Author Topic: Election Results  (Read 34476 times)

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #300 on: November 07, 2020, 06:54:23 PM »

Yes, Canada is a socialist backwater, which is why most Americans could not even name the Canadian Prime Minister,

 ::)


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #301 on: November 07, 2020, 09:58:03 PM »
Drake,

“I can get something notarized online. I send a picture of my ID, and a picture of myself. Why can't people register that way?“

I never have, and venture to guess that you are more sophisticated than the vast majority of people who you are concerned about. To register, and make an absentee ballot request, that sounds like a perfectly acceptable option to me... just not widely accessible. Remember, you are talking about individuals who may not even know that there is an election which they need to register for.


A very large number of people have access to cell phones. Make a simple registration app available and Voila. Those who can't do for themselves can easily be helped by community activists who regularly help people register.

Quote
“Noel, I'm glad you enjoy your privilege of working jobs where you can take off for an hour or more in the middle of the workday, and drive the automobile you can afford, to a rural polling place.“

Actually, I did not take time off from work. I voted between work, and school. Yes, I have vehicles, but public transit (Bus, and Train) is available for those who do not.

“Try that when you have an hour and a half commute via train and bus into San Francisco from Gilroy, which isn't in the same county.“

Your polling place is located one and one-half hours from your residence? California was not that disorganized when I was there. Gavin Newsom must be dramatically more incompetent than Jerry Brown. I would raise hell with the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which has established an advisory committee in each of the 50 states, and the District of Columbia.

You've missed several points. First, I'm not sure why you assume that every situation I describe is about me personally. I don't live in California, I don't have problems with transportation. To help you reread what I wrote, I'm describing a person who lives in Gilroy, meaning they have to vote in Santa Clara county. Their polling place could be a hundred yards from their front door, and it wouldn't make any difference if they work in San Francisco.

Quote
“I'm okay with eliminating ballot collection, sometimes called harvesting, if reasonably equivalent alternatives exist.“

What would a “reasonable equivalent” to ballot harvesting look like?

Something that allows an equal amount of convenience. Mostly this isn't about lazy people before you start crowing about adults. Primarily this is designed to assist the elderly, frail, or disabled community. So you might be somebody who works with blind people, who would have a hard time just going to a polling place. I'm not exactly sure what could fill that gap, apart from voting by mail which you loathe.

Quote
It satisfies federal identification requirements for employment, but you are correct that it should have all of the validation safeguards of a State driver’s license. You can consider that a concession if you like. Who could disagree with reliable Federal voter identification?

It doesn't even satisfy employment identification on its own. The I-9 requires a picture ID to go with it. Groups as varied as the ACLU and the Cato Institute oppose the creation of such a thing out of fears that the government will use them to create a Chinese like surveillance system of citizens. They will (and do) argue that attempts to create such an ID for employment to crack down on illegal immigration would eventually migrate to full blown tracking and destruction of privacy. The same objections would happen for a national voter ID.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #302 on: November 07, 2020, 10:40:25 PM »
Drake,

“Something that allows an equal amount of convenience. Mostly this isn't about lazy people before you start crowing about adults. Primarily this is designed to assist the elderly, frail, or disabled community. So you might be somebody who works with blind people, who would have a hard time just going to a polling place. I'm not exactly sure what could fill that gap, apart from voting by mail which you loathe.“

More specifically; I “loathe” unsolicited mail-in ballots, a point which seems to be alluding you. Absentee ballots, as a secondary option are a reasonable alternative. That method is not ideal as it suffers from a breach of secrecy/undue influence, but still passes muster with me.

“You've missed several points. First, I'm not sure why you assume that every situation I describe is about me personally. I don't live in California, I don't have problems with transportation. To help you reread what I wrote, I'm describing a person who lives in Gilroy, meaning they have to vote in Santa Clara county. Their polling place could be a hundred yards from their front door, and it wouldn't make any difference if they work in San Francisco.”

I have “missed” nothing material. Work commutes are long in the Bay Area. Take the day off if the logistics of getting to your polling place are unmanageable, or apply for an absentee ballot.

“It doesn't even satisfy employment identification on its own. The I-9 requires a picture ID to go with it. Groups as varied as the ACLU and the Cato Institute oppose the creation of such a thing out of fears that the government will use them to create a Chinese like surveillance system of citizens.”

The CCP surveillance system involves a lot more than issuance of a photo Social Security card, and legal use restrictions could be placed upon a Social Security photo ID just as restrictions were placed upon merchants demanding secondary credit card identification when writing a check (how time flies). As a side benefit, such a card would stop employment of illegal aliens cold. That is a good thing.

If your concern is Micro-Federal surveillance, that genie is already out of the bottle with the NSA’s PRISM data capture program. Remaining off the grid pretty much necessitates disabling GPS, audio, and camera functions on your cell phone.

“They will (and do) argue that attempts to create such an ID for employment to crack down on illegal immigration would eventually migrate to full blown tracking and destruction of privacy. The same objections would happen for a national voter ID.”[/i]

Like I said, we are already there, and a card’s legal use is much easier to regulate.

This is what happens when confidence in voting protocol is undermined. :

Where things stand with Trump’s litigation :

Pennsylvania

1. To compel Philadelphia election officials to stop counting ballots.
A federal judge dismissed the request.

2. To compel state election officials to allow Trump campaign officials closer observation of the counting process.

A state judge ruled in the campaign’s favor, allowing campaign officials to observe the Philadelphia process from a six foot distance. Philadelphia election officials appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court, and the outcome of that appeal is pending.

3. To compel Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and all 67 counties to impose an earlier date for voters to show proof of identification if it was not on their initial ballots.

Litigation is ongoing.

The presiding judge ordered all counties to segregate ballots if the voters do not provide supplemental identification by Nov. 9. The ballots with supplemental identification provided after Nov. 9 cannot be counted until approved by the court.

4. To compel the Montgomery County Board of Elections to stop counting mail-in-ballots

The campaign and Republican National Committee filed suit to halt the process of counting mail-in ballots in Montgomery County, one of the counties in suburban Philadelphia, alleging that the board of elections was counting 600 ballots that had not been placed in secrecy envelopes and was therefore not complying with requirements.

The litigation is ongoing.

5. To intervene in an already existing dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether ballots the state received after 8 p.m. on Election Day should count.

The litigation is ongoing.

Nevada

1. To impose an injunction on the automated signature-verification machines used in Clark County as ballots continue to be counted.

Michigan

1. To halt the counting of absentee ballots, on the grounds that campaign officials had not been given access to observe the process as required by state law.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the campaign’s request on Nov. 6.

2. To halt the certification of election results in Detroit, Michigan’s largest city and a Democratic stronghold.

Georgia

Probable request for statewide recount.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2020, 10:49:23 PM by noel c. »

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #303 on: November 07, 2020, 10:53:00 PM »
Grant,

“Yes, Canada is a socialist backwater, which is why most Americans could not even name the Canadian Prime Minister,

 ::)


What part of my statement do you have an issue with?


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #305 on: November 08, 2020, 12:00:59 AM »
It says more about Americans than it does about Canada. Americans are global morons when it comes to locating other countries on a map, let alone their leaders. None of which has anything to do with the relative merits of a country's self governance and methods for voting. You might be shocked to learn that people in other countries care about their leaders beyond their impact on geopolitics and foreign policy. They might care more about affordable health care and other social policy. I guarantee the Quebecois care. And so you don't have to look it up, Quebec is a province of that *censored*hole country to our north. Also, Canadian provinces are like US states.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #306 on: November 08, 2020, 12:04:59 AM »
To the specific question of being a "backwater", Canada is a member of the G7 - generally considered a pretty elite club. That backwater also has many global initiatives, and is more involved than the US in many ways. You can learn about it here.

https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/index.aspx?lang=eng

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #307 on: November 08, 2020, 12:54:40 AM »

“Make a proposal that isn't just everybody should plow into overcrowded polling stations.”

At 5:00 P.M., November 3rd, my polling station looked no more crowded than a train terminal, and there was only one polling place in all of Spanish Fork. As I checked designated locations in other cities going north and south from me, there was, likewise, only one polling station per city. I cannot recall being in an overly crowded poll even when I lived in California.


It might be helpful to identify that you live in a State with default universal mail in voting, with a ballot mailed to every registered voter.  Polling stations are only necessary and available for those people who didn't want to drop off or mail their ballot, or didn't go to vote in person for the 30 days before the election.  The experience of one voter in the metropolis of Spanish Fork [Utah] might not be universally applicable to the question of overcrowded polling stations.   I suspect most observers have seen multiple examples of U.S. voters stretched out for blocks waiting to vote in the last  4 weeks.  This might be an actual problem which top minds of the world's greatest democracy might want to address.


noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #308 on: November 08, 2020, 01:01:25 AM »
Drake,

I should not have taken Donald’s bait.

“To the specific question of being a ‘backwater’, Canada is a member of the G7-7.”

Yes, the G-7 controls roughly 60% of the world’s wealth, and Canada made the membership cut with an economy one-tenth that of the U.S.. That international status is commendable, and Canada has always been a loyal, if reluctant, ally. That said; it has problems that friends should be able to criticize without recrimination. I do not need lectures from a Canadian informed by CNN on why complacency with U.S. electoral defects ought to be overlooked because Canada does even dumber stuff. Don’t get me started on the Trudeau revolution.

KIDV,

“It might be helpful to identify that you live in a State with default universal mail in voting, with a ballot mailed to every registered voter.“

Why do you think that would be “helpful”, except to possibly lodge my disgust that an unsolicited ballot, in my name, entered the ether-would in spite of my timely reregistration?

“Polling stations are only necessary and available for those people who didn't want to drop off or mail their ballot, or didn't go to vote in person for the 30 days before the election.  The experience of one voter in the metropolis of Spanish Fork [Utah] might not be universally applicable to the question of overcrowded polling stations.“

You did notice that I am a native Californian, correct?

“I suspect most observers have seen multiple examples of U.S. voters stretched out for blocks waiting to vote in the last  4 weeks.  This might be an actual problem which top minds of the world's greatest democracy might want to address.“

I have not, and if you personal experience differs, say so.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2020, 01:11:49 AM by noel c. »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #309 on: November 08, 2020, 01:31:45 AM »
Again with the "personal experience" line? Most of us don't have to have a personal experience to know things are happening. I know your observation of the world stops at the end of your nose, but most of us can have empathy for people who are not us.

Quote
In Tarrant County, which includes Fort Worth, 22,803 votes had been cast as of 2:30 p.m. ET, according to the county officials. Five locations showed wait times of more than an hour on Tuesday afternoon.

educate yourself


noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #310 on: November 08, 2020, 01:47:12 AM »
Drake,

“Again with the ‘personal experience’ line? Most of us don't have to have a personal experience to know things are happening. I know your observation of the world stops at the end of your nose, but most of us can have empathy for people who are not us.”

“Things are happening”, now that is insightful. I have waited “more than an hour“ to get on “Pirates of the Caribbean”, and “the Haunted Mansion“, without developing a hunger for “empathy“. Again, if in-person voting is too rigorous a sacrifice for you, request an absentee ballot. 

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #311 on: November 08, 2020, 01:49:07 AM »
It might be helpful to identify that you live in a State with default universal mail in voting, with a ballot mailed to every registered voter.  Polling stations are only necessary and available for those people who didn't want to drop off or mail their ballot, or didn't go to vote in person for the 30 days before the election.  The experience of one voter in the metropolis of Spanish Fork [Utah] might not be universally applicable to the question of overcrowded polling stations.   I suspect most observers have seen multiple examples of U.S. voters stretched out for blocks waiting to vote in the last  4 weeks.  This might be an actual problem which top minds of the world's greatest democracy might want to address.

I don't live in such a state. I early voted, and in my county we evidently more than doubled the number of early/mail-in voting compared the elections past. (going from about 8,600 early/mail in vote to 21,000) When I want into the office to vote about 4:30 in the afternoon just before the closed for that day, I had 2 people ahead of me in the line.

In 2016 the early voting line had 3 or 4 people in line ahead of me as I recall, so that does suggest most of the extra 13,000-ish voters did mail-in. In any case, no lines to really speak of. The longest line I've ever experienced when trying to vote in person involved a whole 6 people, and that was only because they were walking into the building as I pulled into the parking area.

Now my parents have seen lines that ran down the hall and even out the building's entry door on one occasion at their polling location, but they don't remember when that was(it certainly would predate early voting being an option though). Even that line was handled in under an hour to their memory.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #312 on: November 08, 2020, 01:52:32 AM »
“Things are happening”, now that is insightful. I have waited “more than an hour“ to get on “Pirates of the Caribbean”, and “the Haunted Mansion“, without developing a hunger for “empathy“. Again, if in-person voting is too rigorous a sacrifice for you, request an absentee ballot.

Depending on the state, getting a mail in ballot can require certain pre-conditions to be met which he wouldn't qualify for. I know my 2004 mail-in ballot required me to certify that I going to be outside of the area on election day and unable to physically vote in person. They've since changed the laws on that prior to Covid19, but other states still retained the more restrictive criteria until this year's events.

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #313 on: November 08, 2020, 01:55:12 AM »
Grant,

“Yes, Canada is a socialist backwater, which is why most Americans could not even name the Canadian Prime Minister,

 ::)


What part of my statement do you have an issue with?

Some might view insulting someone's residence as an apparent argument to disregard their opinion as a personal attack.  But I guess it's true that Canada is socialist and also that it's a backwater, Noel C. implies, so it's not really an insult?

It appears that Noel C. is serious that we should disregard any Canadian's opinion on valid or reasonable election procedures. 

I do not agree that we should disregard the opinions of people who live in backwaters on reasonable election procedures.  I also do not agree that we should disregard the opinions of people who happen to live in places with universal mail-in voting with signature verification as to whether that is a worthwhile voting option.

----------------

odds and ends:

"There was a six-hour wait for the last person in line to vote just before 10 a.m. Saturday at County Square in Greenville. The line stretched twice the length of the buildings at 301 University Ridge before snaking through a parking lot on the eastern side of the complex."
https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/10/30/election-notes-tim-scott-help-trump-absentee-voting-record-more/6077411002/ [South Carolina]

"By that time the polls had long been officially closed and the state’s Democratic primary had already been called for Joe Biden. Rogers had waited six hours and twenty minutes to vote." [Texas primary]
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/03/texas-primary-lines/

“Eager voters endured waits of six hours or more in Cobb County, which was once solidly Republican but has voted for Democrats in recent elections, and joined lines that wrapped around polling places in solidly Democratic DeKalb County,” the outlet reported. “They also turned out in big numbers in north Georgia’s Floyd County, where support for President Donald Trump is strong.”
https://patriotdailypress.org/2020/10/13/georgia-residents-face-long-lines-on-first-day-of-early-voting-some-voters-had-to-wait-six-hours-or-more-to-cast-their-ballot/

So I guess 6 and 7 hours sometimes.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #314 on: November 08, 2020, 02:37:20 AM »
Deamon,

“Depending on the state, getting a mail in ballot can require certain pre-conditions to be met which he wouldn't qualify for. I know my 2004 mail-in ballot required me to certify that I going to be outside of the area on election day and unable to physically vote in person. They've since changed the laws on that prior to Covid19, but other states still retained the more restrictive criteria until this year's events.”

I think absentee ballots should be reserved for absentee voters. There are distinct drawbacks to their use. If an “hour” wait is the best rational that Drake can come up with, and he has to search CNN to find that, his argument is difficult for me to take seriously.

Kidv,

“Some might view insulting someone's residence as an apparent argument to disregard their opinion as a personal attack.”

Did you make reference to the “metropolis of Spanish Fork”, and are you “... disregarding my opinion”? Do I need to recalibrate my sensitivity to feel “attacked”?

“But I guess it's true that Canada is socialist and also that it's a backwater, Noel C. implies, so it's not really an insult?”

It is socialist, and internationally Canada is an economic, military, trade, and policy lightweight. Facts do not care about your feelings.

“It appears that Noel C. is serious that we should disregard any Canadian's opinion on valid or reasonable election procedures.”

That would be an unwarranted leap in logic. There are highly respectable Canadians whose opinions I value for reasons quite unrelated to their nationality. Interestingly, they do not hold Canada up as an exemplar of international enlightenment. Your reasoning is drifting into tautology.

“I do not agree that we should disregard the opinions of people who live in backwaters on reasonable election procedures.“

Kidv, your reasoning is becoming circular again. Work to manage that habit... just my opinion.

“I also do not agree that we should disregard the opinions of people who happen to live in places with universal mail-in voting with signature verification as to whether that is a worthwhile voting option.“

As you pointed out, I am one of those people, and my opinion is that universal mail-in voting, with signature verification, is asinine. Are you ”disregarding” my opinion that it is not a ”worthwhile option“?

“So I guess 6 and 7 hours sometimes.”

How did we ever have a compassionate election prior to COVID-19? If a Mother Jones search is the source of your angst, call the Texas Secretary of State, Elections Division, in behalf of those people to complain. Better yet, assume that they are not potted plants, and can act for themselves.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2020, 02:50:30 AM by noel c. »

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #315 on: November 08, 2020, 03:27:37 AM »
I liked this quote by Scott Aaronson ( https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=5088 )
Quote
(1) A friend commented that Biden’s victory becomes more impressive after you contemplate the enthusiasm gap: Trump’s base believed that Trump was sent by God to fight Satanic pedophiles, whereas Biden’s base believed that Biden probably wasn’t a terrible human being. I replied that what we call the “Enlightenment” was precisely this, the switch from cowering before leaders who were sent by God to demanding leaders who probably aren’t terrible human beings.

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #316 on: November 08, 2020, 04:00:14 AM »
What I've seen personally was video of lines stretching at least 4 to 5 blocks in New York, I thought, in the last couple weeks, and many other places, as quick overviews on many news reports.  I don't know how long the waits actually were.

I've waited 2 hours to vote in a primary. (In 2016).  If California, Utah, and other states have their voting figured out, that's great.  I think the point is that we could understand that many places in the U.S. may require you to reserve 3-7 hours to vote, so let's figure out some reasonable ways to make voting in the U.S. a reasonable burden.


A thought experiment:

If the Utah legislature has adopted universal mail-in voting safeguarded by a digital database, matching signatures, and unique identifiers on ballots, envelopes, and voters, and Utah is in the running for most conservative state in the U.S., with the Utah legislature run by a Republican supermajority, where does that fit on the discussion of whether every vote being able to count being or not being a conservative vs. liberal concept?

I'm going to go with every citizen being able to vote without undue hassles being an acceptable conservative position.  Being an acceptable American position. 

So get the rest of the U.S. to accept Utah's standards and practices, because it exemplifies effective American principles. 

------------------------------

But really how do we commit voter fraud?

"Banana republic" voter fraud is committed by the government, regardless of the votes actually cast. 

Manipulation of individual ballots is by definition a small scale operation.  Submitting fake ballots is limited by the ability to forge someone's signature, and is only possible to slip through if the actual voter does not vote, which is protected by the risk of a felony.  So that's the risk of mailing out ballots to all registered voters, right?  Fake voters, non-eligible voters, dead voters, are all completely traceable and verifiable for the purpose of protecting the records.  Large scale fraudulent voting (enough to affect an election), is not possible with the current standards available in the U.S.

Fraudulent voting of any type is a negligible problem in the U.S.  (It is also a negligible problem in Canada, coincidentally.) This is not a tautology.  It is a fact.

People keep saying, "But you could!" But people don't.  People who attempt to submit fraudulent votes by and large get caught, and their votes don't count.  I am not aware of any studies finding any widespread problem of voter fraud.  Every study created finds no evidence of non-negligible voter fraud.  People continue to make allegations, but no one has found evidence which matches the allegations.  People who try, appear to get caught. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/02/21/rosa-maria-ortega-texas-woman-sentenced-8-years-illegal-voting-paroled-and-faces-deportation/4798922002/ [a specific example]
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fact-checking-attorney-general-william-barr-s-claims-on-voter-fraud-election-interference-and-jacob-blake/ar-BB18GuFr fact checking William Barr]

Taking Utah as a positive example, maintaining the database seems to be safe enough and meet American principles of responsibility, equal access, and safety.

The problem with declaring voter fraud as a "conservative" issue, [and taking actions which tend to suppress votes in the name of security], is that a large segment of historical justification of voter ID and ballot security measures were specifically taken to suppress minority votes and were the reason for the creation of the voting rights act. 

https://www.findlaw.com/voting/how-do-i-protect-my-right-to-vote-/what-is-voter-suppression-.html

The conservatives in Utah, for instance, recognize the benefit and ability of finding a proper balance, and that it's possible to have easy, open, effective, secure, and safe voting without being accused of voter suppression.  I suspect they recognize that's a benefit to the conservative brand.  They probably recognize that making false claims, or being aligned with historically anti-american programs is not a good look.

Enforcement is obviously necessary, and appears to be occurring.  People that attempt ineligible votes, by all accounts, do not succeed.  (see reports cited above).


noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #317 on: November 08, 2020, 05:59:47 AM »
Kidv,

“If the Utah legislature has adopted universal mail-in voting safeguarded by a digital database, matching signatures, and unique identifiers on ballots, envelopes, and voters, and Utah is in the running for most conservative state in the U.S., with the Utah legislature run by a Republican supermajority, where does that fit on the discussion of whether every vote being able to count being or not being a conservative vs. liberal concept?”

One of the current lawsuits is focused upon electronic signature verification failure. What the technicalities are behind that alleged failure are yet to be publicly clarified, but there should be a way to create a readily accessible low-resolution signature verification system readable at the poll. My issue with Utah’s present system is that the State sends out unsolicited live ballots, and I do not have confidence that an electronic signature record has the resolution, or nuanced pen stroke pressure detection capability, to reveal even a mediocre forgery. Banks use fingerprints as a backup to signatures for that reason. Taken to that level of security, a hypothetically revised Utah system would work regardless of irresponsibly distributed ballots. Utah has a long way to go before it is there however.

“But really how do we commit voter fraud?“

Fraud in a mail-in ballot scenario is defined as someone, other than the authorized voter, casting the ballot, or unduly influencing the rightful voter’s selections. 

" ‘Banana republic’ voter fraud is committed by the government, regardless of the votes actually cast.”

That is not usually how it happens. Enthusiastic Party supporters are the typical tool of election fraud. We had our Tammany Hall, or "boss," politics of Chicago, which mirror South American tactics of power acquisition.

“Manipulation of individual ballots is by definition a small scale operation.“

Not if corruption is culturally endemic and highly motivated, in conjunction with insecure ballot distribution. Harvesting schemes also defy a “small scale” definition.

“Submitting fake ballots is limited by the ability to forge someone's signature, and is only possible to slip through if the actual voter does not vote,“

Assuming instantaneous detection, how is that conflict resolved?

“... which is protected by the risk of a felony.“

Only if there is a substantial chance of getting caught. Tell me how that happens.

“So that's the risk of mailing out ballots to all registered voters, right?“

As amended, correct.

“Fake voters, non-eligible voters, dead voters, are all completely traceable and verifiable for the purpose of protecting the records.”

Traceable how?

“Large scale fraudulent voting (enough to affect an election), is not possible with the current standards available in the U.S.“

That is what Democrats would have you believe, however; only critical counties need to be targeted in a close election, not an entire network of State polls.

“Fraudulent voting of any type is a negligible problem in the U.S.  (It is also a negligible problem in Canada, coincidentally.) This is not a tautology. It is a fact.“

You just walked off the plank. How are you going to prove a negative?

“People keep saying, ‘But you could!’ But people don't.  People who attempt to submit fraudulent votes by and large get caught, and their votes don't count.”

You are going circular on me again.

“I am not aware of any studies finding any widespread problem of voter fraud.  Every study created finds no evidence of non-negligible voter fraud.”

Every study of what election(s)? Certainly you are not going to tell me that late 19th to early 20th century New York, or Chicago, pass the sniff test. How about Peronist Argentina, or modern Bolivia, Uruguay, and (again) Argentina? Where leftist ideology gains a foot-hold, electoral corruption flourishes, and power concentrates. Contemporary Democratic politics have taken a decidedly unapologetic socialist turn.

“People continue to make allegations, but no one has found evidence which matches the allegations.  People who try, appear to get caught.”

There you go again; how would you know? Even Donald concedes fraud will occur. I contend that current political environment is an incubator for significant voter fraud. Let the investigations run their course.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2020, 06:03:28 AM by noel c. »

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #318 on: November 08, 2020, 07:07:38 AM »
Biden's now up by 10,000 in Georgia.  There's no litigation, short of throwing out all the results, that's going to get Trump anywhere close.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #319 on: November 08, 2020, 07:19:40 AM »
Bret Baier said something very reasonable (/sarc) a number of times in the past couple of days. Essentially, his statement boils down to "There is no evidence of voting fraud during this election, but we must continue investigating."

There is also no evidence that Donald Trump poisoned Beau Biden, but clearly, we must investigate. There is no evidence that child slaves are being sexually abused in a pizza parlour's basement, but we must investigate.

Note there is a difference between protecting the voting system, and yes, that includes verification, and acting on a belief (in this case that there is widespread voting fraud) for which there is no evidence.  Especially when the costs of the proposed actions, perceived by many, have a greater cost than that of the minimal levels of fraud currently experienced.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #320 on: November 08, 2020, 07:46:37 AM »
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pennlive.com/news/2020/10/pa-man-accused-of-trying-to-sign-his-dead-mother-up-for-mail-in-voting.html%3foutputType=amp

Noel you should really give that Republican some lessons on how to commit untraceable voter fraud by mail.

This just shows election officials do notice when dead people request ballots and try to vote.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #321 on: November 08, 2020, 08:26:07 AM »
Noel: "... only critical counties need to be targeted in a close election, not an entire network of State polls"

Especially when they don't have to be targeted until after the fact.

And that's the danger of accepting late ballots, or even just suddenly "found" ballots, like the ones that put LBJ over the top in Texas. It would be easier to believe that targeted voter fraud is not possible after it's determined how many votes are needed to secure a win if exactly that type of voter fraud hadn't already been done and the perps also known as the Democrats got away with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_13_scandal#:~:text=The%20Box%2013%20scandal%20was,which%20were%20in%20Johnson's%20favor.

"The Box 13 scandal was an event which occurred in Alice, Texas during the Senate election of 1948. Lyndon B. Johnson was on the verge of losing the election to Coke Stevenson. Six days after polls had closed, 202 additional ballots were discovered in Precinct 13, which were in Johnson's favor. Stevenson was about 854 votes ahead of Johnson during the run-off. Stevenson was still ahead by midday, but after the discovery of the additional ballots, 200 additional votes for Johnson were discovered, leading to his victory by 87 votes out of 1 million voters.

Harry Lee Adams became suspicious and began to investigate. Adams noticed that the last 200 ballots were different from the rest. The color ink of the ink and handwriting used on the tally sheet appeared to be identical, and they were in alphabetical order... The investigation eventually reached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Justice, Hugo Black, ruled that the federal government was not allowed to get involved with a state election... After the election, some thought consequences would be inevitable. Despite this, there would be no charges, because nothing could be proven."


----------------------------------------------

So apparently even with identical handwriting and the tally sheet being in alphabetical order that wasn't enough to prove voter fraud. Like I said, it'd be a lot easier to believe it couldn't happen if it didn't happen already.

I'd wager that the vast majority of crimes in general with voter fraud included can never be successfully prosecuted because there isn't enough evidence. Sometimes there is no evidence at all. Like with a serial killer who knows how to get rid of the body and leaves no evidence. Does that mean all of his victims are still alive anyway just because it can't be proven in a court of law that he killed anyone? And you hardly need to be a Hannibal or Dexter to get away with voter fraud especially with people less competent than keystone cops and less motivated than an old dog in the sweltering heat of an August afternoon trying to find it.

Having said that, do I know there is massive voter fraud or even not so massive but surgically targeted voter fraud? Nope. I have no clue. There's no way to know for sure. All we do know is many of the people involved have a history of demonstrated unreliability, rabid partisanship, and have declared their utmost hatred for Donald Trump and their willingness to do anything to  stop him. So only motive. And means. But no smoking gun.

It's interesting that the Supreme Court wouldn't get involved and said it was a matter for only the state to handle. In other words, all you need is corruption at the state level and you are off to the races. But that can't happen because there is no corruption at the state level, of course...

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #322 on: November 08, 2020, 08:43:42 AM »
Quote
Having said that, do I know there is massive voter fraud or even not so massive but surgically targeted voter fraud? Nope. I have no clue. There's no way to know for sure. All we do know is many of the people involved have a history of demonstrated unreliability, rabid partisanship, and have declared their utmost hatred for Donald Trump and their willingness to do anything to  stop him. So only motive. And means. But no smoking gun.

What you're saying is that there's never any possible circumstance in these election where Trump would get defeated, and you'd not be spewing the exact same bull*censored* about fraud.

However among the candidates, it's not the Democrats but rather only Donald Trump who asked his voters to vote twice, once by mail and once in person, so if you want to condemn someone for wanting to commit fraud, start by *censored*ing condemning him.

But no, the person who actually asked his supporters to act illegally to get him elected, that's the one person you'll never condemn for wanting fraudulent elections.


cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #323 on: November 08, 2020, 09:10:14 AM »
By y'all's reasoning voter fraud didn't happen in Alice, Texas in the 1948 election. Just didn't happen. Sure there was the story but that's all it was. Just a story. Sure there was the reporter but it was just accusations with no evidence. There was never any real police investigation. Nobody was ever charged with a crime. Nobody ever went on trial. Nobody was ever convicted. So ipso facto there was no voter fraud.

Except... actually there was.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #324 on: November 08, 2020, 09:16:08 AM »
One big potential problem in Pennsylvania is if some districts are separating the late ballots while others are purposefully comingling them so they can never be separated out. Now if the areas separating them are where Republicans are making some of the decisions and the areas not separating them are where the Democrats are making the decisions, if those ballots do end up getting disqualified that's going to be a real pickle.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #325 on: November 08, 2020, 09:26:01 AM »
By y'all's reasoning voter fraud didn't happen in Alice, Texas in the 1948 election. Just didn't happen. Sure there was the story but that's all it was. Just a story. Sure there was the reporter but it was just accusations with no evidence. There was never any real police investigation. Nobody was ever charged with a crime. Nobody ever went on trial. Nobody was ever convicted. So ipso facto there was no voter fraud.

Except... actually there was.

No, by YOUR reasoning Trump committed vote in the 2016 election AND the 2020 election, and we don't have to prove anything, we can just assert it. Because see, he *really* wants to win, and he himself admits it's easy to commit mail fraud, so obviously he has the means and the motive, so he's therefore committing fraud. And *censored* the absence of evidence.

Look, you hate that you lost, WE GET IT. And you're sore losers, WE GET IT. And you're conspiracy nuts, convinced that everyone is conspiring against you, WE GET IT, and that the rest of the world is just as amoral as the person who strolled through the locker rooms of undressed 15-year old girls and bragged about it afterwards.

But this election wasn't even *censored*ing close, and the fact that you're NOT condemning the *one* person who publicly asked for voter fraud to be committed on his behalf (i.e. Trump) condemns you too.

One big potential problem in Pennsylvania is if some districts are separating the late ballots while others are purposefully comingling them so they can never be separated out. Now if the areas separating them are where Republicans are making some of the decisions and the areas not separating them are where the Democrats are making the decisions, if those ballots do end up getting disqualified that's going to be a real pickle.

If Trump stood in the middle of 5th avenue and shot somebody, you'd still vote for him.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #326 on: November 08, 2020, 10:15:15 AM »
It's fascinating how outraged some people get if you just mention the mere possibility that Democrats might commit voter fraud.

(In haughty indignant voice) "Why... I never!...."

No they would never do that. Of course not. They are paragons of virtue. The epitome of the law abiding citizen. They respect the laws and follow them to the letter all the time every time. Like they respect and abide by the drug laws, the immigration laws, the laws against rioting and looting and arson, in fact just all the laws.

Well... a few may step just a teensy tiny bit over the line on some of those once in a blue moon, like the activist lawyers who threw a Molotov cocktail into a police vehicle, but voter fraud? Never!

And the hypocrisy over fretting about possibly false charges and sometimes not even charges just speculating about the possibility, that would undermine the confidence of the American people in the election is also rich after what the Democrats did for four years with their Russian collusion delusion and hoax even going so far as impeachment.

If we had a system in place that made voter fraud difficult then yeah, sure, I could see the outrage. But when Democrats fight tooth and nail against any system that might reasonably be expected to detect even the simplest and most obvious attempts at voter fraud such as when they won't even allow common sense voter I.D., it's perfectly rational after that not to have the greatest level of confidence in the integrity of the system. We're basically on the honor system here. And plenty of people on both sides have amply demonstrated they are, to be politically correct perhaps it's most generously described as "honor challenged".

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #327 on: November 08, 2020, 10:20:43 AM »
Yes, let me also mention the possibility that you'll commit rape and murder.

Your outrage over the Russian investigation is also quite amusing. A crime that actually happened, and the only issue was how many were involved - and in the end people couldn't prove Trump was involved, and so you argue they should be ashamed to ever investigate the person who benefitted from the crime at all. It's actually sane and not at all shameful to investigate the person who benefits from the crime.

And as for the impeachment, that should have gone ahead, Trump was clearly asking for a quid-pro-quo, using the power of the state to get a foreign power to give him political ammo against his political opponents in the USA. Shameful that the Republicans refused to impeach him for that. There you had the means, the motive, the opportunity, the smoking gun and pretty much every proof you needee to convict.

But instead, you declare a crime that you have absolutely zero evidence it occured, because you can't stand the idea of your psychopathic villain not getting a second term. You don't investigate an existing crime, you invent it....
« Last Edit: November 08, 2020, 10:29:28 AM by Aris Katsaris »

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #328 on: November 08, 2020, 10:37:42 AM »
How would I have any evidence of anything? I'm hundreds of miles away. If I tried to get the evidence I'd get arrested and locked up. The question people can't answer is if there was voter fraud then what are the security mechanisms in place to catch it especially when it's an inside job. The observers? What if they are not allowed to be close enough to observe?

That's what was supposedly a problem.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-speaker-house-newt-gingrich-172256262.html

"In an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Gingrich discussed one of the Trump campaign's lawsuits in which the president's team complained that their poll watchers weren't allowed to be close enough to observe the ballot counting."

And besides that, what are they really observing anyway? How do they know where the ballots came from or that they are legit. If they observe a bunch of fraudulent ballots, what is going to be the proof that they are fraudulent? Like I said, we don't have the security mechanisms in place for anyone to get up on their high horse and insist that nobody doubt the integrity of our elections especially when both past as well as present behavior is duly considered.

If you want to have faith, that's fine. But that's really all it is. Some might even call it wishful thinking. But when I don't know I admit it. I have no idea if our elections are secure or not. I have no idea if there is massive fraud or not. It's like a lot of things. There's just no way to know for sure. What gets suspicious though is when people insist they know the truth about something that is not knowable and then insist that lack of proof one way or the other proves that they are right.

Now I'm not saying that because I can't prove there isn't voter fraud than there is. I'm saying I don't know. But apparently it's not a problem to say that because it isn't proven that there is voter fraud that means that there isn't. That's just too much of a stretch for me but if other people want to go that far everyone has that prerogative.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #329 on: November 08, 2020, 10:39:02 AM »
“So I guess 6 and 7 hours sometimes.”

How did we ever have a compassionate election prior to COVID-19? If a Mother Jones search is the source of your angst, call the Texas Secretary of State, Elections Division, in behalf of those people to complain. Better yet, assume that they are not potted plants, and can act for themselves.

I guess some of this falls under quirks of the various state electoral systems.

The Secretary of State has final certification authority and issues guidelines for the various counties to adhere to, but the operation of the general election polling locations is up to the County Clerk's office of the respective county where I'm at. They are the ones in charge of hiring any poll workers they choose to hire, and training for any volunteers and paid poll workers they decide to field for that election.

So it does come back to my earlier question about "Why do these areas seem to be unable to field enough poll workers?" Because if these Democrat run counties are unable to properly staff their own polling locations and they're running on a comparable model.. Then the people those Democratic voters need to be complaining to are 1) Democrats, 2) Their County or City Governments. (As I understand in some locations the city is also a county, or in the case or Virginia, the City may exist outside of a county in general.)

I won't disagree about the Republicans getting into Partisan election shenanigans in many parts of the country. But my credulity at Democrats in particular complaining about problems  trying to vote in deeply democrat controlled districts, in democrat controlled counties, and especially in democrat controlled states(California) is pretty low. Seems to me they're likely experiencing a "self-inflicted injury" on this front and the people to blame in many of those cases are members of their own party.

And yes, this applies for Republicans who have to wait out long lines to vote in Republican Controlled Counties in Republican states.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #330 on: November 08, 2020, 10:41:05 AM »
The observers? What if they are not allowed to be close enough to observe?

That's what was supposedly a problem.

No, it wasn't. It's one of the many blatant, blatant lies that Trump said. They had to admit even before the court, that yes Republican observers were observing every moment of the counting.

This is just a LIE. And you repeat it stupidly, because well Trump said it so it must be true, no matter how often it's disproven, no matter how much of a blatant lie it is.

Quote
If you want to have faith, that's fine.
Bull*censored* again. It's you who has faith on every single piece of bullcrap lie that Trump is psychopathically spewing.

You're the equivalent of a cultist and Trump is your cult-leader, the chosen of God, whose word you trust no matter what your own senses are telling you.

Don't project your own flaws unto others.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #331 on: November 08, 2020, 10:49:06 AM »
Quote
If you want to have faith, that's fine.
Bull*censored* again. It's you who has faith on every single piece of bullcrap lie that Trump is psychopathically spewing.

You're the equivalent of a cultist and Trump is your cult-leader, the chosen of God, whose word you trust no matter what your own senses are telling you.

Don't project your own flaws unto others.

That's not a fair characterization of Cherry.

I agree that we're not just having faith that the count is being fair. We're just trusting in all the election officials and observers of both parties in the relevant states that they would catch any systematic cheating.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #332 on: November 08, 2020, 11:02:25 AM »
https://www.wgal.com/article/pa-commonwealth-court-allows-trump-campaign-observers-to-get-closer-to-philadelphia-ballot-counting/34589143#



"The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled Thursday that Trump campaign observers can get closer to the vote counting in Philadelphia.


A judge reversed a lower court ruling and said all candidates, watchers or candidate representatives will be permitted "to observe all aspects of the canvassing process within 6 feet, while adhering to all COVID-19 protocols, including wearing masks and maintaining social distancing."

Trump's team had claimed observers were being kept too far away to clearly see the ballot canvassing process.

The Trump campaign called the court's decision a "major victory for election integrity."

The Philadelphia Board of Elections has appealed the case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The Trump campaign is also seeking to intervene in a Pennsylvania case at the Supreme Court that deals with whether ballots received up to three days after the election can be counted.

Another lawsuit sought to dismiss a directive allowing voters to provide missing proof of identification up to six days after the election. A court just ruled the six-day limit will stay in place."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That looks like local news.

So how close exactly were they being allowed to observe that they apparently thought was not close enough so had to sue to get closer?

And then they apparently won that lawsuit which would reasonably indicate that they deserved to be closer than they were allowed to be previously.

And if the first court's ruling was reversed wouldn't that mean that the first court ruled they didn't have to be as close as the observers wanted to be but the higher court ruled that they weren't being allowed to be close enough?

How many ballots were counted in between the lower court's ruling and the higher court's?

And with covid and the six foot rule, is being six feet away really close enough to properly observe anything that is written down? What are the font sizes on these ballots, like 65 or what?

The wording there was a little confusing. "Within six feet". I'm not sure if that means they can get closer than six feet or they have to stay six feet away. It seems like that would be important to know.

----------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the kind word. Yeah it's not fair to say this is all about Trump. I'm old enough now I suppose that the integrity of elections has been an issue for decades, long before Trump was on the political radar.  I would like to have full confidence in the process. I really would. But I'm not seeing a process that really warrants that much confidence. When the priority is to make sure every person can vote who is eligible I guess that means that there is going to have to be some give in the how secure the system can be. Making it too secure apparently means that some people will get disenfranchised. So I don't see how it's so wrong to not have complete confidence in a system that is purposefully left less than fully secured.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #333 on: November 08, 2020, 11:08:37 AM »
Grant,

What part of my statement do you have an issue with?

You may be unaware of this Noel, but that's understandable.  This was part of the secret meeting.  But I'll let you know because you won't believe me anyways. 

Canada is actually the center of the socialist conspiracy.  It's totally not a backwater.  Trudeau is actually pulling the strings for Venezuela, China, and Norway.  When world socialism is made reality, Ottawa will be revealed as the world globalist capitol. 

I addition, I don't think that the ignorance of the majority of Americans can be used as evidence to prove that something is unimportant.  The majority of Americans can't even name a single Supreme Court Justice.  The majority of Americans also believe that Biden is preferable to Trump.  I don't know if you want to use that as evidence for anything. 


TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #334 on: November 08, 2020, 11:30:16 AM »
Pretty sure China is literally fascist these days, they're communists(or socialists as you prefer) in name only.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #335 on: November 08, 2020, 11:43:49 AM »
Grant,

“You may be unaware of this Noel, but that's understandable.  This was part of the secret meeting.  But I'll let you know because you won't believe me anyways.”

Thank for an insider’s perspective.

“Canada is actually the center of the socialist conspiracy.  It's totally not a backwater.  Trudeau is actually pulling the strings for Venezuela, China, and Norway.  When world socialism is made reality, Ottawa will be revealed as the world globalist capitol.”

Ah, I suspected as much.

“I addition, I don't think that the ignorance of the majority of Americans can be used as evidence to prove that something is unimportant.”

Now you are shaking my confidence. Is Grant an American?

“The majority of Americans can't even name a single Supreme Court Justice.  The majority of Americans also believe that Biden is preferable to Trump.  I don't know if you want to use that as evidence for anything.”

Umm, Biden’s nomination was a Democratic brain fart? I follow you.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #336 on: November 08, 2020, 12:41:06 PM »
Grant’s attempted humor aside; does anyone on this board really expect that flaws in election security will not be exposed in the course of pending Republican investigations? If so, send me a PM, and let’s lay odds.

Another election is coming in 2022, again in 2024. Georgia will be going through this drill in only two months. Democrats have an interest, equal to Republicans, in getting it right. The best way to perpetuate/embolden election fraud is to make it safe to commit, and only confidence in election results can establish groundwork for a “reconciliation“, that Biden claims to seek.

What kind of screws do you need to have loose to roll-over on the integrity of the most fundamental operation in a viable democracy? Democrats have invited doubt into the process by sacrificing security to enhance their candidate’s prospects.

This is the price of that expediency.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #337 on: November 08, 2020, 01:36:53 PM »
And that's all I'm asking for. Thorough investigations. Very thorough. So in depth they make one of the IRS's famous full course proctology style audits look like an Uncle Joe shoulder rub and hair sniff. You don't always get what you expect, but you do always get what you inspect.

And if they turn up nothing then so be it. At least one time we should check it out all the way, leaving no stone unturned, forensic analysts of the ballots, the whole nine yards.

I don't think we've ever had a real investigation like the one President Trump is about to unleash, and frankly it's long overdue.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #338 on: November 08, 2020, 02:21:45 PM »
Drake,

“Again with the ‘personal experience’ line? Most of us don't have to have a personal experience to know things are happening. I know your observation of the world stops at the end of your nose, but most of us can have empathy for people who are not us.”

“Things are happening”, now that is insightful. I have waited “more than an hour“ to get on “Pirates of the Caribbean”, and “the Haunted Mansion“, without developing a hunger for “empathy“. Again, if in-person voting is too rigorous a sacrifice for you, request an absentee ballot.

Would have loved to. Couldn't do so, Texas wouldn't let me.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #339 on: November 08, 2020, 02:57:22 PM »
What will the Trump people claim when most of his law suits get tossed for lack of evidence?  Again, in a court of law you have to prove wrong doing.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #340 on: November 08, 2020, 03:05:35 PM »
Grant, you weren't supposed to expose the whole plan before you liberate the American proletariat from the oppressive yoke of our oppressive constitution and confiscate all our guns!

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #341 on: November 08, 2020, 04:16:22 PM »


“I am not aware of any studies finding any widespread problem of voter fraud.  Every study created finds no evidence of non-negligible voter fraud.”

Every study of what election(s)? Certainly you are not going to tell me that late 19th to early 20th century New York, or Chicago, pass the sniff test. How about Peronist Argentina, or modern Bolivia, Uruguay, and (again) Argentina? Where leftist ideology gains a foot-hold, electoral corruption flourishes, and power concentrates. Contemporary Democratic politics have taken a decidedly unapologetic socialist turn.

“People continue to make allegations, but no one has found evidence which matches the allegations.  People who try, appear to get caught.”

There you go again; how would you know? Even Donald concedes fraud will occur. I contend that current political environment is an incubator for significant voter fraud. Let the investigations run their course.

noel c. doesn't notice or respond to the two links I posted after my statement, which are the simply two exemplars off a google search giving some background on false allegations of voter fraud and describing unsuccessful voter fraud.   We're talking about U.S. elections. The studies are of attempted fraud of in U.S. elections, I'll say in the last 20 years. The findings are that the U.S. does not have a systemic problem with voter fraud.

"Dunlap’s lawsuit even unearthed a draft of the commission’s final report, circulated by Kossack, the Pence aide, which confident staffers had started writing in November 2017, after just two public meetings. It’s titled “Evidence of Election Integrity and Voter Fraud Issues.” It doesn’t contain any. The report offers no more than a blank list of categories — “instances of fraudulent or improper voting,” “noncitizen voting,” etc. — that Kobach and his allies couldn’t fill with any actual examples. “Glaringly empty,” Dunlap says. In a letter to Pence and Kobach after he had reviewed those 8,000 pages, Dunlap named the larger problem: “That the Commission predicted it would find widespread evidence of fraud actually reveals a troubling bias,” he wrote. “A very few commissioners worked to buttress their preordained conclusions shielded from dissent or dialogue.”"

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/kris-kobach-donald-trump-voter-fraud-myths-vote-suppression-990300/

Let's try this more directly:

"A subsequent study The Guardian cites found that more than 99% of the people the system had flagged for potential voter fraud were, in fact, distinct voters."
"The article also mentions Kobach’s opinion piece for right-wing publication Breitbart in 2017, which claimed there was proof that New Hampshire’s elections had been swung because of voter fraud. The state’s top election official reprimanded Kobach, saying there was no such proof."
“It’s the same thing over and over and over — say it, say it, say it — and push it out there,” Lorraine Minnite, a professor at Rutgers University-Camden who studies voter fraud, told The Guardian. “It functions just like propaganda.”
"Trump appointed Kobach vice chair of the Presidential Commission on Election Integrity in 2017. The commission was disbanded in 2018, after finding no evidence to support widespread voter-fraud allegations."
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article246745826.html

"The now-disbanded voting integrity commission launched by the Trump administration uncovered no evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud, according to an analysis of administration documents released Friday."
https://apnews.com/article/f5f6a73b2af546ee97816bb35e82c18d

Hey! Here's an actual study referenced above, which studies and reviews the claims of voter fraud:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/F0F11207B6EC1A0A5DE18DC283ACE926/S000305541900087Xa.pdf/one_person_one_vote_estimating_the_prevalence_of_double_voting_in_us_presidential_elections.pdf


Just do some google searches and follow some links.  The news reports the consensus in line with the finding that "After extensive research, Levitt (2007) and Minnite (2010) conclude that little to no voter fraud—of any stripe—has occurred in recent U.S. elections." (cambridge link, id.)

As I do my google-fu, it seems some people disagree with those findings, but no one is still presenting any actual evidence of widespread voter fraud.

The news stories I'd found and linked (or didn't like) indicate stories of the people who try to commit voter fraud are not being successful.

-----------------------------------

The balance, which hasn't been responded to, is that tightening voter ID historically was directed to illegal voter suppression and functionally continues to do so now.  For this reason (equal protection) the Kansas voter ID law was ruled unconstitutional in 2018, decision affirmed by the court of appeals in 2020. 

"“The district court found that even under calculations from one of the Secretary’s experts, the estimated number of suspended applications that belonged to noncitizens was ‘statistically indistinguishable from zero,’ while ‘more than 99% of the individuals’ whose voter-registration applications were suspended were citizens who presumably would have been able to vote but for the DPOC requirement,” the court noted in its 84-page ruling."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/federal-appeals-court-rules-voter-id-law-unconstitutional

The appellate decision is in the link the Washington Examiner link. Probably a good read with actual evidence.
Probably supports the idea that Canada and the U.S. have equivalent levels of voter fraud, which is to say, negligible. 

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #342 on: November 08, 2020, 04:23:46 PM »
That all said:  The evidence I see supporting vigorously checking and following up on potential voter fraud in the U.S. seems worthwhile.  Enforcement and having a good database result in the findings that attempts at voter fraud, intentional or no, don't result in invalid ballots being included in final election results (in the news reports I have found.)

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #343 on: November 08, 2020, 07:10:19 PM »
Kidv,

“People keep saying, ‘But you could!But people don't.  People who attempt to submit fraudulent votes by and large get caught, and their votes don't count.”

Military Maxim:

“Do not base your plan of action on what the enemy would do. Base your actions on what the enemy could do.”

Rear Admiral Richmond Turner foolishly led three heavy cruisers to annihilation, and a fourth scuttled, constituting the worst U.S. naval defeat of WWII, at the battle of Savo Island on August 8th, 1942 by ignoring this common-sense application of military doctrine. There is a reason that political contests are called ”campaigns”.

As I was already aware, and you pointed out, the voting integrity commission did not find an absence of voter fraud. I am also aware of Tenth Circuit District Court Judge Julia Robinson’s decision on Kansas’s 2018 voter identification law, which similarly did not find an absence of voter fraud (67 cases), yet struck down the law notwithstanding. Judge Robinson is wrong, and that precident will not survive review by the current Supreme Court. Bank on it.

You keep referring to voter fraud, that was detected, as quasi-proof that all voter fraud is detected, and punished. You are not going to force an explanation of what is wrong with that reasoning, are you? When estimating cockroach infestation, spotting a single one during daylight hours is a pretty good indicator that 27+ are staying under protective cover.

Conversely, claiming that little, or no, voter fraud was ”proven“, and therefore little, or no, voter fraud ”exists“, is formally an argument from ignorance. I am not going to chase that canard no matter how many times you repeat it, especially as applied to current conditions promoting cultivated non-traceability of unsolicited ballots.

“The evidence I see supporting vigorously checking and following up on potential voter fraud in the U.S. seems worthwhile.”

Great, we are in agreement.

“Enforcement and having a good database result in the findings that attempts at voter fraud, intentional or no, don't result in invalid ballots being included in final election results (in the news reports I have found.)“

Yes, that is the basic premise behind treating opportunity for fraud, as likelihood of fraud. Door locks are not an esthetic design feature.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2020, 07:13:46 PM by noel c. »

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #344 on: November 08, 2020, 09:22:17 PM »
It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Biden could afford to lose any two battleground states in which he is currently leading and still take the electoral college.  What would be needed for Biden to have successfully "cheated" and avoided losing would have been at least 3 separate, wide scale, secret fraud projects in 3 separate states, each with their own separate voting mechanisms, without which he would have lost.  And none of those battleground states mailed out unsolicited ballots (with the exception of 6-EC-vote Nevada).

That is quite the vast conspiracy to have kept secret. 

OR

Given that Trump was the most disliked incumbent in modern history, never even having reached 50% approval, who was uniquely controversial and who revelled in being so, who presided over the worst health crisis in a century and by most accounts failed miserably (especially as compared to other countries) and who was out-fund-raised and outspent by about 50% during the campaign, it is not at all surprising that record numbers of people across the whole country came to vote him out.  No, it can't be that the man who presided over more criminals being convicted or pleading guilty than any other modern president could have anything to do with his loss; nor that Russia was accepted by congress and the intelligence community as having helped him get elected; nor that, even knowing that, he just couldn't distance himself from being seen to suck up to Putin, or attempt to bribe other countries to help him in getting re-elected.

No, it couldn't be that.  It must be the unfalsifiable 'fraud' that, even when not found, is somehow still evidence of its existence.

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #345 on: November 08, 2020, 09:41:48 PM »
Biden could afford to lose any two battleground states in which he is currently leading and still take the electoral college.  What would be needed for Biden to have successfully "cheated" and avoided losing would have been at least 3 separate, wide scale, secret fraud projects in 3 separate states, each with their own separate voting mechanisms, without which he would have lost.  And none of those battleground states mailed out unsolicited ballots (with the exception of 6-EC-vote Nevada).

Trump's so accustomed to winning, or at least litigating his way to a form of success, this should hardly be a shocker. I don't think anyone expected him to be anything but a sore loser. So News at 11?

Certain things about the really close counts suggest that a recount might shift the outcome, but that's highly unlikely, and probably only in Georgia, which wouldn't change the outcome nationally. It's possibly Trump's legal team may manage to litigate their way into getting some other votes invalidated, but I doubt it will be anywhere near enough to make a difference. Although many Republicans and Conservatives are curious to see just how much fraud he'll be able to demonstrate in court. That curiosity more than anything is what is leading to a lot of that silence you're hearing. It isn't them holding their breath hoping for a Trump upset victory through litigation. They want to see what Trump's legal team can turn up.

Quote
Given that Trump was the most disliked incumbent in modern history, never even having reached 50% approval, who was uniquely controversial and who revelled in being so,

Agreed, despite low enthusiasm for Biden himself, there was plenty of it for defeating Trump. His trying to bluff and otherwise bloviate his way through problems might work well enough in his real estate dealings or in the boardroom of companies he owns a controlling interest in. But it doesn't work as PotUS, especially when you have a highly hostile press corps out for your blood.

Quote
who presided over the worst health crisis in a century and by most accounts failed miserably (especially as compared to other countries)

That remains to be seen, IIRC the per capita numbers for the US aren't that far off from Sweden even now. And the health crises isn't over yet, until it is in the rearview, it is really hard to tell which option truly was "the better one."

Quote
and who was out-fund-raised and outspent by about 50% during the campaign,

Funny you should mention that, considering how well that huge fundraising advantage worked out for the Democratic "down ballot." The Republicans retained control of every state legislature they already held, gained New Hamsphire and Alaska, and also now control the governorship of Montana in addition to its legislature. The new Republicans in the House of Representatives are a nice touch as well. Even with the huge financing advantage enjoyed by the Democratic Party's billionaire donor cadre.

This year the DNC cemented its role as the preferred party of Billionaires. If that doesn't speak to entitlement, what does?

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #346 on: November 08, 2020, 10:05:05 PM »
Biden raised $368 million from small donors (donations of less than 200$).  Trump only raised $268 million from small donors.

Biden also nabbed more big money donations than did Trump.

Does that really say anything about entitlement? What do you mean by entitlement?  Do the Democrats have a sense of entitlement because people, wealthy and otherwise, wanted to get rid of Trump enough to pay for the privilege?  Are donations considered government entitlements now?  What exactly do you mean?

At any rate, I brought up Biden's fundraising advantage to illustrate just how much so many people wanted to get rid of Trump.  If you want to suggest those donations will eventually lead to a quid pro quo, knock yourself out :)

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #347 on: November 09, 2020, 12:23:21 AM »
At any rate, I brought up Biden's fundraising advantage to illustrate just how much so many people wanted to get rid of Trump.

I've actually wondered whether there's an asymmetry between the sorts of things left-wing vs right-wing people think they should be doing as part of the civic participation. If you looked at demographics across the board, would there be asymmetries in any of the following categories:

-Writing to Congress
-Showing up for town hall sessions
-Answering phone polls
-Sending donations to political candidates (purely as civic duty, not as a PAC or quid pro quo political maneuver)
-Volunteering to assist with campaigns or other political work

I'm sure there are other things I could list. I just wonder whether it's roughly equal left vs right, or whether in some areas conservatives feel more strongly they should be doing that things, vs other things for liberals. Not saying that's necessarily behind a disparity in small donations, it just got me thinking. Like, in terms of sending money to a candidate, does a certain world view have to be present to think that sending $25 to Biden is a good idea - for example, "every little bit helps!" or "hey my voice counts too!" or something like that? Maybe as opposed to someone whose political persuasion is more like "hey those big boys are gonna do what they're gonna do and don't pay attention to little old me anyhow." 

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #348 on: November 09, 2020, 04:12:10 AM »
"Although many Republicans and Conservatives are curious to see just how much fraud he'll be able to demonstrate in court."

That's a very good point. Just because there may not have been enough voter fraud to change the results of the election doesn't mean this isn't a great opportunity to closely look into exactly how much voter fraud is going on, who is responsible, and to hold them accountable and learn something to help prepare for the next election. If after all is said and done everything looks pretty much hunky-dory, then that's great. That's worth knowing too and not just hoping everything is okay. A good investigation by Trump and his team that turns up little to nothing will do a lot to inspire confidence in our process, and if it turns up some things that we need to know even if they don't change the results of the election then at the end we'll be better informed for it so it's well worth the effort.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #349 on: November 09, 2020, 06:55:40 AM »
"Although many Republicans and Conservatives are curious to see just how much fraud he'll be able to demonstrate in court."

That's a very good point. Just because there may not have been enough voter fraud to change the results of the election doesn't mean this isn't a great opportunity to closely look into exactly how much voter fraud is going on, who is responsible, and to hold them accountable and learn something to help prepare for the next election. If after all is said and done everything looks pretty much hunky-dory, then that's great. That's worth knowing too and not just hoping everything is okay. A good investigation by Trump and his team that turns up little to nothing will do a lot to inspire confidence in our process, and if it turns up some things that we need to know even if they don't change the results of the election then at the end we'll be better informed for it so it's well worth the effort.

His voter fraud commission tried that after the last election and turned up almost nothing. Now is the time to help the nation heal and concede. Trump has 0 evidence of massive vote fraud. Nothing large enough to flip multiple states. At this point investigating and finding 100 fraudulent votes in the nation is simply divisive. Leave the investigations to state’s attorneys general to run after the election to secure the next election.