Massive Voter Fraud Overnight

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by stratego, Nov 4, 2020.

  1. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unlikely. But the courts cannot change objective reality.
    The election observers, from both parties, were not allowed to closely observe the count in key counting centers - for the first time.

     
    quiller likes this.
  2. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Objective reality doesn't comport with your perception of reality.

    This is not a "first time" issue because Pennsylvania election code has never afforded the right to "closely observe" - only the right to be present. So, while in non-Covid days watchers may, or may not, have been closer, there's no right to be close.

    § 3146.8
    (b) Watchers shall be permitted to be present when the envelopes containing official absentee ballots are
    opened and when such ballots are counted and recorded.

    Furthermore, the one witness presented by Republicans in this case describes in great detail how they could in fact see all parts of the process. He wanted to be closer so that he could actually read the ballots - including voters' names and how they voted - in order to validate each ballot. In other words, to act in the capacity of a canvasser, not a watcher.

    As a watcher, this again is not permitted. Nor indeed is there any right to challenge specific ballots.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2020
    peacelate likes this.
  3. quiller

    quiller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,579
    Likes Received:
    2,989
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We should stop torturing these libs with videos showing them what their lying eyes refuse to see. Cognitive dissonance is bound to set in and then they'll have to lie down until it passes.
     
    James California likes this.
  4. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,246
    Likes Received:
    16,930
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'll file that one in the 'scant evidence' file as you are comparing an estimate to a recorded statistical fact, and on that scant evidence, which is NOT evidence, you are willing to levy a charge of 'democrats conducting a nationwide conspiracy, coordinated across all counties and states to thwart the will of the people?

    Because, that is what you are alleging.

    Let's take a look at what it would take for any party to commit massive voter fraud on a scale to impact the outcome of an election.

    That's the beauty of the American electoral system, it's controlled by states, and within each state, there isn't necessarily a conformity of systems across all counties.

    It's decentralized, no president or party could ever rig the system that way.

    But, what parties could do, as republicans have proven, by doing it, is gerrymander districts, limit the number of polling places where there opponents live, put more restrictions on access, unjustly conduct purges of voter registration rolls. Republicans have been doing these things, and in close elections, they have been successful. But that is they only way anyone can rig an election, by affecting, externally, the vote. Internally, what repubs are accusing, is virtually impossible.

    They would have to have conducted a massive conspiracy, organized, coordinated with operatives in every election office, literally thousands of them, in every state cooking the books.

    How in holy hell could they get away with it let alone actually do it? This is a decentralized process, what you are suggesting is impossible. Each election office has dem and repub overseers, NEVER were they excluded, they are picked from applicants from a process, from those who volunteer in their sense of civic duty, and many are volunteers.

    Team Trump were shouting "we were denied access". That's a bogus argument, because who do they think they are? None of the offices are going to let any tom dick and harry into the offices, it would cause chaos, and they are not special, to be allowed into the offices, well, there is a process for it, and for most of them, it's dems and repubs volunteering to help process ballots, and ALL of them had repub and dem overseers. Yeah, they denied team trump access, JUST AS THEY DENIED EVERYONE who did not comply with the process for volunteering.

    It's just a lie, the argument they are making. In fact, all of their arguments are frivolous, and in every suit thus far they have brought forth, the judge tossed the suit out of court. okay, now they are saying 'we won' with the scotus suit for 'segregating votes in PA that came in late". No, all of the counties were already doing that, and all that happened was that Team Trump wasn't satisfied with the PA Secy Of State's directive to the counties to segregate, they wanted SCOTUS to tell them, so Alito said, okay, 'segregate'. they are going to settle the issue later. But,even if Trump wins that one, the count in PA does not include those ballots, anyway. It won't change the outcome of the election, I doubt they will even take up the case, because of that fact.

    When you scrutinize just what it is you are alluding to, the argument just falls apart, completely, totally, utterly. A number of studies have been done, and they reveal there just isn't any evidence of massive voter fraud that could affect the outcome of a national election. Google the Brennan Center election fraud studies.

    All this talk about 'fraud', what, there never has been much talk about it in any election I've been a part of, and I cast my first vote in the 70s.

    It's only been a thing during this election. why is that? I'll tell you why, it's because Trump is trying to undermine the election, and he's been trying to do that since he took office.

    All elections have anomalies, but they are inconsequential to the overall count. Sure, there are mishaps here and there, hell, it happens in every election. All Trump is doing is trying to make anomalies a thing, he's barking up a storm of every little damn thing that happens, in order to undermine the integrity of American Democracy, and a number of republican senators are getting peeved. No president in history has done this, it's anti-American, if you ask me.

    Liken it to a big animal, and all big animals have warts. But an animal's warts do not shape nor define the animal.
    In fact, you find me an a big election without anomalies, and you'll have an anomaly, right there.

    The right that are making this argument really need to get a grip on reality, and learn something about what the hell they are talking about.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2020
  5. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,327
    Likes Received:
    38,997
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And that is one of the problems. I found it amusing that one official tried to excuse the barriers and blocking the view saying the workers didn't want to be on camera and felt uncomfortable then with the same breath state the there are cameras throughout the room streaming everything online. Hey election workers it is REQUIRED that what you are doing be totally transparent and observable stop you whining or don't apply to do it.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  6. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,327
    Likes Received:
    38,997
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And with the affidavit signed by an election worker claiming higher officials were back dating ballots so they could be counted will you be saying great news and looking forward to the trial hearing? Will you retract your claim there was no fraud or wrong doing?
     
  7. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,327
    Likes Received:
    38,997
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    False it could be done by MULTIPLE people/groups operating totally independently but they all add up to a fraudulent result. And every fraudulent or illegal vote, as it was submitted after the date set by the state legislature, disfranchises a legal properly submitted vote. I thought every legal vote was supposed to count?
     
  8. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL! IOW, you think PA election officials have the legal authority to prevent ballot observers from verifying the signature or anything else. Dream on. ;-)
     
  9. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, the fix was in.
     
  10. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Correct, and no need for LOLs - though perhaps that's a consequence of this being news to you.

    I cited the statute enumerating the (limited) extent of poll watching activity - to be present as ballots are opened, counted and reported. Until such time as Pennsylvania chooses to enact legislation affording broader and specific rights, that's it. And in the absence of such, PA officials do indeed have the authority to prevent any activities outwith those enumerated in law.
     
  11. fullmetaljack

    fullmetaljack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2017
    Messages:
    7,917
    Likes Received:
    6,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And when the "evidence" gets laughed out of court will you retract your unsupported claim of fraud or wrong doing and affirm the accuracy and honesty of this election ?
    And call for the prosecution of the election worker for perjury ?
     
  12. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No statute can be interpreted to, under the color of law, violate the fundamental human rights of the American people. The ballot observers are there to insure the integrity of the election not just to be "present" in a ballot counting center.

    Election rigging is not legal anywhere in America.
     
  13. Swensson

    Swensson Devil's advocate

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So if it ends up inconclusive, why is that what you posted when asked for evidence? What is the point of evidence other than being the thing that makes you convinced (and therefore, without which you would not be convinced)? If every time I address an article from you, you move the argument to a completely different article, then you're not swayed by good arguments as much as lots of bad arguments.

    https://www.factcheck.org/2020/11/viral-image-shows-outdated-claims-about-detroit-voter-rolls/
    https://www.politifact.com/factchec...oters-detroits-voter-rolls-including-person-/

    Seems to me this had been resolved, and that the resolution was acknowledged by the nonpartisan group who filed it, months before the 2020 election.

    Detroit's comment was that the numbers were exaggerated, and although either news source provide enough information for us readers to determine for ourselves, we can look at the example of someone's birth mislabelled as 1823 (instead of the correct 1982) may be sloppy, but didn't actually add or subtract anyone from the record.

    I'm not an expert in voter records, but in my understanding, the registered voter record is not designed to be, nor does it pretend to be, a record that reflects who among the voters have died. Votes from dead people (in practice, most commonly people who have died between casting their ballot and their vote being counted) are excluded based on death records, not from the registered voter record. Dead people remaining registered is a natural part of how it is designed to work, and not an indication that votes from dead people arrive or are counted. To my understanding, the initial complaint does not suggest that the issue is linked to vote fraud.

    Of course, I don't know if you have follow ups to these, and my point isn't that these points are why you're wrong, my point is that these are things that you would have to address before I would even consider you to have provided any relevant evidence.
     
  14. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,327
    Likes Received:
    38,997
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why would it get "laughed out of court"?
     
  15. fullmetaljack

    fullmetaljack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2017
    Messages:
    7,917
    Likes Received:
    6,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Answer the question.
     
  16. kiwimac

    kiwimac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,360
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Because it's bullshit.
     
  17. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    78,717
    Likes Received:
    19,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Again. A claim you make. No proof.
    I see no reason to read any more posts of yours.
     
  18. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Poll watching is not a "fundamental human right". It's not even a right at all. States, on the other hand, do have the right, per the Constitution, to regulate every aspect of their elections, and the ability to observe polls is granted by States in their election codes which also delineate what observers can and cannot do.

    That's why there are often significant variations from state to state as to the appointment, number, permitted activities, etc. of observers. West Virginia, for example, is generous in terms of who can observe canvassing (i.e. counting room processes) but does not allow any poll watchers in polling places.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2020
  19. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Proof:



    See the barriers? Next question: Do count observers matter?
     
  20. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Free and fair election are a fundamental human right. In America that right is protected by law.
    The DP party bosses have rigged this election. Election rigging is illegal.
    They should have been called to account when they rigged their own party primaries and nomination process.
     
  21. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    These allegations are utterly spurious. Two things about Trump: one, he hates to be seen as a loser and two, he always - always - has a ready-made excuse, just in case, planting the seed well ahead of time in his supporters' minds. In this case, fraud. That's why he's been banging on about it for months before the election. And, in doing so, has sought to undermine confidence in "free and fair elections" for no other reason than to protect his fragile ego, which is utterly inexcusable in anyone, let alone the President of the US.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2020
  22. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More empty partisan blather. Everyone should know by now that the DP will even rig its own primaries and nomination process.
    DP party bosses have always very anti-democratic.

    "I watched the debate in Iowa here two weeks ago -- the all white debate -- and the fact that the Democratic, the DNC will not allow Cory Booker on that stage, will not allow Julian Castro on that stage, but they are going to allow Mike Bloomberg on the stage?" Moore roared. "Because he has a billion f*cking dollars!""
    GRABIEN NEWS, MICHAEL MOORE: DNC LETTING BLOOMBERG ON THE STAGE BECAUSE ‘HE HAS A BILLION F*CKING DOLLARS’, By Tom Elliott, Jan 31, 2020.
    https://news.grabien.com/story-michael-moore-dnc-letting-bloomberg-stage-because-he-has-bil

    Time to get woke.
     
  23. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,268
    Likes Received:
    25,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Blind partisans have to cover their eyes. You just have to raise the face mask up a couple of inches. :)



    Those who ban election observers are rigging elections.
     
  24. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Everybody should know..." simply means you think everyone should know.

    A link to an opinion of Michael Moore is hardly definitive proof, of anything.
     
  25. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,327
    Likes Received:
    38,997
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That really the best you got? What is bs about sworn affidavits?
     

Share This Page