Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Alan Klein]

Quote from: James Clark on Today at 09:37:07 am
Do you think voter fraud was why Donald Trump lost?

Further research shows a strong opinion polarization on this subject.

Well, he lost in four swing states.  SO the odds they were all phoney are too high.  If he only lost one state, then I'd probably have a different opinion.  The Dems got lucky with COvid because a lot of people who would not have voted otherwise voted because of mail-in votes. 

[dreed]

Well, he lost in four swing states.  SO the odds they were all phoney are too high.  If he only lost one state, then I'd probably have a different opinion.  The Dems got lucky with COvid because a lot of people who would not have voted otherwise voted because of mail-in votes.

And there you have it ladies and gentlemen, Mr Alan Klein is in favour of suppressing voters for the Democrat party.

[Alan Klein]

And there you have it ladies and gentlemen, Mr Alan Klein is in favour of suppressing voters for the Democrat party.

I'm not opposed to LEGAL mail-in votes. That's how I voted.  That's how Trump voted. But the fact is many states mailed out ballots without them being requested.  So ballots were sent to dead people and people who moved and should not have been on the voting lists.  Mail-in ballots are OK if requested by the voter. 

[dreed]

Mail-in ballots are OK if requested by the voter.

Again, Mr Alan Klein expresses his favour of supressing the ability of eligible voters from being able to vote.

[Chris Kern]

Speaking of fraud ...

How Trump Steered Supporters Into Unwitting Donations

Online donors were guided into weekly recurring contributions. Demands for refunds spiked. Complaints to banks and credit card companies soared. But the money helped keep Donald Trump’s struggling campaign afloat.

As P.T. Barnum is reputed to have said, "there's a Trump supporter born every minute."

[JoeKitchen]

Again, Mr Alan Klein expresses his favour of supressing the ability of eligible voters from being able to vote.

No he is not, and this does not suppress people from voting.  If they did not request a mail in ballot, they can always go to their local polling place the day of, which is what I did.  FYI, I was in line for about 30 seconds this last time around even though it was the largest turn out in USA history. 

Stop spreading lies.  Personally, I am in agreement with Alan. 

There are too many errors in voter rolls just to send out ballots without one being requested.  I know of no one that moves and thinks, "I better update my voter address with the State's voter roll."  That just does not happen.  Mail in ballots should only be sent out if requested so the State knows it has an accurate address, otherwise many ballots will go to wrong addresses, which did happen in 2020. 

[digitaldog]

There are too many errors in voter rolls just to send out ballots without one being requested. 

How many errors, explicitly where that result in what? 

[Robert Roaldi]

Well, he lost in four swing states.  SO the odds they were all phoney are too high.  If he only lost one state, then I'd probably have a different opinion.  The Dems got lucky with COvid because a lot of people who would not have voted otherwise voted because of mail-in votes.

Why do you only ever worry about voter fraud in areas where Trump/Repubs lost? If you truly cared about election fraud, shouldn't you also be examining fraud in areas where Trump/Repubs won?

How do we know the 2016 election wasn't rigged?

I'll give you an 'A' on tenacity the way you're trying to keep the "rigged election" fake meme going.

[Alan Klein]

Why do you only ever worry about voter fraud in areas where Trump/Repubs lost? If you truly cared about election fraud, shouldn't you also be examining fraud in areas where Trump/Repubs won?

How do we know the 2016 election wasn't rigged?

I'll give you an 'A' on tenacity the way you're trying to keep the "rigged election" fake meme going.

Fraud should be investigated everywhere. First off, election law affects more elections unrelated to the presidents such as senator, congressman, state senator, assemblyman, mayor, governor, local sheriffs and judges, fire commissioners, etc.  It's not mainly about Presidential elections.  More fraud occurs for lower-level political offices because fewer votes are required to win.

The reason swing states are more important is because it is there that a small number of votes can flip a presidential winner.  In a state like NY or California, that's so heavily Democrat, or a Republican state like Wyoming, it's almost impossible to switch a presidential vote even with fraud.  But in states like PA, WI, etc, that could happen because of the close votes.  Similarly, in Georgia, the senate runoffs were very close. 

I've posted a lot of examples of fraud and the page where you can find them.  Haven't you read any of them to see how often election fraud occurs?  Of course, Republicans commit election fraud as well, although it seems Democrats seem to do it more often.  But for both republicans and democrats who do this, it seems most of the fraud centers on non-presidential elections although some convictions seemed like they could be for presidential elections as well.

The 2016 election was very close.  But there were only charges of Russian collusion which were proved untrue.  The Russians did use social media to support Trump.  But the FBI and Mueller investigated and they found no actual interference with the actual voting or voting machines.  Keep in mind these laws protect Democrats and Republicans against fraud.  It's why all states have measures to protect the process.  Georgis is no worse or better than most other states. This is just about the Democrats looking for an excuse to commit fraud.  They know that voting by mail is the perfect way to get phony votes in.  They go around and help people select who to vote for and fill out the ballots.  It's a game. 

[Manoli]

Stop spreading lies.  Personally, I am in agreement with Alan. 

I think both you and Alan der Kleine would benefit from understanding the difference between lying, misrepresentation and fraud.

[Manoli]

... and this does not suppress people from voting.

Ensuring only eligible citizens vote does not, per se, suppress people from voting. But when a Republican lawyer makes representations to the Supreme Court (Amy Coney Barrett) that striking restrictive laws would “put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats”, we're no longer discussing voter eligibility; it's voter suppression pure and simple.

I posted a bullet list of issues in an earlier post where only the brain dead wouldn't interpret the 'gotchas' as thinly disguised attempts at voter suppression.

Of course the one 'gotcha' that I haven't yet seen or heard discussed is how difficult the State will make it for the more 'disadvantaged' to get an ID and whether those requirements in themselves will fundamentally serve to disenfranchise them.

So, yes, you and Kleine can holler all you want but in terms of the larger picture, for the time being , it's a red herring.

Edit:
In the past eight presidential elections, Republicans have won the popular vote once. It is not hard to conclude that they have given up competing for it, and are instead directing their energy toward trying to game the system, and having lost every single one of over 360 law suits inspired by Trump's delusional 'they stole the Election' mantra', I guess you can take it as a 'given' that they'll try anything out of desperation.

[TechTalk]

It's not the in-person voting at the ballot box that is the biggest fraud.  It's the harvesting of mail-in and absentee ballots that can be fraudulently submitted in huge quantities that are the problem. 

Collection of an absentee/mail-in ballot from a voter for delivery, or assigning someone to deliver it, doesn't make the voter, their vote, or their ballot fraudulent.

There are laws in some states that limit the number that can be collected by one individual or that restrict who can deliver a ballot for you. Some states do not. The laws are all over the map, literally, from one state to another. Here's a state-by-state list of the laws that regulate collection and delivery.

Who Can Collect and Return an Absentee Ballot Other Than the Voter - National Conference of State Legislatures

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-10-who-can-collect-and-return-an-absentee-ballot-other-than-the-voter

The ballot collection case in New Jersey, that you've highlighted too many times to remember, in order to demonstrate FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD! Would be perfectly legal in other states. Yes, it's true... not legal in New Jersey to collect more than three ballots and you can't be a candidate either. In another state, not a problem.

[Alan Klein]

Ensuring only eligible citizens vote does not, per se, suppress people from voting. But when a Republican lawyer makes representations to the Supreme Court (Amy Coney Barrett) that striking restrictive laws would “put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats”, we're no longer discussing voter eligibility; it's voter suppression pure and simple.

I posted a bullet list of issues in an earlier post where only the brain dead wouldn't interpret the 'gotchas' as thinly disguised attempts at voter suppression.

Of course the one 'gotcha' that I haven't yet seen or heard discussed is how difficult the State will make it for the more 'disadvantaged' to get an ID and whether those requirements in themselves will fundamentally serve to disenfranchise them.

So, yes, you and Kleine can holler all you want but in terms of the larger picture, for the time being , it's a red herring.

Edit:
In the past eight presidential elections, Republicans have won the popular vote once. It is not hard to conclude that they have given up competing for it, and are instead directing their energy toward trying to game the system, and having lost every single one of over 360 law suits inspired by Trump's delusional 'they stole the Election' mantra', I guess you can take it as a 'given' that they'll try anything out of desperation.

This is what you posted about the various new rules.  Not much different than New York State where we have a larger population of minority voters and way more Democrats.  Frankly, the fight over Georgia isn't about Georgia.  It's about passing HR1, the House of Representatives bill to remove all requirements of IDs across the country in all 50 states.  The fight about Georgia is setting the groundwork to sell HR1 and come up with an excuse why ID shouldn't be required.  Most Americans want some form of ID. 

> Is Georgia’s bill, really a common-sense measure to make elections more secure, or racist voter suppression?

• It retains absentee voting, but voters will have to present state-issued ID and have less time than last year to request and return their ballots.
• They will have fewer drop-boxes than last year, but before the pandemic they had none at all.
• On balance, most voters in Georgia will probably have increased access to early voting, of which Georgia offers more than New York or Massachusetts.
• Of the bill’s ban on anyone other than poll workers giving water to voters, the ban only applies within 150 feet of a polling place or 25 feet of a voter, and allows poll workers to set up “an unattended receptacle” from which thirsty voters can serve themselves.

[Alan Klein]

Collection of an absentee/mail-in ballot from a voter for delivery, or assigning someone to deliver it, doesn't make the voter, their vote, or their ballot fraudulent.

There are laws in some states that limit the number that can be collected by one individual or that restrict who can deliver a ballot for you. Some states do not. The laws are all over the map, literally, from one state to another. Here's a state-by-state list of the laws that regulate collection and delivery.

Who Can Collect and Return an Absentee Ballot Other Than the Voter - National Conference of State Legislatures

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-10-who-can-collect-and-return-an-absentee-ballot-other-than-the-voter

The ballot collection case in New Jersey, that you've highlighted too many times to remember, in order to demonstrate FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD! Would be perfectly legal in other states. Yes, it's true... not legal in New Jersey to collect more than three ballots and you can't be a candidate either. In another state, not a problem.

If some states are foolish enough to not have protection against ballot fraud, that's their business and stupidity, Why shouldn't Georgia and other states?  Even ultra-liberal and Democratic state of New Jersey has these laws.  Some states have capital executions for murder.  Other states don't have capital executions, only life imprisonment.  Welcome to the Federal Republic of the US.  We have 50 sovereign states.

[Manoli]

This is what you posted about the various new rules. 

Yes, I did and felt it was a reasonably accurate synopsis of the issues being debated - both pros and cons. But when you say  " The fight about Georgia is setting the groundwork to sell HR1 and come up with an excuse why ID shouldn't be required "

I'd reply that the fight is about ensuring fair elections AND ensuring that ALL those with a legitimate right to vote are facilitated to so do. You've finished an election notable for its mendacity and propaganda on the side of the Trump fanatics, you've repeated the 'steal' mantra ad nauseam, but the fact remains that whatever fraud there was or was not, it proved insignificant to the final outcome.

It's nothing but a diversion - as I said above, a red herring.

[PeterAit]

I'm not opposed to LEGAL mail-in votes. That's how I voted.  That's how Trump voted. But the fact is many states mailed out ballots without them being requested.  So ballots were sent to dead people and people who moved and should not have been on the voting lists.  Mail-in ballots are OK if requested by the voter.

Straw man. Mail-in ballots are not just counted without examination. The signature is checked against the sig on record. The validity of the voter is checked against registration rolls and if the voter is not legitimately registered the ballot is disallowed. If the voter has also voted in person or mailed in 2 ballots it is caught and the ballot is disallowed.

And the registration rolls are another place where the GOP is trying to suppress votes, by ordering purges of the rolls that often snare, inaccurately, people for false or spurious reasons. And, golly gee, these purges tend to falsely catch more Dem voters. So these legitimate voters show up at the polls and are told they cannot vote. They have not been notified or given a chance to appeal. Democracy? I think not.

[TechTalk]

If some states are foolish enough to not have protection against ballot fraud, that's their business and stupidity

I pointed out two things. (1) Collection of an absentee/mail-in ballot from a voter for delivery, or assigning someone to deliver it, doesn't make the voter, their vote, or their ballot fraudulent. (2) What you keep calling "ballot fraud" is perfectly legal in many states.

A voter that has legally voted and has their ballot invalidated, due to someone else failing to stay within the collection limits of that particular state, has had a fraud perpetrated against themselves, their vote, and their ballot. Perhaps the "foolish" and "stupid" states believed protecting voters from having their legal votes invalidated by the actions of someone else a worthy consideration in constructing their laws.

Welcome to the Federal Republic of the US.

Welcome to the United States of America. That's the country where I was born and raised — even if it doesn't always live up to the United in its name.

[Alan Klein]

Straw man. Mail-in ballots are not just counted without examination. The signature is checked against the sig on record. The validity of the voter is checked against registration rolls and if the voter is not legitimately registered the ballot is disallowed. If the voter has also voted in person or mailed in 2 ballots it is caught and the ballot is disallowed.

And the registration rolls are another place where the GOP is trying to suppress votes, by ordering purges of the rolls that often snare, inaccurately, people for false or spurious reasons. And, golly gee, these purges tend to falsely catch more Dem voters. So these legitimate voters show up at the polls and are told they cannot vote. They have not been notified or given a chance to appeal. Democracy? I think not.

Apparently, Peter, you missed my earlier post #9587 showing a couple of ballot fraud convictions in Pennsylvania.  I'll repeat them below for your convenience.  I don't understand your second complaint.  There are many people who have died or moved who should be removed (purged) from the voter rolls where they moved from as they can no longer vote in those election districts.  This prevents mail-in ballots from being sent out to people, dead or alive,  who should not get them. 

Example #1 "Austin Murphy

Former Congressman Austin Murphy was convicted on one charge of absentee ballot fraud. Murphy forged ballots for senior citizens living in a nursing home, claiming merely to be assisting them in exercising their voting rights. He was sentenced to six months of probation and ordered to perform 50 hours of community service."

Example #2 1993 Philadelphia Special Election

A 1993 special Pennsylvania state senate election was overturned by a federal district court judge due to absentee ballot fraud. This election was important as the senate was evenly divided and the winner would determine which party controlled the senate. Campaign workers for Democratic candidate William Stimson engaged in a massive absentee ballot scheme involving nearly 600 tainted ballots. After a surprising and extraordinary surge in absentee ballots seemed to result in a victory for Stinson, an investigation was undertaken.  Stinson was indicted for his role in the scheme but was not convicted.  Two campaign workers, Ramon Pratt and Barbara Landers, were convicted of misdemeanor offenses.

 

In a related civil suit, however, a federal district court judge determined that Stinson and others engaged in a scheme to steal the election, and Stinson was removed from office.  The scheme primarily targeted Latino and black voters by using intimidation, and deception in order to fraudulently obtain and process absentee ballots in violation of state law. Two Democratic city commissioners, Margaret Tartaglione and Alexander Talmadge, Jr., and an elections supervisor, Dennis Kelly, were also found to have been complicit in allowing the fraud to occur.
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?combine=&state=PA&year=&case_type=All&fraud_type=All&page=1

[TechTalk]

Haven't you figured out that in American media, the race of the felon is often left out of the news report, or downplayed when a black is the perpetrator.  In this case, the perpetrator wasn't only black, but he identified with the Nation of Islam, Farrakhan's hateful anti-Jewish and anti-White black Muslim group.

Whites aren't playing the race card.

[TechTalk]

You must know better than this.

Slander someone with false allegations of racist statements; call them a coward; then act like you're the victim. How do you justify that to yourself?

That's exactly what you're doing when you call Georgians racist for wanting more secure voting to prevent election fraud... Why are you calling them Jim Crow laws?  You're calling them racist.

I'm speaking only for myself and not on Mr. Camp's behalf; but, I can say with complete confidence that NOTHING even remotely resembling the accusations above have been stated or implied by anything that I have written or anything seen in Mr. Camp's posts.

Where do you find anything resembling calling "Georgians racist" or "calling them Jim Crow laws"? You don't. It's flat out fiction created from your imagination.

Your habit of FALSE accusations aimed at participants posting here is beyond the pale and should be an embarrassment to you. It's very unfortunate that they are not of any particular concern to you. It's rather sad, actually.

* To John Camp: Please accept my apology in advance if I have taken excessive liberty by including your name in this reply. I did so only because we were both quoted by Alan. I'll be happy to remove any mention of your name if you would prefer it.