Author Topic: Election Results  (Read 269722 times)

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #500 on: November 12, 2020, 05:03:05 PM »
That's how I felt during the Gore "recount" in Florida.  It's absurd to demand of the opposition what we wouldn't demand from our own team.

The thing in Florida was effectively caused by the butterfly ballots taking away votes by accident from the Democratic party. So the will of the voters was violated and this violation gave Bush the win when Gore should have been president... but AFAIK it was done by accident, not deliberate fraud.

No the thing in Florida was caused by refusing to follow the actual legal process for partisan gain.  Sounds a lot like what's going on now, with a desire for selective rule changes to tip the scales.  The recounting process that kept finding new votes, was a precursor to the current ballot harvesting issues.  The belief was that if they just kept recounting they'd keep finding new Gore votes, or spoiling prior Bush ones until the election result flipped (which is why the recount had to be selective and only in DNC counties - despite state law - to ensure that the other side could do the same).

As a matter of law, the Constitution grants state legislatures authority over elections.  A state court overruling a state legislature is not a state law question, as they have mistakenly interpreted it to be from time to time, its a federal question.  The SC decision should have been 9-0 not 5-4, but it was correct in concluding that the FL SC was acting in violation of the Constitution with its continual interference in the State's defined process.

Quote
This in turn motivated Democrats to try to fix the false election outcome, by selective recounts. But that was from the beginning bull*censored*. The problem was in the ballots, not in the counting thereof.

Frankly the whole Florida election should have been repeated with properly made ballots, but I don't know if your constitution permits it or what not.

If the FL count had proceeded as it was required under law, it would have been certified far sooner in the process for Bush, and then Gore would have been able to try to challenge the results under the State rules.  His campaign did not view that as favorable, both because certifications are rarely overturned and because the rules for the challenge would have been even.  But, in answer to your question, the state legislature sets the rules and they could have included a re-run process if they had desired.

Quote
In fact, a big take away from this result - for me - is that never Trumpers have been repudiated.

Your cult of personality is showing. In the Democrat party, there are perhaps the centrists and the leftists.... in the Republican party there *used* to be conservatives, libertartians, hawks, whatever -- but now the only division that matters is people who like Trump and people who don't like Trump.

The only relevant distinction is between those who are part of the establishment and those who are trying to drain the swamp.  The raw numbers of voters for Trump went up, dramatically.  He made gains, by percentage, with every demographic group other than white men over where he stood when compared to Clinton.  https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/11/politics/election-analysis-exit-polls-2016-2020/.  That's a stunning repudiation of the racist pigeonholing the DNC relies on.

Trump's policies are what caused those gains, and his personality is what cost him.

I said this is a repudiation of never Trumpism, but I should have narrowed that, because I only meant inside the Republican party.  Any Republican that endorsed Biden has to know from those results that the party doesn't agree with them.  The party and even new voters turned in large numbers for a lot of reasons, but not least of them to try and stop socialism and to repudiate radical policies, like defunding the police, that make their lives worse.  Policy is more important to conservative and libertarian voters than some concept of disliking Trump as a person, which is the failing of the politicians that purport to be conservative or libertarian.  There's no ground to claim to be conservative and then to endorse the Democrat candidate with the Democrat platform having moved to be the most extreme in history. Those that supported Biden admitted to the entire party that they don't believe in the goals they profess to be be supporting.

Quote
You are speaking of Trump and his opponents like a Stalinist would speak of Stalin and Stalin's opponents.

I wonder what will happen with you lot when Trump dies.

Nothing will happen.  Hopefully the door he cracked open showing the swamp won't be allowed to close, but I'm not remotely hopeful.  Obama-Biden engaged in wide spread corrupt abuse of their government authorities, and unlike the Special Counsel investigation that Trump let run for over 2 years, that cost the Republican's the House in the midterms and that concluded with no evidence of any crimes (other than their own), Biden's going to supress all evidence of wrong doing with the full help of the staff of the DOJ and FBI and all the other insiders that favor Dems to Repubs by more than 9:1.

We voted for more corruption.  We voted for a media that buries stories rather than reporting them.  We voted for prosecutors that target political opponents rather than crimes.  We voted for opium rather than reality, and that price is going to come due and be harsh.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #501 on: November 12, 2020, 05:14:13 PM »
As to the long polling lines? I've never had the occasion to live in such a precinct so it is outside my experience, but I also realize that certain cities probably have high rise apartment buildings with more eligible voters living there than live in my entire precinct.

I've lived in Manhattan and Brooklyn and never seen those lines either.  Longest line I ever heard of while I was in Manhattan was 30 minutes, and that was the result of broken voting machines.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #502 on: November 12, 2020, 05:37:37 PM »
Trying to call those activities "systemic" or even "organized" is problematic at best, as to "widespread" that's another matter, but depending on how it was done, potentially very hard to detect let alone prove, especially with all of the opportunities for such abuses which were created this year.

Voter fraud opportunities are
1) Register fake people to vote (states have ways to identify and weed these out).
2) Register real people to vote and pretend to be them. (Hope they decide not to register and vote themselves)
3) Some kind of vote or ballot buying with mail in votes. (Hard to keep a large scale op secret)
4) Harvesting ballots and dumping all the ones from people who you think didn't vote for your guy.

1, 2 can be detected by taking a 1,000 randomly selected voters in the region you think fraud occurred in and go ask all of them if they voted.
3 gets busted by some idiot posting on facebook that he just got $20 for voting for x. Or by an honest person calling the cops on someone trying to give them money for their vote.
4 is detected by individual voters checking the status of their mail in ballots. When a lot of people say I gave my ballot to Dr. Evil and it never was turned in an investigation can ensue.

So what method of voter fraud is so devious and sneaky as to be completely undetectable? Republicans seem to think its so easy, they completely outperformed polls, maybe they are really good at it.

You didn't get the secret memo sent out on the email list for libs? The millions of Americans who identify as Dems are all morally bankrupt, and very happy to lie, cheat and steal to install Biden as socialist dictator. None of them would report malfeasance, for sure.

*censored*, Republicans somehow think that poll workers are wholly partisan. On that they might be right, because only a sucker would take that job.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #503 on: November 12, 2020, 06:26:09 PM »
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.

Not sure what the heck you're talking about.  Mueller reached the actual conclusion that there was no evidence that any American colluded with Russia.  There literally was no crime by any American, including the members of the Trump campaign.  Mueller had to concede that despite his own team's unshakable religious conviction (i.e., completely taken as a matter of faith without evidence) that Trump must have been guilty of something.

As far as examples go, the Russian collusion investigation is so far more abusive than any amount of election fraud investigation that will ever occur it just makes you look completely unbalanced to cite to it.

Mueller wasn't even able to find that the Russians even had an influence on the election.

Quote
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.

Trump was asking?  Do you have some proof of that?   The only on point statements about Trump were testimony where Trump expressly told others that there was to be no quid pro quo.  From that you've magically created a false narrative that the opposite occurred.  You've also created a false narrative that this was "political ammo" and not actually evidence of criminal activity by the Bidens.

Are you going to hold to this position if Joe Biden tries to investigate Trump's "crimes" by asking our foreign allies about interactions they had with him?  We already know the real answer - not a chance - that won't be impeachable conduct in your view, because you know, Trump is already guilty its just a matter of finding what he's guilty of, whereas Biden can't possibly be guilty no matter how much evidence is found.

Quote
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.

They had no high crime or misdeamor.  They had no evidence of a high crime or misdeamor.  All they actually had, was a partisan Democratic House process that refused - much like any Banana Court - to provide any due process protections to the President.  A House Democrat process that used star chamber secret interrogations, from which the majority leaked damaging snippets to create a false narrative of guilt but that refused to provide access to the records and any exculpatory materials.  A majority that refused to allow the calling of defense witnesses (even in secret) and refused to honor any reasonable process for assistance of counsel.  In fact a majority that went out of it's way to find out the truth when it had a much more palatable way to get the narrative it was looking for.

A case based on a fake whistlyblower, written by activist lawyers, that turned out to have been purpose designed as the plan B impeachment option in case Mueller fell through.  But no matter how much coicindence occurs, no matter how thoroughly it's elements turn up in documents after the fact, you can't ever break away from the initial narrative you have in your head.

Even then, the star witnesses all turned out to be malicious mid-level bureaucrats, everyone of which denied seeing any actual crime or knowing of any connection to Trump, but who managed at various times to confirm their own views that notwithstanding our laws and our entire Constitutional structure that they - the mid level bureaucrats - were the proper deciders of policy and not the President and the elected officials.  Pretty much literal documentation of the deep state.

And to top it off, Trump was impeached for a fake crime that was based on Biden's actual crime.

Quote
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....

You are the one talking in absolutes that have no evidence, if there were evidence, Mueller would have brought it forward or the impeachment hearing would have presented it.

There is every evidence that fraud occurred in this election, in fact there are documented instances.  The increased use of mail in ballots added millions of additional contact points in the chain of voting custody.  A non-zero number of people in that custody chain are persons of limited morality, some of whom are even convicted or unconvicted criminals.  A non-zero number are super partisan.  A non-zero number are perfectly willing to commit fraud to achieve their goals.

How many is non-zero?  We can't know, and we'll never know.  What we do know, is that one party has consistently undermined any ability to determine that non-zero amount, has consistently intervened in election rules, in any way that they could whether or not legal, to subvert or eliminate those rules.  It just so happens that in many cases members of that same party happen to be the expected beneficiaries of any fraud, happen to be the ones responsible for preventing it at the local level, happen to be the ones charged with investigating it at the local level and happen to the ones who would report on it at every level.  I guaranty with 100% certainty, if this set of circumstances were created by Republicans there would be nothing on earth that could convince you that the election was fraud free, heck the way this game works, it could be 25% of this level of circumstances and you'd refuse to accept the result.

But yeah, no one will be able to prove the exact amount of it.  And no one is going to overturn the election, Republicans included, without that proof, but the threshhold of proof at which Republicans are going to think it should be overturned is lower (significant fraud whether or not provable that enough ballots were impacted) than the threshhold for Democrats (independent verification of specific fraudulent vote totals -and that it was Trump votes undercounted/Biden votes overcounted - that far exceed what it would take to reverse the election). 

So there's no remedy here, even if the election was stolen.  The results will still stand.  If they did commit fraud, those that did it will get away with it and, if any one goes to jail, they will be minor players that are pretty much happy to take the fall for giving their team power.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #504 on: November 12, 2020, 06:41:15 PM »

Trying to get my head around how the experience of reality can be so different between people
70 million viewing things one way and 70 million seeing it in another.
Are we all being gas-lit?

I dunno, dude.  I think it has some to do with the fact that on some levels, different people just have different values, and we live in an age of eclecticism.  Very rarely have nations had so many different opinions about EVERYTHING.  It used to be that when things like this happened, civil war would occur, and there would be a readjustment.  A nation would keep a certain degree of homogeneity in thought.  Not anymore. 

The other half of it is, I believe, that people want to subscribe the having of different values and different beliefs to sinister motives.  Democrats are crooked.  Republicans are crooked.  Catholics are crooked.  Jews are crooked.  Mexicans are crooked.  All that jazz. 

The final part of it is just plain and simple partisanship.  People are really really invested in their own point of view and their "side".  Because that is what they have been taught by all media because it sells and gets out the vote, and because we live in an age of unprecedented peace and prosperity where only 1-2% of the population has been exposed to the horrors of war that are stark lessons against partisanship.

There is something different now, but I don't think it is any that you listed.

If AGW is real, not believing it will almost definitely kill millions of people, at the minimum.

If Trump convinces enough people that the election was rigged when it was not, it will undermine our democracy.
If illegal immigrants are mostly rapists and murderers, then killing them is in our nation's best interest.

If enough people don't wear masks and follow health guidelines, Covid-19 will exponentially spread throughout our country, overwhelms hospitals and needlessly kill millions of people.

Before the parties disagreed about values and exactly how to handle our problems.  More or less money for welfare.  Higher or lower taxes.  Harsher or gentler punishments for crimes.  We disagreed about the degrees of the solutions.

Now we seem to disagree about reality itself.  About the facts.  Everything is an opinion now.  Trump can say factually incorrect things, and people will defend it as if it were merely his point of view.

How long can we agree to disagree when people's lives, and our nation's life, may be on the line?  :(

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #505 on: November 12, 2020, 06:51:54 PM »
Biden raised $368 million from small donors (donations of less than 200$).  Trump only raised $268 million from small donors.

This is one of those things I'd like to see looked at.  Both with Biden, but also with the number of Senate races that hit eye popping numbers.  I think when you add up the totals it translates into an improbable number of households putting out an improbable amount of contributions to these campaigns.  I'd love to know what an investigation into the routing of big money through anonymous contribution brokers could turn up.  I mean, how many families really have thousands of dollars to donate to multiple campaigns in states where they don't live.

Quote
Biden also nabbed more big money donations than did Trump.

Biden's big advantage here was not in donations to Biden.  It was things like Bloomberg spending millions directly outside of Biden's official campaign.  In a country where we're supposed to be capped at a relatively small contribution of less than $20k, the fact that some could spend millions and more seems a pretty obvious hole in our process.

The fact that notwithstanding the repeated claim that the Republicans are the party of the rich, the mega rich consistently contribute to the Democrats should give some pause, yet it doesn't.  Democrats always cut deals with their allies in bind the scenes payola schemes.

Quote
At any rate, I brought up Biden's fundraising advantage to illustrate just how much so many people wanted to get rid of Trump.

Apparently just slightly more than wanted to keep him (despite  overwhelmingly negative personal reactions to him).  Real mandate there.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #506 on: November 12, 2020, 07:22:59 PM »
Quote
Apparently just slightly more than wanted to keep him (despite  overwhelmingly negative personal reactions to him).  Real mandate there.

Considering that Trump never won the popular vote, Biden certainly has a much greater mandate than Trump ever did.  :D

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #507 on: November 12, 2020, 08:05:53 PM »
Quote
At any rate, I brought up Biden's fundraising advantage to illustrate just how much so many people wanted to get rid of Trump.

Apparently just slightly more than wanted to keep him (despite  overwhelmingly negative personal reactions to him).  Real mandate there.
Congratulations on missing the point even after I spelled it out to TheDaemon

I was making the point that a lot of people wanted Trump gone, and that the amount of money raised in small donations was evidence of that desire.  And that desire to see Trump gone is a better explanation of Biden's vote counts than, say, software that flips millions of votes to Biden from Trump, or hundreds of thousands of Democrats (and exclusively Democrats) voting using their dead grandparents' identities, or a completely secret conspiracy that spanned multiple states with different voting mechanisms and successfully cast hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes.

It had nothing to do with Biden's 5 million vote margin or his mandate.

But thanks for playing.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #508 on: November 12, 2020, 08:32:18 PM »
Very rarely have nations had so many different opinions about EVERYTHING.  It used to be that when things like this happened, civil war would occur, and there would be a readjustment.  A nation would keep a certain degree of homogeneity in thought.  Not anymore. 

You know, in some respects this must obviously be correct. 600 years ago you wouldn't have gotten much dissent in proposing the Christian worldview or cosmic understanding. But is that really the sort of personalized view of the world people carry with them day in, day out? You would think it would be, actually, but I'm not so sure it's as simple as that. I suspect that even within a 'Christian society' there was massive variation in personal comportment, views on people, on how to do business, on what we would now call politeness, and so forth. Now someone cuts a line and people scream; it's just a given. Back then I don't really know for sure but I suspect that there was more of an understanding that people are not something you can control so easily. From this standpoint any deviation from what we'd now call civility or normality would be just another instance of the breadth of human variety. Now we have names for each type of deviation of psychological normality; back then it was just people being people. Now we have names for different types or orientations of sexuality; back then there was just sexuality. People were sexual, they liked sexual things. Now there are categories. So yes it means we know more, but also means in a way we demand much more in certain categories of life. I think intolerance of any divergence of opinion is not a symptom of being heterogenous, but of being homogenous. The illusion is that now we are so open to diversity, but actually I think 2020 must be the pinnacle of intolerance to diversity in recent human history. Back in Chesterton's day disagreement through 'wars of letters' was commonplace, even journalistically celebrated. Now people will get offended if you tell them you disagree. That's a new thing, and not one born of being more diverse in nature; I suspect it's born of being less diverse in thought.

Just over 200 years we had people still getting killed in honor duels. They discontinued the practice, but in some respects, it probably had created a society prior to its ending that took being "polite and proper" a bit more seriously than later generations discovered they needed to. After all the penalty for "speaking out" of turn was no longer potential death.

The bigger problem seems to be that as society has advanced we've "knocked off  the rough edges" of a great many things, and as a consequence our society has lost the ability to cope well with adversity... Of any kind. Because it so rare that people in developed nations experience it during their formative years. (And the ones who do often end up with a lot of coddling after the fact, something that wouldn't have happened even 70 years ago.

Not all changes are for the better. It may be that social theory/psychology is going to have to acknowledge something comparable to what immunology is moving towards. Placing someone in a sterile environment where they need never worry about a great many infections is actually bad for the health of the vast majority of the population. It may also hold true that raising someone in an environment free of adversity is equally bad for the mental health of many people.

That also could explain many of the historical trends that are noted. Societies grow, reach a state of plenty and prosperity which will generally last for a handful of generations(children in the leadership echelons of society don't know/understand/appreciate adversity but become the leaders in time)... Ultimately culminating in those people of "entitled upbringing" becoming faced with a challenge they're unable to cope with, and the society falls apart as many of their peers likewise come to pieces as they have to try to deal with something they have no mental tool set to use for coping.

It isn't really decadence that bit them in the end, although that was likely a symptom. The real cause was lack of coping skills paired with little to no understanding of the "real world" in which they lived... Because they'd been protected from it for too much of their formative years.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #509 on: November 12, 2020, 08:35:44 PM »
I've got a feeling that what's going to end up happening is that some Republicans will try to use the hoax of massive voter fraud to undermine the integrity of the election and by extension the authority of incoming President Biden and refer to him as an illegitimate President. It may be that some of them even believe it but for most of them it will just be a form of political warfare to grasp at power or at least keep it from the opposition even in the face of a lost election. Exactly like what the Democrats did to Trump with their Russian collusion hoax.

I think some will run with it as "payback for the Russia hoax"  they ran with. As sparse as the voter fraud evidence is, it's still more substantial than anything the Dems managed to turn up on Trump.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #510 on: November 12, 2020, 08:47:55 PM »
I think some will run with it as "payback for the Russia hoax"  they ran with. As sparse as the voter fraud evidence is, it's still more substantial than anything the Dems managed to turn up on Trump.
It takes willful ignorance to characterize the Russia investigation as a hoax.  Members of Trump's family, members of his campaign team, and even after his election, members of his administration cooperated with Russian agents to assist with Trump's election (and re-election).

Whether Trump was directly involved matters not at all - Russia was helping the Trump campaign, and even without knowing to what extent Russia was helping, members of his campaign cooperated with Russian agents in their efforts to elect their candidate.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #511 on: November 12, 2020, 08:51:19 PM »
I think some will run with it as "payback for the Russia hoax"  they ran with. As sparse as the voter fraud evidence is, it's still more substantial than anything the Dems managed to turn up on Trump.
It takes willful ignorance to characterize the Russia investigation as a hoax.  Members of Trump's family, members of his campaign team, and even after his election, members of his administration cooperated with Russian agents to assist with Trump's election (and re-election).

Whether Trump was directly involved matters not at all - Russia was helping the Trump campaign, and even without knowing to what extent Russia was helping, members of his campaign cooperated with Russian agents in their efforts to elect their candidate.

We don't listen to you because you are living in the socialist backwater of Canada. /sarcasm

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #512 on: November 12, 2020, 09:00:20 PM »
Ah well... at least I have ready access to exceptional baked goods...

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #513 on: November 12, 2020, 09:01:04 PM »
Ah well... at least I have ready access to exceptional baked goods...

Oh no, Quebecois croissants! Zut alors!

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #514 on: November 12, 2020, 09:54:36 PM »
Y-22,

“Voter fraud opportunities are
1) Register fake people to vote (states have ways to identify and weed these out).”


I have never heard of this.

“2) Register real people to vote and pretend to be them. (Hope they decide not to register and vote themselves)“

The average turnout in a general election, from total eligible voters, is ~60%. On a random basis your hypothetical seems to be a really good way for the perpetrator to get arrested provided the ballot is presented in person at a polling station. In a mail-in scenario, or unmonitored drop-box, there is little risk.

“3) Some kind of vote or ballot buying with mail in votes. (Hard to keep a large scale op secret)“

Risk is correlated to some degree with the target population, and disclosure of the purchaser’s identification. It is illegal to sell a ballot, as well as buy one, so there is some inherent protection. When compounded by buyer discretion in remaining anonymous to the seller, actual risk is near zero.

“4) Harvesting ballots and dumping all the ones from people who you think didn't vote for your guy.”

Harvesting that targets populations in need of political “education”, ie.; retirement homes, psychologically institutionalized patients, government housing projects, or just going door to door in low income housing tracts, would pretty much raise the typical 60% “eligible“ voter participation to upwards of 90%+, depending upon persistence of the farmer. Not surprisingly, assisted voting normally conforms to “educational” directives. Undue influence negates any need for hypothetical ballot sorting.

“1, 2 can be detected by taking a 1,000 randomly selected voters in the region you think fraud occurred in and go ask all of them if they voted.”

I doubt #1 occurs at all, and #2 is ineffectual in picking up the margins of victory in contemporary elections.

3 gets busted by some idiot posting on facebook that he just got $20 for voting for x. Or by an honest person calling the cops on someone trying to give them money for their vote.

Only if #3 provided identification along with the cash.

4 is detected by individual voters checking the status of their mail in ballots. When a lot of people say I gave my ballot to Dr. Evil and it never was turned in an investigation can ensue.

No, ballot harvesting does not work that way.

Recent posts in this thread have despaired the imminent demise of democracy, and even incitement of civil violence. If there is serious interest in restoring the public trust, stop screwing with the vote. That is the genuine and immediate threat to our democracy.

The two parties functioned in a reasonable state of cooperative opposition for approximately 128 years (until the Clinton administration). To begin a return to the age of “loyal opposition”, eliminate all of the electioneering gamesmanship encompassed above, and restore the secret, in-person vote from rolls that are purged every election cycle, as a default mode, with restrictive conditions on absentee ballots. Without confidence in the worth of a vote, democracy is an empty concept.

Civil comity would also be greatly aided if Democrats recognized that their party’s efforts at post-election nullification, of Trump’s presidency, are equally effective in provoking Republican animosity, as is outright voting fraud. For example; within this thread it was asserted that the Obama FBI was justified in misusing FISA authority as a precursor to spying on the Trump campaign, transition team, and governing administration, allegedly because Carter Page, a minor foreign policy campaign advisor, could not restrain himself from talking to “CCP“ operatives. It was not enough to demolish that inane proposition. The discussion ended with an even more absurd hypothesis, to wit; Mr. Page was a CIA mole sent to spy on not just any U.S. citizen, but his boss, in violation of Executive Order 12333 of 1981, and in accordance with procedures approved by the Attorney General.

Would the Lefties on this site be better able to appreciate the harm done to America if, should he be installed as President, Joe Biden had the same welcome to office?
« Last Edit: November 12, 2020, 10:06:16 PM by noel c. »

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #515 on: November 12, 2020, 10:00:34 PM »
You realize that the only reason there's a lack of confidence in the vote is because the GOP has spent the last decade screaming about voter fraud without any evidence that it's a significant problem? Yet your proposal says nothing of getting the GOP to stop making voting a partisan issue.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #516 on: November 12, 2020, 10:11:35 PM »
NH,

“You realize that the only reason there's a lack of confidence in the vote is because the GOP has spent the last decade screaming about voter fraud without any evidence that it's a significant problem?“

It is Republican confidence that you want to avoid Republican opposition.

“Yet your proposal says nothing of getting the GOP to stop making voting a partisan issue.”

Okay, I will say something; make the proposal bipartisan.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #517 on: November 12, 2020, 10:13:59 PM »
NH,

“You realize that the only reason there's a lack of confidence in the vote is because the GOP has spent the last decade screaming about voter fraud without any evidence that it's a significant problem?“

It is Republican confidence that you want to avoid Republican opposition.

“Yet your proposal says nothing of getting the GOP to stop making voting a partisan issue.”

Okay, I will say something; make the proposal bipartisan.

Republicans want to improve security. Democrats want to improve access. A bipartisan effort has to address both of those things, but it will never happen because each party only sees one side of the issue.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #518 on: November 12, 2020, 10:20:58 PM »
Drake,

“A bipartisan effort has to address both of those things, but it will never happen because each party only sees one side of the issue.”

If these two aspects of voting are really exclusive of each other, then you are effectively arguing against democracy. Is that your position?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #519 on: November 12, 2020, 10:34:23 PM »
Drake,

“A bipartisan effort has to address both of those things, but it will never happen because each party only sees one side of the issue.”

If these two aspects of voting are really exclusive of each other, then you are effectively arguing against democracy. Is that your position?

My position is that they are not exclusive. As you should already know from everything I've written on the subject. It seems you couldn't care less about adding hurdles to voting. Like most of your ilk, you dismiss every concern about access by stating openly that anyone who won't do it like they did it in the 1950s is not an adult.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #520 on: November 12, 2020, 10:41:12 PM »
Drake,

“Like most of your ilk, you dismiss every concern about access by stating openly that anyone who won't do it like they did it in the 1950s is not an adult.”

Why is my statement wrong?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #521 on: November 12, 2020, 10:56:35 PM »
Drake,

“Like most of your ilk, you dismiss every concern about access by stating openly that anyone who won't do it like they did it in the 1950s is not an adult.”

Why is my statement wrong?
\
If you don't know, I doubt I can successfully explain it to you.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #522 on: November 12, 2020, 10:58:01 PM »
Give it a try, I am patient.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #523 on: November 12, 2020, 11:16:11 PM »
Citizens shouldn't have to take a day off from work to vote, as you've blithely suggested. Citizens shouldn't have to pay for daycare to vote, a defacto poll tax. Citizens shouldn't have to travel miles to drop off a ballot. Period. But you dismiss people who have to make those choices as "children".

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #524 on: November 12, 2020, 11:35:06 PM »
Drake,

Adult citizens usually work. It seems that every artificial limitation which you have placed on voting, would also be an obstacle to employment. Do you see any flaw in that analogy?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #525 on: November 12, 2020, 11:41:17 PM »
Drake,

Adult citizens usually work. It seems that every artificial limitation which you have placed on voting, would also be an obstacle to employment. Do you see any flaw in that analogy?

Disabled veterans.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #526 on: November 12, 2020, 11:54:41 PM »
Disabled veterans, as in blind, para, or quadriplegic, correct? Any others?

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #527 on: November 13, 2020, 12:09:21 AM »
Drake,

Consider the following: http://www2.itif.org/2012-making-voting-accessible-vets-disabilities.pdf

“Election officials can better serve these voters if they understand the barriers to voting faced by veterans with disabilities and the opportunities that exist to make the electoral process more accessible. All citizens, with or without a disability, should be assured they are able to vote privately, securely, and independently

“The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) of 1986 requires states to allow active duty service members to vote by absentee ballot in federal elections, and the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009 requires states to support military voters with electronic systems to obtain voter registration and absentee ballot request forms and have their absentee ballots delivered“

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #528 on: November 13, 2020, 12:44:13 AM »
So if it is safe for that group to vote, why can't we let every other citizen opt in to the same avenue?

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #529 on: November 13, 2020, 12:52:04 AM »
So if it is safe for that group to vote, why can't we let every other citizen opt in to the same avenue?

That would be the "overseas citizens" part of that act. If you're not overseas, you should be living where you vote, with an extremely short list of additional exceptions.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #530 on: November 13, 2020, 12:57:03 AM »
So if it is safe for that group to vote, why can't we let every other citizen opt in to the same avenue?

That would be the "overseas citizens" part of that act. If you're not overseas, you should be living where you vote, with an extremely short list of additional exceptions.

Same argument. If the overseas citizens can do that safely, why can't somebody 3000 yards from their voting location do the same?

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #531 on: November 13, 2020, 06:55:47 AM »
Drake,

“Same argument. If the overseas citizens can do that safely, why can't somebody 3000 yards from their voting location do the same?”

If that us the extent of partisan compromise that would ensure both security through “Voting assistance... provided more extensively to... (voting) facilities. (And) State and local election officials (would) develop uniform statewide procedures for providing assistance in... community-based facilities for voter registration and absentee voting. (And) Election officials (would) prepare and conduct training for (poll) staff and volunteers who are designated to provide voter assistance.”, and accessibility, I would sign on.

But notice that under the Act you still have to physically drag your body to a State designated assisted voting facility, which in common language is called a “polling station“. I am not sure how even accommodations currently in place for disabled veterans makes casting a mail-in ballot easy enough for your vision of an average voter.

What this could not evolve into, and still maintain the VA voter assistance criteria, is an independent vote-harvesting contractor model, with a political “education“ agenda.

Does that satisfy your needs for convenience?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2020, 07:00:53 AM by noel c. »

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #532 on: November 13, 2020, 07:24:30 AM »
Serious about voter fraud, and access? Do this:
1. Federal databases of all births in the country, including retinal scans. This could be done in hospitals, doctor's offices after the fact, or by registered doulas, or nurse practitioners.
2. Frequent updates of retinal scans and facial scans of all residents until the age of majority.  This could be done in schools, or even libraries, at doctors' appointments, in hospitals during treatments, etc.
3. The data could be regularly updated thereafter, though would not be required as often (retinal patterns and face shapes changing less significantly after that age.
4. Every person born would also be provided with a subcutaneous microchip implantation, including a GUID, uniquely identifying each person. 
5. Immigrants would also be provided with the same benefits, and citizenship would be dependent on the verification of all these features.

Voting could then be done from anywhere, using a smartphone and a government app, or from a desktop computer, or an acquaintance's phone or computer. Those without access to either could use libraries, or could use polling places as is done today.  Voting kiosks could even be set up at post offices, at ATMs, at banks, etc.

Of course, maybe one feels there needs to be more control - and if that's the case, do away with all the access methods with the exception of dedicated polling places, but still require retinal and facial scans, and chip confirmation. Although setting up temporary polling places would seem to be the most open to being hacked and compromised...

Security of the voting process is important, right?

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #533 on: November 13, 2020, 07:48:42 AM »
Donald,

Your Canadian conditioning is showing through. :

“Voting could then be done from anywhere, using a smartphone and a government app, or from a desktop computer, or an acquaintance's phone or computer. Those without access to either could use libraries, or could use polling places as is done today.  Voting kiosks could even be set up at post offices, at ATMs, at banks, etc.”

The Act’s criteria provided that: ”All (American) citizens, with or without a disability, should be assured they are able to vote privately, securely, and independently“

Orwellian exercises in population control are not an American value priority.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #534 on: November 13, 2020, 07:54:14 AM »
JOINT STATEMENT FROM ELECTIONS INFRASTRUCTURE GOVERNMENT COORDINATING COUNCIL & THE ELECTION INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR COORDINATING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES

Quote
“The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history. Right now, across the country, election officials are reviewing and double checking the entire election process prior to finalizing the result.

“When states have close elections, many will recount ballots. All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary. This is an added benefit for security and resilience. This process allows for the identification and correction of any mistakes or errors. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.

...

"While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too. When you have questions, turn to elections officials as trusted voices as they administer elections.”

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #535 on: November 13, 2020, 08:03:47 AM »
Donald,

“There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

An “E” syllogistic proposition. Let’s see how long that one survives a casual test.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #536 on: November 13, 2020, 08:12:57 AM »
Your Canadian conditioning is showing through
Your misplaced chauvenism is showing.

Hint: clearly, security isn't paramount to you. That was my point.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #537 on: November 13, 2020, 08:55:43 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.

Not sure what the heck you're talking about.  Mueller reached the actual conclusion that there was no evidence that any American colluded with Russia

No. There was lots and lots of evidence. The report concludes there wasn't *sufficient* evidence to conclude collusion, it doesn't say there wasn't any evidence at all.

And the report does conclude that crimes did happen -- that the Russian government violated US criminal law. It describes "ten episodes where Trump may have obstructed justice while president and one before he was elected". The report says the Russian interference was "welcomed by the Trump campaign as it expected to benefit from such efforts".

Your constant outrage that the investigation even happened is absurd.
Do keep in mind btw, that Trump has 'redacted' parts of the report, claiming 'executive privilege'.

Quote
Mueller wasn't even able to find that the Russians even had an influence on the election.

AFAIK the Mueller report is an investigation on the crimes that happened, not a sociological investigation about how much their campaign of interference affected the voting population. So "it wasn't even able to find" -- how would you have expected to be able to find such?

Quote
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.

Quote
Trump was asking?  Do you have some proof of that?

I saw the actual transcript of the Trump call.
Quote
ZELENSKY: I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We. are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. Specifically, we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United· States for defense purposes.

TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your weal thy people. ... The server, they say Ukraine has it.
[...]The other thing, there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

It's clearly quid-pro-quo. He's asking for a favour regarding a Ukraine-rather-than-Russia-did-it conspiracy theory, and then asks ammo about Biden's son.

This is undeniably quid-pro-quo. Trump couldn't make it more explicit unless he had actually used the words "quid pro quo". The guy speaks about defense contracts, Trump responds "we need a favour though" about something utterly unrelated except in how it's about criminal investigations about him and his opponents.

Quote
Are you going to hold to this position if Joe Biden tries to investigate Trump's "crimes" by asking our foreign allies about interactions they had with him?

If Biden says that he "needs a favour though" about his political opponents or about his son or Trump's sons, when the other countries are discussing defense arrangements with the United States, yes I will.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #538 on: November 13, 2020, 09:16:55 AM »
Hint: clearly, security isn't paramount to you. That was my point.
And if it wasn't also clear - I was giving you the opportunity to show that the limits of your concern about security end when the proposed mechanisms affect everybody equally, and not, coincidentally of course, primarily those with whom you disagree on policy.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #539 on: November 13, 2020, 09:17:15 AM »
Donald,

“Your misplaced chauvenism is showing.“

“Misplaced” in what way? You are the one coming to an American website, discussing American politics, and offering Canadian advice, not the other way around. It seems that you view America as exceptional, and that I do not see Canada in the same way.

Did you not just suggest that proof of identity was vital to legal voting? This is in conformity with, much stricter, Canadian naturalization laws:

”Filing income tax:

You may need to file taxes in Canada for at least 3 years during the 5 years right before the date you apply.


Language skills:

Canada has two official languages: English and French. If you’re 18 to 54 years of age on the day you sign your application, you must show that you can speak and listen at a specific level in one of these languages.

The ways we measure your language skills in English or French include:

- Reviewing the proof you send with your application.
- Noting how well you communicate when you talk to a citizenship official anytime during the process
assessing your language level during a hearing with a citizenship official, if necessary.

To become a citizen, you need to meet the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) Level 4 or higher. This means you can:

- Take part in short, everyday conversations about common topics.
- Understand simple instructions, questions and directions.
- Use basic grammar, including simple structures and tenses.
- Show you know enough common words and phrases to answer questions and express yourself.

If you’re 18 to 54 years of age on the day you sign your application, you need to take the citizenship test. You’ll need to answer questions about the rights and responsibilities of Canadians and Canada’s:

- History
- Geography
- Economy
- Government
- Laws
- Symbols

The test is:

- In English or French
- 30 minutes long
- 20 questions (pass mark: 15 correct answers)
- Multiple-choice and true or false questions.
- Based on the official citizenship study guide: Discover Canada
-Usually written, but may be oral.

Prohibitions

-If you committed a crime in or outside Canada you may not be eligible to become a Canadian citizen for a period of time.
- Time spent serving a term of imprisonment, on parole, or on probation doesn’t count as time you’ve lived in Canada.“



“Hint: clearly, security isn't paramount to you. That was my point.“

Note the cultural elitism implied by language requirements. Clearly, in your attempt to be ”clear”, you misunderstand American values. Stay within your political bubble.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2020, 09:21:40 AM by noel c. »

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #540 on: November 13, 2020, 09:26:40 AM »
Yes, I understand you don't want people to notice that my point flew well over your head.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #541 on: November 13, 2020, 09:33:44 AM »
Donald,

Your ”point“ is trivially mundane. Every public policy has practical limits.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #542 on: November 13, 2020, 09:38:52 AM »
Y-22,

“Voter fraud opportunities are
1) Register fake people to vote (states have ways to identify and weed these out).”


I have never heard of this.

“2) Register real people to vote and pretend to be them. (Hope they decide not to register and vote themselves)“

The average turnout in a general election, from total eligible voters, is ~60%. On a random basis your hypothetical seems to be a really good way for the perpetrator to get arrested provided the ballot is presented in person at a polling station. In a mail-in scenario, or unmonitored drop-box, there is little risk.

“3) Some kind of vote or ballot buying with mail in votes. (Hard to keep a large scale op secret)“

Risk is correlated to some degree with the target population, and disclosure of the purchaser’s identification. It is illegal to sell a ballot, as well as buy one, so there is some inherent protection. When compounded by buyer discretion in remaining anonymous to the seller, actual risk is near zero.

“4) Harvesting ballots and dumping all the ones from people who you think didn't vote for your guy.”

Harvesting that targets populations in need of political “education”, ie.; retirement homes, psychologically institutionalized patients, government housing projects, or just going door to door in low income housing tracts, would pretty much raise the typical 60% “eligible“ voter participation to upwards of 90%+, depending upon persistence of the farmer. Not surprisingly, assisted voting normally conforms to “educational” directives. Undue influence negates any need for hypothetical ballot sorting.

“1, 2 can be detected by taking a 1,000 randomly selected voters in the region you think fraud occurred in and go ask all of them if they voted.”

I doubt #1 occurs at all, and #2 is ineffectual in picking up the margins of victory in contemporary elections.

3 gets busted by some idiot posting on facebook that he just got $20 for voting for x. Or by an honest person calling the cops on someone trying to give them money for their vote.

Only if #3 provided identification along with the cash.

4 is detected by individual voters checking the status of their mail in ballots. When a lot of people say I gave my ballot to Dr. Evil and it never was turned in an investigation can ensue.

No, ballot harvesting does not work that way.
...

Would the Lefties on this site be better able to appreciate the harm done to America if, should he be installed as President, Joe Biden had the same welcome to office?

So of all the voter fraud instances I could think of your response is:
1) It doesn't happen.
2) Seems like a great way to get caught.
3) Its easy to get away with if you only buy votes from smart unscrupulous people.
4) People are praying on the elderly or people otherwise mentally unfit with ballot harvesting.

My point is that all of these are easy to detect even if the perpetrator remains anonymous. Show me police reports where a person called the cops for someone trying to buy their ballot. Show me reports from senior care staff or the families of residents of aggressive ballot harvesters preying on seniors. Even if Dr. Evil ballot harvester/buyer remains anonymous there is evidence that the crime/fraud was committed. You don't even have that. So unless you know of some way that 10,000+ ballots could be altered, eliminated, or otherwise tampered with give up on the message that this election is being stolen, Trump being the rightful winner, or vague "security waiver" concerns.

P.S. This is a internet forum for discussion, insulting people or discounting their opinions for being Canadian is a jerk move. We're here to discuss ideas. Country of origin doesn't really matter in that context.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #543 on: November 13, 2020, 09:51:17 AM »
Y-22,

“This is a internet forum for discussion, insulting people or discounting their opinions for being Canadian is a jerk move. We're here to discuss ideas. Country of origin doesn't really matter in that context.”

And certainly, any epithets that Donald has issued calling me a “liar”, or “chauvinist”, are at minimum an equally “jerk” move, correct?

I am entitled to refute both. That is not a “jerk” move, it is “discussion of ideas”.

“My point is that all of these are easy to detect even if the perpetrator remains anonymous. Show me police reports where a person called the cops for someone trying to buy their ballot. Show me reports from senior care staff or the families of residents of aggressive ballot harvesters preying on seniors.”

A single incident of all categories will be adequate, correct?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2020, 09:58:09 AM by noel c. »

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #544 on: November 13, 2020, 09:59:03 AM »
“My point is that all of these are easy to detect even if the perpetrator remains anonymous. Show me police reports where a person called the cops for someone trying to buy their ballot. Show me reports from senior care staff or the families of residents of aggressive ballot harvesters preying on seniors.”

A single incident of all categories will be adequate, correct?

Sure if you want to demonstrate 10 votes were tampered with. You're the one alleging fraud on the scale that could change the outcome of a state. I've already stated I'll accept without evidence that a 100 votes nationwide were somehow fraudulently cast. What I'm looking for is evidence of what Trump and you are claiming (since you think he's going to win now) which is evidence that anywhere near 10,000 votes in a single state could have been tampered with (only by Biden supporters). We've already seen two cases of Republicans in Pennsylvania being caught trying to double vote or vote for a dead relative. So clearly there are mechanisms in place to catch this type of fraud.

noel c.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #545 on: November 13, 2020, 10:03:15 AM »
Y-22,

Which is it, “Sure”, or “What I'm looking for is evidence of what Trump and you are claiming (since you think he's going to win now) which is evidence that anywhere near 10,000 votes in a single state could have been tampered with (only by Biden supporters).”?

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #546 on: November 13, 2020, 10:03:40 AM »
Sure if you want to demonstrate 10 votes were tampered with. You're the one alleging fraud on the scale that could change the outcome of a state. I've already stated I'll accept without evidence that a 100 votes nationwide were somehow fraudulently cast. What I'm looking for is evidence of what Trump and you are claiming (since you think he's going to win now) which is evidence that anywhere near 10,000 votes in a single state could have been tampered with (only by Biden supporters). We've already seen two cases of Republicans in Pennsylvania being caught trying to double vote or vote for a dead relative. So clearly there are mechanisms in place to catch this type of fraud.
The challenge is bigger than that, actually: Trump's campaign has to show the likelihood of that level of fraud in at least 3 separate states in order to reduce Biden's EC count below 270.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #547 on: November 13, 2020, 10:13:56 AM »
The full quote with emphasis added.
Quote
Sure, if you want to demonstrate 10 votes were tampered with. You're the one alleging fraud on the scale that could change the outcome of a state. I've already stated I'll accept without evidence that a 100 votes nationwide were somehow fraudulently cast. What I'm looking for is evidence of what Trump and you are claiming (since you think he's going to win now) which is evidence that anywhere near 10,000 votes in a single state could have been tampered with (only by Biden supporters). We've already seen two cases of Republicans in Pennsylvania being caught trying to double vote or vote for a dead relative. So clearly there are mechanisms in place to catch this type of fraud.
Y-22,

Which is it, “Sure”, or “What I'm looking for is evidence of what Trump and you are claiming (since you think he's going to win now) which is evidence that anywhere near 10,000 votes in a single state could have been tampered with (only by Biden supporters).”?

I'll listen and I'm interested in if you have evidence of any level of voter fraud. I've already posted that I don't like ballot harvesting. And I'll give you 100 fraudulent ballots without evidence.

But what Trump and you are claiming is voting fraud on a scale of 10,000+ votes per state. So if you have stories that 10 or 20 ballots are fraudulent don't be surprised if I'm not blown away and start calling Biden's election a sham on democracy.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #548 on: November 13, 2020, 11:19:52 AM »
Quote
“When states have close elections, many will recount ballots. All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary. This is an added benefit for security and resilience. This process allows for the identification and correction of any mistakes or errors. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.

Except for the one system which did change vote tallies(but not the votes themselves), but was quickly caught and corrected.

"Quickly caught and corrected" does not make a thing unhappen.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #549 on: November 13, 2020, 11:30:18 AM »
You realize that the only reason there's a lack of confidence in the vote is because the GOP has spent the last decade screaming about voter fraud without any evidence that it's a significant problem? Yet your proposal says nothing of getting the GOP to stop making voting a partisan issue.

You realize that is a direct and provable lie, don't you? There has been voter fraud and senior Democrats have been sent to prison for election after election. It seems to be a way of life for them.

Voting is fundamental to our Constitutionally-limited Republic - but vote fraud IS a partisan issue. No matter how innocent you claim to be, any Democrat apologist in this forum must admit it is the Democrats who have tried to steak this election.