The American (USA) 2016 presidential elections thread?

[pritch]

"hurt god"? LOL - you cannot hurt what does not exist. Remember folks "what may be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence".

Apparently.

Mark Meadows, White House Chief of Staff, when reminded there is no evidence that voter fraud has occurred with postal voting replied,
"The lack of evidence, is the evidence."

Trump maintains that absentee voting is OK, postal voting is not, because the ballots are just posted out to everybody including the family dog. That's bollocks of course.

Absentee voting and postal voting in most states are identical. Trump votes by mail as does his wife, even though they are not actually resident in Florida. Most states post out application forms to registered voters, a few though post out ballot forms direct to registered voters.

Most states will accept the pandemic as a reason to use postal voting, others still require an excuse before they will permit a postal vote.

Meanwhile the mail sorting machinery is being stripped from mail centres, post boxes are being removed all over the country, and postal delivery vans are being loaded onto trucks at night. While all the politicians are on holiday.

[pritch]

I'm no Al Sharpton fan but I quite like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q7Sk59Ay88

[TheDemonLord]

Apparently.

Mark Meadows, White House Chief of Staff, when reminded there is no evidence that voter fraud has occurred with postal voting replied,
"The lack of evidence, is the evidence."

Trump maintains that absentee voting is OK, postal voting is not, because the ballots are just posted out to everybody including the family dog. That's bollocks of course.

Absentee voting and postal voting in most states are identical. Trump votes by mail as does his wife, even though they are not actually resident in Florida. Most states post out application forms to registered voters, a few though post out ballot forms direct to registered voters.

Most states will accept the pandemic as a reason to use postal voting, others still require an excuse before they will permit a postal vote.

Meanwhile the mail sorting machinery is being stripped from mail centres, post boxes are being removed all over the country, and postal delivery vans are being loaded onto trucks at night. While all the politicians are on holiday.

Did you per-chance watch the legal discussion about Mail in Voting and how each state has variations in how Mail-in Voting is handled?

Because it articulates that different States have different methods of handling Mail-In Voting - with some being much more robust than others.

[pritch]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...ge%2Fstory-ans

[sugilite:Me]

Did you per-chance watch the legal discussion about Mail in Voting and how each state has variations in how Mail-in Voting is handled?

Because it articulates that different States have different methods of handling Mail-In Voting - with some being much more robust than others.

How about Pritchs other points, mail sorting machines being removed, budget cuts and trucks and po boxes being removed just a few weeks out from the election, and the deliberate slowing down of mail deliveries? You good with that?

[pritch]

How about Pritchs other points, mail sorting machines being removed, budget cuts and trucks and po boxes being removed just a few weeks out from the election, and the deliberate slowing down of mail deliveries? You good with that?

There have been photos of 'mountains' of post boxes in scrap yards. Others, still in place, have been "locked" so they can't be used. Funny thing, in red states it seems that postal voting is still OK.

Since you quoted TDL, may I add that I have no idea which legal discussion he saw or listened to, but I listen to several legal podcasts every week, some of which are currently discussing this situation because it's definitely topical.

[TheDemonLord]

How about Pritchs other points, mail sorting machines being removed, budget cuts and trucks and po boxes being removed just a few weeks out from the election, and the deliberate slowing down of mail deliveries? You good with that?

It's not about what I'm good with or not, The whole mail-in vote thing for me is not super relevant.

What IS relevant is the framing of the issue - From an objective legal stand point, different States have different methods of running Mail-in Voting, some with more stringent checks and balances than others.

Pritch's contention is that it's mostly the same so no problems, but within that summation there's a problem word: 'Mostly' - As above, there are differences and some of those where ballots and not mere applications are posted out would seem to be worthy of honest discussion - which seems to be something that certain groups and people are unwilling to do so.

Do I think there is mass voter fraud happening? Not really - in almost all the elections in living memory ~50% voted Left and ~50% voted Right - if we suddenly had an election where 70% voted Left and 30% voted right or vice-versa, I might be concerned.

Do I think that there are loopholes in some states that may be prone to exploitation? Probably and that this should be a topic for honest conversation.

Do I think that neutralizing the Mail system as a precaution against voter fraud is warranted? As articulated, No, I don't (and there's the answer to your question) - however, you'll forgive me if I don't trust for a millisecond that the claim by the Left-wing media is accurate, factual and free from editorial omissions, You'll further forgive me if at this point in time, I decline to fact-check further since they've cried wolf far too many times.

If I ask you the flipside question:

- Not requiring a mail-in ballot to be witnessed
- allowing 3rd parties to assist with a signature (that aren't family)
- allowing 3rd parties to handle the ballot after it's cast
- Not postmarking a mail-in ballot in such a way that it can determined if it was made during the allotted time period
- Providing disproportionate amount of in-person Voting locations in areas that mostly vote Democrat vs Republican
- The law that provided for all this did not go through the proper process to ensure due levels of scrutiny

Are you good with that?

The followup being - where do we get to a point of consensus, I'll (for the sake of discussion) accept that the claims posted by Pritch are 100% true and state that I disagree with this course of action - will you reciprocate and agree with Trump that there is an issue with some State's handling of Mail-In Votes?

Because that is really what I'm interested in.

[Viking01]

If I ask you the flipside question:

- Not requiring a mail-in ballot to be witnessed
- allowing 3rd parties to assist with a signature (that aren't family)
- allowing 3rd parties to handle the ballot after it's cast
- Not postmarking a mail-in ballot in such a way that it can determined if it was made during the allotted time period
- Providing disproportionate amount of in-person Voting locations in areas that mostly vote Democrat vs Republican
- The law that provided for all this did not go through the proper process to ensure due levels of scrutiny

Are you good with that?

The followup being - where do we get to a point of consensus, I'll (for the sake of discussion) accept that the claims posted by Pritch are 100% true and state that I disagree with this course of action - will you reciprocate and agree with Trump that there is an issue with some State's handling of Mail-In Votes?

Because that is really what I'm interested in.

Out of curiosity, were these "existing issues" during the 2016 election (or even prior) ? Or have circumstances deteriorated since 2016?

[pritch]

To keep it simple for TDL, I don't agree with anything Trump said*. There is almost zero history of fraudulent postal voting in the US. Voter fraud in the US is so low as to be almost non-existent and has been for many years.

Republicans are the party of old white guys, the way the USA used to be. The USA is not like that now, and there's no way they will normally ever win a fair election. So they resort to voter suppression, gerrymandering, and electoral fraud. It's all they've got.

People want to vote by mail because it's safer during a pandemic. That would facilitate big voter participation which the Republicans don't want. Thus we have Trump's masterplan.

People, including TDL, can dream up whatever fictional reasons they like but there is nothing wrong with postal voting. Our local body elections were 100% postal and there were no witness signatures required, nor any of the other bullshit he's peddling. I don't seem to recall any uproar about fraudulent voting?




* To be fair, I was watching a clip of Trump speaking outrageous rubbish about the US economy early this morning and I posted on social media that I agreed with something he said. He said it was unbelievable. I agreed, what he was saying was literally "unbelievable".

[TheDemonLord]

Out of curiosity, were these "existing issues" during the 2016 election (or even prior) ? Or have circumstances deteriorated since 2016?

My Understanding is the following:

Due to Covid - a large number of states have either

1: Expanded the criteria by which someone could qualify for Mail-in Voting
or
2: Relaxed the requirements for having a valid mail-in vote

So in 2016, those that had loose checks and balances for the authenticating of a mail-in vote, this was only extended to a small number of people and not the wider state populace. Those that had previously stricter rules around mail-in voting in 2016 have relaxed them somewhat in anticipation of there being a large number of people opting to mail-in their vote, thus leading to potential loop-holes.

Obviously the large grain of salt being - I am not a lawyer and am taking the dumbed-down version from what actual lawyers have said and basing my view on that.


As I write this however, another thought comes somewhat to me, purely hypothetical - but interesting:

Should fear over catching Coronavirus (a Deadly disease) be grounds for remote voting? Considering that the right to vote fought over and paid for in blood and human lives, there's an argument that goes something like this:

"People died for your right to vote. Either Voting is important enough to you that you would risk your life to do so and therefore Corona or NoCorona, you are heading to the polling booth OR If you aren't willing to risk your life for the privilege of Voting, perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to"

Again - this is entirely a thought experiment, but it does raise some interesting moral, ethical, political and sociological questions.

[TheDemonLord]

To keep it simple for TDL, I don't agree with anything Trump said. There is almost zero history of fraudulent postal voting in the US. Voter fraud in the US is so low as to be almost non-existent and has been for many years.

Republicans are the party of old white guys, the way the USA used to be. The USA is not like that now, and there's no way they will normally ever win a fair election. So they resort to voter suppression, gerrymandering, and electoral fraud. It's all they've got.

People want to vote by mail because it's safer during a pandemic. That would facilitate big voter participation which the Republicans don't want. Thus we have Trump's masterplan.

People, including TDL, can dream up whatever fictional reasons they like but there is nothing wrong with postal voting. Our local body elections were 100% postal and there were no witness signatures required, nor any of the other bullshit he's peddling. I don't seem to recall any uproar about fraudulent voting?

Thus proving my point about the Framing of the issue better than I could have myself.

Not to mention entirely contradictory - if "Voter fraud is almost non-existent and has been for many years" then how come "there's no way they (the Republicans) will normally ever win a fair election. So they resort to voter suppression, gerrymandering, and electoral fraud. It's all they've got" - when they've won both the most recent one and were in office from 2001 to 2009 - is that not included in the auspices of 'For many years'

Which is it Pritch?

Is there Voter Fraud, Suppression and Gerrymandering or are the Republicans able to win fairly?

[Bonez]

To keep it simple for TDL, I don't agree with anything Trump said*. There is almost zero history of fraudulent postal voting in the US. Voter fraud in the US is so low as to be almost non-existent and has been for many years. .

Incorrect. There have been plenty of fraudulent postal votes. Like votes from folk who have moved out of a particular area, letting the local authorities know, apparently voted twice postal from their old place and physical voting from their new area. Postal votes by deceased people is another example.

In 2016 what party did that bitch come from who was the last area to put in their votes and later found a huge amount were still in trucks unsorted, back of cars unsorted and in back rooms unsorted?

[pritch]

Not to mention entirely contradictory - if "Voter fraud is almost non-existent and has been for many years" then how come "there's no way they (the Republicans) will normally ever win a fair election. So they resort to voter suppression, gerrymandering, and electoral fraud. It's all they've got" - when they've won both the most recent one and were in office from 2001 to 2009 - is that not included in the auspices of 'For many years'

Which is it Pritch?

Is there Voter Fraud, Suppression and Gerrymandering or are the Republicans able to win fairly?

There is no contradiction, although it does appear there is a comprehension problem. There is a difference between voter fraud and electoral fraud. The latter has been rampant. There has been a huge amount written about this but it's obvious you haven't read it, and I don't want to write a book about it.

If you read the history you come across details like the questions black people had to answer to be permitted to vote. One sample questionnaire I saw there was no right answer to any of the carefully crafted questions. Others were less creative, "How many jellybeans in the jar?"

In more recent history the Supreme Court permitted the introduction of voter ID requirements - although there was no history of fraud. Some states are using this to suppress voting. One red state is very selective about approving ID: student ID is not acceptable, the state welfare ID card is not acceptable, a hunting licence, however, is.

Some of the states are less subtle as in Florida where they purge the rolls. They just delete tens of thousands of names from the electoral rolls. Needless to say they are selective about how they do this.

The Democrats went to sleep on the job the last time there was a boundary redrawing. The Republicans went hard after State political seats. They took many off the Dems who didn't care because Obama had been re-elected and they thought they had won the big prize. Wrong! The boundaries were redrawn to hugely favour the Republicans using new, specialised, software. That's an interesting story on its own.

There's more hanging on this election than just getting rid of an unfit, incompetent, corrupt, mental case, president. It will be boundary redrawing time again.

Vote suppression, gerrymandering and electoral fraud are real, but they are not voter fraud.

[pritch]

Just came across this on The Washington Post web site. Scroll down past the Westerhout item to the video clip.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...e-house-years/

[TheDemonLord]

There is no contradiction, although it does appear there is a comprehension problem. There is a difference between voter fraud and electoral fraud. The latter has been rampant. There has been a huge amount written about this but it's obvious you haven't read it, and I don't want to write a book about it.

Ah I see, so it's only a problem when the side you don't like does it or when it doesn't work in your favour - got it.

If you read the history you come across details like the questions black people had to answer to be permitted to vote. One sample questionnaire I saw there was no right answer to any of the carefully crafted questions. Others were less creative, "How many jellybeans in the jar?"

And when were those Questionnaires last used? Circa 1950 I believe?

In more recent history the Supreme Court permitted the introduction of voter ID requirements - although there was no history of fraud. Some states are using this to suppress voting. One red state is very selective about approving ID: student ID is not acceptable, the state welfare ID card is not acceptable, a hunting licence, however, is.

I suspect if we look closer at the example, we'll find that one is a Photo ID issued directly by the State and the other is not.

As for Voter ID - I carry 2 forms of Government issued Photo ID on myself at all times (unless I've forgotten my Wallet), so if I can do it, why can't everyone else do it? It's not exactly difficult to obtain a Government ID.

Some of the states are less subtle as in Florida where they purge the rolls. They just delete tens of thousands of names from the electoral rolls. Needless to say they are selective about how they do this.

The Democrats went to sleep on the job the last time there was a boundary redrawing. The Republicans went hard after State political seats. They took many off the Dems who didn't care because Obama had been re-elected and they thought they had won the big prize. Wrong! The boundaries were redrawn to hugely favour the Republicans using new, specialised, software. That's an interesting story on its own.

There's more hanging on this election than just getting rid of an unfit, incompetent, corrupt, mental case, president. It will be boundary redrawing time again.

Vote suppression, gerrymandering and electoral fraud are real, but they are not voter fraud.

So, were all these Vote Suppression, Gerrymandering and Electoral Fraud practices going on when Obama was elected? How come they didn't work then but did for Trump and Bush?