party but this fits a pattern of Republican behavior to make voting more difficult and to attempt to have otherwise valid ballots discarded.

Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: msquared on November 02, 2020, 04:03:44 PM
The Republican federal judge has just thrown out the suite by the Texas  Republicans trying to disallow 127,000 drive up votes.  The Republican State Supreme Court told them to go away last night. Now this Republican federal judge has just told them the same thing.  He even asked why this type of voting was OK in the primaries, but not now.  He also told the plaintiffs that the had no standing to bring the case.

Looks like 127,000 votes in Texas are going to get counted.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: DonaldD on November 02, 2020, 04:49:43 PM
And on that note, the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, Republican Joe Straus, had this to say about his party on Facebook:

Quote
Speaker Joe Straus
on Sunday

The lawsuit attempting to disenfranchise more than 100,000 voters in Harris County is patently wrong. All of us who believe in the core ideals of this country should want more votes counted and more voices heard. While it may be too late for this election, the Republican Party needs to return to a place where we win with ideas and persuasion rather than trying to intimidate and silence our fellow citizens. I hope all elected statewide leaders in the Texas Republican Party will stand up against these desperate tactics.


Word, Joe.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: msquared on November 02, 2020, 05:34:37 PM
Amen.
Title: Re: Voting mechanisms
Post by: TheDrake on November 06, 2020, 12:05:36 PM
Quote
PHILADELPHIA — Two men with guns were arrested on Thursday night near Philadelphia’s convention center, where ballots are being counted, after officers received a tip that armed people were driving to the building in a Hummer, a Philadelphia police spokesman said.

Officers first spotted the silver Hummer around 10:20 p.m., parked about a block away from the convention center and unoccupied. A few minutes later, two officers on bicycles found the two armed men, neither of whom had a valid permit to carry in Pennsylvania, Sgt. Eric Gripp, the spokesman, said in a statement.

The police arrested the two men, who said that they owned the silver Hummer, in which the police found another gun, Sergeant Gripp said.

The arrests were first reported Thursday night by WPVI-TV, the local ABC affiliate, which aired footage of the police inspecting a silver Hummer with Virginia license plates. The station also aired footage of two window decals on the Hummer and a hat inside that seemed to reference QAnon, the conspiracy theory that includes the false narrative that a clique of pedophiles are plotting against President Trump.

Let's hope there isn't more of this. It is a good thing they got the tip, we can only wonder what their intention was.