Cases of Election Fraud

[commando]

Just now, Archy1221 said:

The dissenters are correct that the arrangements for collecting ballots at these events did not comply with governing law. By statute, absentee ballots must be submitted to state election officials, not volunteer “poll-watchers” who are not agents of the state. Laches is not a convincing rationale for turning a blind eye to this violation of election law — and by invoking it, the majority hurts the cause of preventing a recurrence.
 

 

isn't that a dissenting opinion?   

[Redux]

2 hours ago, funhusker said:

because an angry mob stormed the building and were taking unauthorized pictures of election workers and information about registered voters...

 

Lol k

[Enhance]

26 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

The dissenters are correct that the arrangements for collecting ballots at these events did not comply with governing law. By statute, absentee ballots must be submitted to state election officials, not volunteer “poll-watchers” who are not agents of the state. Laches is not a convincing rationale for turning a blind eye to this violation of election law — and by invoking it, the majority hurts the cause of preventing a recurrence.

My understanding of the Wisconsin situation is that there were concerns about the lawfullness of those park drop offs, but that lawmakers are hesitant to toss ballots out when voters were following the rules told to them by election officials. And, at the end of the day, the case was thrown out... so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .

 

Trump's legal team also submarined their cause by focusing on the two counties he lost, despite the fact that the issues they claimed were fraud would've happened all over the state. So why not look into the other counties? Further, the same issues Trump's team were trying to argue were fraudulent in 2020 were ALSO in place and being exercised when he won in 2016. So, it wasn't a problem then, but it is now because he lost?

 

Ultimately, there has not been near the evidence or facts presented by Trump's team to prove fraud at the levels that would've over-turned the election. Could some practices be improved? Absolutely. But we're making mountains of molehills.

[Archy1221]

17 minutes ago, Enhance said:

My understanding of the Wisconsin situation is that there were concerns about the lawfullness of those park drop offs, but that lawmakers are hesitant to toss ballots out when voters were following the rules told to them by election officials. And, at the end of the day, the case was thrown out... so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .

 

Trump's legal team also submarined their cause by focusing on the two counties he lost, despite the fact that the issues they claimed were fraud would've happened all over the state. So why not look into the other counties? Further, the same issues Trump's team were trying to argue were fraudulent in 2020 were ALSO in place and being exercised when he won in 2016. So, it wasn't a problem then, but it is now because he lost?

 

Ultimately, there has not been near the evidence or facts presented by Trump's team to prove fraud at the levels that would've over-turned the election. Could some practices be improved? Absolutely. But we're making mountains of molehills.

well said.  Two things:

 

I still don’t understand though why it’s ok for election officials to tell voters do do something that is against state statute and everyone says oh well move along. Nothing we can do.  What’s the point of having a statute if it isn’t enforced? 

 

Your last paragraph is one of Andrews points.    The other point he makes is that these issues need to be buttoned up for future elections in the event the outcomes were closer and it does matter.  
 

 

[Enhance]

14 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

I still don’t understand though why it’s ok for election officials to tell voters do do something that is against state statute and everyone says oh well move along. Nothing we can do.  What’s the point of having a statute if it isn’t enforced? 

I think that's a fair question that boils down to disenfranchisement and scale. I expect voters to follow the rules provided to them, but if they are told the wrong information, I hold that against election officials whose job it is to get this stuff right. Telling a legal voter that their vote no longer counts because they did something they were told to do is pretty unfair, and it has the potential to disenfranchise voters from the democratic process. I think it's pretty important we not do that kind of stuff.

 

And then scale is a second big piece. If we're talking about an issue with evidence to suggest a change in an election outcome, then that should be investigated. In this Wisconsin case, I don't think there was evidence to support that as a possible outcome.

 

But yes, I absolutely agree in a need to button up these issues. I just hope people can keep the context at the front of their minds. I'm disappointed in the reactions from conservatives I know who are trying to make the fraud claims into an issue much larger than currently available evidence suggest it is, just as I was disappointed in liberals who tried to claim the similar things in 2018. We have too many people willing to believe just about anything because it is an affront to something they wanted.

[Nebfanatic]

1 hour ago, Redux said:

 

Lol k

How about you try reading. Or are you just going to continue blindly listen to the pathological liar who has been proven false on this and many other claims? 

14 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

You must get tired of stretching and reaching so far for ANYTHING that might prove Donald Trump's words or any right wing media sources stories are true.  Aren't you tired of trying to keep this narrative up?

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/05/media/detroit-windows-covered-ballots-vote-center/index.html

 

 

 

[Archy1221]

57 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I hold that against election officials whose job it is to get this stuff right. Telling a legal voter that their vote no longer counts because they did something they were told to do is pretty unfair, and it has the potential to disenfranchise voters from the democratic process. I think it's pretty important we not do that kind of stuff.

While I understand your point and pretty much agree, doesn’t it potentially disenfranchise voters who legally cast ballots for the other side when illegally cast ballots are counted and those ballots fall within the win margin?  
 

it didn’t happen this year, but it could at some point.  Shouldn’t those election officials be held to account so it never happens again?  Right now, everyone is just saying oh well, no harm no foul so it’s bound to continue happening because of the silent approval. 

[Enhance]

17 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

While I understand your point and pretty much agree, doesn’t it potentially disenfranchise voters who legally cast ballots for the other side when illegally cast ballots are counted and those ballots fall within the win margin?  

I think my soft answer is yes, but then I look back to scale or win margin. I don't think most people have a reason to feel disenfranchised right now because of how the election panned out. I think the ones that do feel passionately disenfranchised are, for the most part, making mountains out of mole hills.

 

Quote

it didn’t happen this year, but it could at some point.  

Shouldn’t those election officials be held to account so it never happens again?  Right now, everyone is just saying oh well, no harm no foul so it’s bound to continue happening because of the silent approval.

yes, they should be held to account. And I would hope these counties/state do everything in their power to investigate and fix these issues in order to remove further opportunities of doubt.

[funhusker]

2 hours ago, Redux said:

 

Lol k

 

 

Not sure what you're laughing at.

 

This was being covered live as it was happening.  

 

I mean, what else would you call this? 

 

 

Edit: I guess if you want to get hung up on the words "angry mob" or "stormed the building" that's your choice.  But this video clearly shows a group of people gathering by the windows with phone cameras recording.  The election workers are just doing their jobs, and were being recorded by random people on the that "weren't happy".  

[Archy1221]

10 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I think my soft answer is yes, but then I look back to scale or win margin. I don't think most people have a reason to feel disenfranchised right now because of how the election panned out. I think the ones that do feel passionately disenfranchised are, for the most part, making mountains out of mole hills.

 

yes, they should be held to account. And I would hope these counties/state do everything in their power to investigate and fix these issues in order to remove further opportunities of doubt.

Appreciate the back and forth discussion! 

[knapplc]

Yes, there appears to have been criming.

 

 

[Redux]

1 hour ago, Nebfanatic said:

How about you try reading. Or are you just going to continue blindly listen to the pathological liar who has been proven false on this and many other claims? 

 

 

All you do is throw shade, I'm not entertaining you any further.  If I want to question something in a realistic way I will.  I don't have to buy anything at face value if I don't want to.  You do you.

[Redux]

45 minutes ago, funhusker said:

 

 

Not sure what you're laughing at.

 

This was being covered live as it was happening.  

 

I mean, what else would you call this? 

 

 

Edit: I guess if you want to get hung up on the words "angry mob" or "stormed the building" that's your choice.  But this video clearly shows a group of people gathering by the windows with phone cameras recording.  The election workers are just doing their jobs, and were being recorded by random people on the that "weren't happy".  

 

It's simple, if there's nothing to hide then don't hide it.  I don't see how blocking the view does anything to prevent this "angry mob" from being angry.  All it did was cast more doubt.  It's suspect, that's all.

[commando]

1 hour ago, funhusker said:

 

 

Not sure what you're laughing at.

 

This was being covered live as it was happening.  

 

I mean, what else would you call this? 

 

 

Edit: I guess if you want to get hung up on the words "angry mob" or "stormed the building" that's your choice.  But this video clearly shows a group of people gathering by the windows with phone cameras recording.  The election workers are just doing their jobs, and were being recorded by random people on the that "weren't happy".  

they are literally chanting "stop the count".  i don't think they were impartial witnesses in any sort of way.  

[Enhance]

39 minutes ago, Redux said:

It's simple, if there's nothing to hide then don't hide it.

I agree, but I think this perspective is a bit too absolute. I have nothing to hide about my job, but that doesn't mean I necessarily want a disgruntled group of people chanting at me and recording me while I do it. There are other more proficient ways of holding certain government and election officials accountable.

 

But, again, think about the context or reason as to why those people were there, and then think about that within the framework of why those election officials did what they did. The whole situation is asinine. When in recent history have we seen mobs of people standing outside of election centers chanting about fraud and demanding access to see something they've never had reason to doubt before? This is unhinged and radical behavior buoyed entirely by Trump and his cohorts. The reason those people were there was based on exaggeration, lies and intentional mistrust. The fraud these people have been so desperate to uncover has still yet to be revealed at the levels they believe it to have been done.