Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Patricio Da Silva, May 27, 2020.
You don't read. All you offer are thought-terminating clichés
You won't read.
All you offer are thought-terminating cliches.
1200 cases in 20 years...and billions of votes cast
GOP voter suppression proof far outweighs any Democratic cheating.
The GOP that cheat this year are going to jail next year.
You made a claim without backup. I wanted a link to at least one reliable source describing "MASSIVE voter fraud."
Either you got that information from somewhere and can share a link to it, or you're pulling it out of your behind. Which is it?
demonstrably correct. You can no substantiate that claim. You can not provide evidence of that claim.
How very naive of you to say that, all politics is about profit and fraud is part of the game. We do not live in some fantastical imagined utopia where all participants have nothing but pure intentions.
Yeah, we can trade links until the cows come home but the issue is voter fraud and everyone differs on the size and scope. What's important is that the amount that is acceptable is zero and the small amount that you suggest would be multiplied exponentially by an untried national mail in system. For every transaction that requires security there is an effort to overcome that security. Until we have an iron clad, bullet proof system fraud will be an issue. The coming election for some it is highly emotionally charged such that they seek some magical guarantee of a win and in this case mail in voting seems to fit the bill. The sanctity of the vote and the rights of the voter will not be usurped by some hysterical, foolish scheme, it's as simple as that.
Voter fraud is a myth.
Did those who have been prosecuted for it over the years receive mythical punishments?
You're conflating some ideas. Go back to the OP, and you will see that this point is thorough addressed
You are not really thinking things through.
Voter fraud pertains to 1. Impersonating another voter. 2. Voting more than once. 3. Voting as an illegal alien.
Fraudsters, who commit crimes like welfare fraud, etc., are in it for the immediate cash benefit. There is no immediate profit in voter fraud.
You're thinking of the political benefit of installing one candidate over the other, but fraudsters who are after the political benefit of putting their favored candidate would not do, 1, 2, or 3 above, because, well, think about it. Say you are a company and you want Joe Bloe in office because his policies favor your company's bottom line. You wouldn't be considering 1, 2. or 3, because these are petty attempts at ballot tampering, and you can't do, 1, 2, or 3 on a scale that could affect the outcome of an election. No, you would put PAQ together and go that route, which is legal.
But , what would a party, say, the GOP do that could affect the outcome of a vote? They are not going to do 1, 2, or 3, because it can't be done on a scale that would affect the outcome of a vote, and if you did do it and get caught, you are going to jail and pay a fine.
What you would do is resort ot all sorts of dubious schemes, as HIllary did. Note that Hillary did not do 1, 2, or 3, she got the upper hand by getting Wasserman to give her a tactical advantage. She caught hell for this and Wasserman was forced to resign. During the convention, Wasserman was not allowed to give a speech ( Imagine the humilation of being party chief and now being allowed to speak at the convention! ) So, when we are talking 'profit' you are conflating immediate cash benefit with political gain, and they are two separate things.
So, what would party operatives do to affect the outcome of votes? Note that I'm not talking about small races, or primaries, I'm talking about the general election. Someone said "dems engaged in vote fraud'. Technically, no but Hillary did engage in some dubious tactics. So did Brian Kemp in ithe governor race. So, if you shout 'Hillary" I'll shout "Kemp". But I'm not talking about this, this thread is about what the GOP did to affect the outcome of the vote, and it wasn't 'fraud', it was voter suppression.
See, dems do not need to suppress, dems benefit with large turnouts. Repubs, however, tend ot lose with large turnouts. So, where is the incentive? The incentive for repubs is to shrink the electorate.
They do all the things revealed in this this film, and I covered all about this film in the OP. So, please review this thread and what it was posted for.
Now, if you had been paying attention ot this thread, you will see that I addressed this in the OP, the salient premise established was thus:
1. Voter fraud does not occur in large enough numbers to affect presidential elections, and, as such, Voter ID laws are a fix in search of a problem.
2 Republican voter suppression methods do in fact result in more than enough votes suppressed to affect outcomes far more than fraud occurs
This thread is all about #2, above. Go back to the OP and review it, please.
Voter fraud is 1, 2, and 3, above, and the studies linked to in the OP refute this. But, there are dubious methods that dems DABBLED in , HIllary v Sanders, Repubs DABBLED in , Kemp V Abrams, and the Heritage foundation studied this and over a 20 year period they found 1285 instances of fraud, which goes back to the 'DABBLED in' aforementioned.
But what the Heritage Foundation didn't mention was what but Repubs did in a manner many times greater than these, are voter suppression as covered in the OP, so, again, please review the OP.
But you cannot prove that. They can guess. They can estimate, but without firm numbers which are impossible to obtain, that is all they can do.
I know what it's about and this is getting tiresome and I'm done here.
That's a lawyerly trick, but we are not in a court of law, we are in the court of public opinion, where we can rely, very easily, for our opinions, on a plethora of circumstance, and not to mention, documentation and evidence.
Greg Palast, investigative reporter for The Gaurdian, Rolling Stone, uncovered that Kris Kobach's "Interstate Crosscheck" purged far more voters from the voter registration rolls in the swing states than Trump's margin of victory. Watch the film "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy", it's free on Amazon Prime. He was able to obtain the exact number because he acquired the purged list.
And that's just one thing. Then watch this film
for all the other crap that republicans have been doing in the elections.
No "lawyer" trick. If they were positive of such a thing, then they should be able to come up with some exact numbers. Otherwise it is just one opinion against the other opinion which means practically nothing.
Read again my reply, the section regarding Palast.
Read again all my comments. If they can't come up with fairly exact numbers, they are only guessing.
So let's understand that flawed concept shall we?
You would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of legal voters to prevent ONE fraudulent voter?
1200 cases over 20 years out of billions of votes cast
And now there are over 1,000 actual criminal convictions.
The liberal judge in Philly is the latest to be added to the growing list of those convicted.
The Senate election in New Hampshire in 2016 was determined by votes that were cast by non-New Hampshire citizens.
People who claimed that they were moving to the state and then never showed up as agreed upon.
So, New Hampshire just changed their voting law to make sure that it doesn't happen again..
Nothing in the database regarding an individual's party affiliation?
The fact that the Democrats are making this point is because their internal polling shows hella people think there is rampant voter fraud.
It is so important to them, voter fraud is the stake they sacrificed Twitter on to push the narrative
Democrat election rigging & voter fraud: MASSIVE and pervasive
To deny this is to deny reality.
Massive backup on the thread, and Google - check it out. You need a link to this thread?
Read the thread. You can either read or you can't, and you responded to my post, so... Which is it?
Read the thread and/or Google. <- See here. <- And here.
Notice you couldn’t provide any evidence to support the moronic claim you made? I did. And so did everyone else reading.
Separate names with a comma.