The Voting Thread (Procedures, Turnout, Legal Challenges)(Update: Trump to file suit in PA, MI, WI, AZ, NV, GA) (3 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Lapaz

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Sep 28, 2019
    Messages
    1,738
    Reaction score
    1,516
    Age
    61
    Location
    Alabama
    Offline
    There is a lot of push-back from Trump on voting by mail, but most states allow it, and 1/3 allow it without any excuse. His rationale is that it will lead to vast fraud, but of course that isn't his real reason. His real reason is that he thinks it will be worse for conservatives, but studies have shown that states that have instituted much broader voting by mail haven't had any statistical changes in party voting.



    Although, normally voting by mail doesn't affect party votes, I bet it might this year if we have another resurgence of Covid, because I think the right is much more apt to discount the virus than the left. I know that is why Trump is against it.

    Whether you're left or right wing, expanding mail in votes is the right thing to do to reduce the likelihood of spreading the virus, to expand voter participation, and to make it easier for those that do show up to stay distant. It will also allow any people with susceptibilities to remain safer. I think voting by mail could be made extremely secure by having people vote using traditional postal mail, coupled with requiring a confirmation either by phone, email or text. If done by phone, then voters can provide confirmation that can include confirming their form number. If done by email or text, it can include a picture of their form, and then confirmation that that was their form. Rather than staffers individually calling people, this can be automated by having voters call the number, text the number, or email the address provided to them on their form. A website can even be created with a database of those that have voted, and perhaps a link to allow people to confirm their vote was correctly registered. For people without computers, a site can include a means to access the database over the phone with some confirmation information. These types of systems are used extensively by banks and other sites that need security, so I think they are mature enough to use. We could even use such a site for people to confirm their vote on the day of the election.
     
    I'm going to post some highlights of the article I linked...

    Curing ballots will harm Trump?

    Elsewhere in Pennsylvania, Republicans sued to stop local election officials from releasing the names of voters whose absentee ballots had been rejected for errors such as a lack of signature. Local counties release the names so voters can fix the flaws in their ballots.

    These suits have not succeeded, either.

    In Northampton County, Pa., for instance, a judge wrote that the local GOP needed to prove why it would be injured if voters had a chance to correct their ballots. “As a result, its request for an injunction must fail,” wrote Judge Michael J. Koury Jr.

    My favorite one...

    McDaniel also asserted that 2,000 Republican ballots in Rochester Hills, Mich., had been “given to Democrats . . . due to a clerical error.”

    Tina Barton, the GOP city clerk of Rochester Hills, said in a video posted on Twitter that McDaniel was referring to an “isolated mistake that was quickly rectified” and called her allegation “categorically false.”

    As a Republican, I am disturbed that this is intentionally being mischaracterized to undermine the election process,” she said in the video.

    In an interview, she said that there was a technical issue that temporarily created duplicate results when mail ballots were scanned, but it was immediately fixed.

    Barton said that she learned of the RNC chairwoman’s claim only when a reporter called her for comment.

    “I have spent 15 years building my reputation of being a good election official — not only a good one, but a great one — and to have someone make a statement that we committed fraud of some kind, that 2,000 ballots were found, I couldn’t stand by and not respond,” she said.

    From 10,000 to one.... who maybe was lying?

    Neither the Trump campaign nor the GOP were named plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit that was eventually filed by Republicans, which presented no evidence that thousands of people had voted improperly.

    By then, the allegation had been whittled down drastically. Instead of 10,000 cases, Trump’s allies presented one: a woman named Jill Stokke, who said she was denied the right to vote in person because her mail ballot had been stolen and filled out by someone else.

    But, in fact, Stokke’s story was more complicated. Election officials said they had indeed received a mail ballot from her — but the signature matched her own. They had offered her a chance to cancel that mail ballot and vote again if she would sign an affidavit saying the mail ballot had been stolen. She did not.
     
    Not everyone at Fox News seems to be on the same page...


    Yup.

    1604953736808.png


    I will say this, and I've said it for weeks now, when they call the election, that is just the media going through the numbers and statistical realities. Technically, it's not official until each State certifies the elections. If that gives some Republican's hope that the result will change, well... not likely.
     
    Finally the ol' turtle speaks.
    Lets hear what he has to say about the election. Seems like he is right on the line of being a trump sycophant

     
    Finally the ol' turtle speaks.
    Lets hear what he has to say about the election. Seems like he is right on the line of being a trump sycophant


    This really should surprise no one. McConnell had proven to have no bottom.
     
    We know they always planned to try to use the courts to flip at least one state if it would turn the election (PA was most likely). Trump literally said over and over that he needed a Supreme Court justice to decide the election for them. But now that it's not close, and they would have to flip several states, and there is no plausible legal strategy to change the outcome, they are just going to try it anyway. Really? Undermine all confidence in the electoral process and try to create a constitutional crisis.. just to still lose the election. Beyond delusion. Do we even want to see what happens when the courts reject all of this nonsense?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom