Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just a simple reminder for Illinois residents. I did not see a thread on this so here it goes.
If you requested a mail-in ballot and decided not to use it, bring it to the polling station.
Your mail-in ballot would be surrendered and locked, and pending the standard signature verification you would then have access to a brand spanking new in-person ballot. The process only takes a few minutes, the election judges know exactly how to help you.
If you have destroyed your mail-in ballot, you can still carry the fragments in, and failing that you can vote provisionally.
What's the point? It's obvious the election is rigged no matter how many ballots you bring. After the first night of the election most states were red, then as they started to pump in fake ballots most turn blue - "miracle"!
What's the point? It's obvious the election is rigged no matter how many ballots you bring. After the first night of the election most states were red, then as they started to pump in fake ballots most turn blue - "miracle"!
You don't seem to understand that while many of the in person votes on election day were Republican, most of the mail in ballots were from Democrats who didn't want to chance COVID19.
That's not rigged, it is just a matter of what was counted first.
If it was rigged:
Exactly how were tens of thousands of fraudulent votes in AZ, GA, Mi, NV, WI, PA cast?
How was this orchestrated among so many states - not just one, but at least six?
Why is Trump losing in a GOP controlled GA?
Why did the Democrats do so badly downballot?
Did the perpetrators of these fraudulent votes not care about the balance of power in Congress?
Mitch McConnell in charge means nothing gets done. Were they really that stupid?
Why would Dems allow the two important Senate seats in GA get to a runoff, when their chance of winning either race under those circumstances is remote?
Also note that in every election, the results are called by the media before the votes have been certified as they must be by December.
There were four times when the results were contested.
IN NO CASE did the loser do what Trump is doing and refuse to concede.
1876: A compromise that came at a price
By 1876 – 11 years after the end of the Civil War – all the Confederate states had been readmitted to the Union, and Reconstruction was in full swing. The Republicans were strongest in the pro-Union areas of the North and African-American regions of the South, while Democratic support coalesced around southern whites and northern areas that had been less supportive of the Civil War. That year, Republicans nominated Ohio Governor Rutherford B. Hayes, and Democrats chose New York Governor Samuel Tilden.
***********
Democrats decided not to argue with that final result due to the “Compromise of 1877,” in which Republicans, in return for getting Hayes in the White House, agreed to an end to Reconstruction and military occupation of the South.
Hayes had an ineffective, one-term presidency, while the compromise ended up destroying any semblance of African-American political clout in the South. For the next century, southern legislatures, free from northern supervision, would implement laws discriminating against blacks and restricting their ability to vote.
1888: Bribing blocks of five
In 1888, Democratic President Grover Cleveland of New York ran for reelection against former Indiana U.S. Senator Benjamin Harrison.
Back then, election ballots in most states were printed, distributed by political parties and cast publicly. Certain voters, known as “floaters,” were known to sell their votes to willing buyers.
Harrison had appointed an Indiana lawyer, William Wade Dudley, as treasurer of the Republican National Committee. Shortly before the election, Dudley sent a letter to Republican local leaders in Indiana with promised funds and instructions for how to divide receptive voters into “blocks of five” to receive bribes in exchange for voting the Republican ticket. The instructions outlined how each Republican activist would be responsible for five of these “floaters.”
********************
Cleveland actually won the national popular vote by almost 100,000 votes. But he lost his home state, New York, by about 1 percent of the vote, putting Harrison over the top in the Electoral College. Cleveland’s loss in New York may have also been related to vote-buying schemes.
Cleveland did not contest the Electoral College outcome and won a rematch against Harrison four years later, becoming the only president to serve nonconsecutive terms of office. Meanwhile, the blocks-of-five scandal led to the nationwide adoption of secret ballots for voting.
1960: Did the Daley machine deliver?
The 1960 election pitted Republican Vice President Richard Nixon against Democratic U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy.
The popular vote was the closest of the 20th century, with Kennedy defeating Nixon by only about 100,000 votes – a less than 0.2 percent difference.
Because of that national spread – and because Kennedy officially defeated Nixon by less than 1 percent in five states (Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico) and less than 2 percent in Texas – many Republicans cried foul. They fixated on two places in particular – southern Texas and Chicago, where a political machine led by Mayor Richard Daley allegedly churned out just enough votes to give Kennedy the state of Illinois. If Nixon had won Texas and Illinois, he would have had an Electoral College majority.
While Republican-leaning newspapers proceeded to investigate and conclude that voter fraud had occurred in both states, Nixon did not contest the results. Following the example of Cleveland in 1892, Nixon ran for president again in 1968 and won.
2000: The hanging chads
In 2000, many states were still using the punch card ballot, a voting system created in the 1960s. Even though these ballots had a long history of machine malfunctions and missed votes, no one seemed to know or care – until all Americans suddenly realized that the outdated technology had created a problem in Florida.
Then, on Election Day, the national media discovered that a “butterfly ballot,” a punch card ballot with a design that violated Florida state law, had confused thousands of voters in Palm Beach County.
Many who had thought they were voting for Gore unknowingly voted for another candidate or voted for two candidates. (For example, Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan received about 3,000 votes from voters who had probably intended to vote for Gore.) Gore ended up losing the state to Bush by 537 votes – and, in losing Florida, lost the election.
But ultimately, the month-long process to determine the winner of the presidential election came down to an issue of “hanging chads.”
Over 60,000 ballots in Florida, most of them on punch cards, had registered no vote for president on the punch card readers. But on many of the punch cards, the little pieces of paper that get punched out when someone votes – known as chads – were still hanging by one, two or three corners and had gone uncounted. Gore went to court to have those ballots counted by hand to try to determine voter intent, as allowed by state law. Bush fought Gore’s request in court. While Gore won in the Florida State Supreme Court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled at 10 p.m. on Dec. 12 that Congress had set a deadline of that date for states to choose electors, so there was no more time to count votes.
You don't seem to understand that while many of the in person votes on election day were Republican, most of the mail in ballots were from Democrats who didn't want to chance COVID19.
Yeah right, Republicans all went voting in person, but "smart" Dems went all mail-in... I bet CNN can make folks believe even in this nonsense after they repeat it 100 times.
It's obvious that Dems waited first to see which states need fake votes the most, and then went all in with mail-in fakes - exactly as Trump predicted.
Yeah right, Republicans all went voting in person, but "smart" Dems went all mail-in... I bet CNN can make folks believe even in this nonsense after they repeat it 100 times.
It's obvious that Dems waited first to see which states need fake votes the most, and then went all in with mail-in fakes - exactly as Trump predicted.
Trump constantly lies. Why do you believe anything he says? He is throwing a toddler tantrum because he lost. There is no evidence of voter fraud on the scale he would need to change the election results.
Look at the court cases - his lawyers are disputing. They have a small amount of ballots that had problems, but not enough to make a difference in the states he is disputing. Of course, the official count is still pending as certification is not done until December.
My granddaughter voted by mail (she is at college). I voted early in person. While our votes were for the democrats, I am in Texas and it went Republican.
What Trump is saying is false, and Republican politicians know it. If the votes against the president were fraudulent, then Republican wins in the House and Senate were also fraudulent: The votes were on the same ballots.
You guys have a short memory. Way back when the original Mayor Daley was in charge of Chicago, he did a huge alteration of the voting process to get President Kennedy in there. It's no well kept secret. Another well known one is that both the Detroit and Philadelphia areas have a strong history of voting corruption. They've already been made aware, much like with Daley, that a good number of already dead folks voted in this election. So don't go getting all bent out about Trump and his so called lying when the Dem's are wicked guilty of a ton of it.......such as their attempted coo against Trump trying to manufacture reasons he shouldn't have been president. If it were me I'd march Pelosi, Schumer and Schiff off a cliff along with a few others. They are corrupt as all get out
Trump is what, 0-12 in court cases in the past 9 days because they've failed to provide a shred of evidence?
These cases keep getting tossed within hours because they're BS.
It's been discussed for weeks PRIOR to election day that several states would appear like a "red mirage" on election night because of the order in which ballots are counted, whereas others would be counted quickly because mail ballots were counted early/first. Many polls prior to election day were showing that far more Democrats were going to vote by mail due to concerns with the pandemic. It's why the post office was getting screwed around with and mail was being slowed in specific swing states.
Florida was counted early/first.
WI, MI, PA all had Republican state legislatures that did not want to start counting mail ballots until either election day or after polls closed.
Wisconsin was the first of these completed because they were able to start on election day. PA had approx. 1 million more Democratic mail ballots than Republican, and that was documented before election day if you at all visited https://electproject.github.io/Early...20G/index.html
The site showed that turnout was going to be way up. Texas early/mail vote exceeded total 2016 votes prior to election day, per that site. Texas ended up with record turnout, just to provide some credibility to the site.
Just because you're ill-informed doesn't make the election rigged.
After the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election, Stacey Abrams started an organization and registered more than 800k new Democratic voters in Georgia. That state should not surprise. Arizona voted a Democrat in the Senate in 2018 and polls showed Trump down for months as well. The trend was apparent.
Michigan and PA went to Trump in '16 because of low turnout, and he barely won going up against Hillary, a historically bad candidate. Other than 2008 and 2012 when Obama was on the ballot, Wisconsin has been closely contested in the last several elections.
Yeah right, Republicans all went voting in person, but "smart" Dems went all mail-in... I bet CNN can make folks believe even in this nonsense after they repeat it 100 times.
I (being an election judge) tried to encourage my neighbors to vote early or by mail in, but no takers. For some reason, all of my Trump supporting friends out here in Kendall county wanted to vote in person and on November 3rd. I think there was something symbolic about it to them.
They did NOT want to vote by mail in ballot for sure, although in the past mail-in ballots tended to skew Republican. Trump's noise about it and the USPS shenanigans changed that.
So it is simple for me to see that most Trump supporters were not going to vote with mail-in ballots. If my observations were correct the mail-in ballots should skew heavily toward the Democrats, and that is what appears to have happened.
This is not rocket science, it's more like child psychology.
Political parties and campaigns count votes before they are cast. They typically know how many votes they have and how many they need to beat the other campaign(s).
We clearly need some sort of overhaul of our voting practices. I do not want our elections federalized. But, I do think that the states need to come up with a more robust system of verification for voters. Right now, there is too much opportunity for malfeasance. Leftists can claim that there are no cases of voter fraud, etc. But, that doesn't match the perception. I need more identification to get on a plane or buy Claritin-D than I do to vote in an election. That strikes most people as ridiculous.
Political parties and campaigns count votes before they are cast. They typically know how many votes they have and how many they need to beat the other campaign(s).
We clearly need some sort of overhaul of our voting practices. I do not want our elections federalized. But, I do think that the states need to come up with a more robust system of verification for voters. Right now, there is too much opportunity for malfeasance. Leftists can claim that there are no cases of voter fraud, etc. But, that doesn't match the perception. I need more identification to get on a plane or buy Claritin-D than I do to vote in an election. That strikes most people as ridiculous.
Absolutely. Although I would have preferred a different outcome to this election (at least so far), I don't want it to be stolen by EITHER political party. If we cannot have confidence our elections are done in a fair matter, then we are done as a democracy, and may as well start choosing sides for the inevitable civil war right now.
That leaves us with the question about THIS election. IF there is enough evidence uncovered by the ongoing investigation such that great doubt is cast on the result, what do we do? I'm not willing to say, "OK, it's President Biden" because I don't want riots. But I also don't want the Supreme Court to start electing Presidents, either. So, do we nullify this election and hold another, but with much tighter controls?
If there is NOT as much evidence as President Trump's counsel has proclaimed exists (and will be delivered in due course), then I'll be the first to stand up and say "To heck with Trump", I'm not willing to subvert the will of the American people just to have him serve another term, regardless of my personal preference. This is WAY more important than the term of ANY President. But the flip side of that coin is, I expect Democrats of Good Will to do the same. Will they?
And to borrow a line from World According to Briggs, "Stop Typing" if you (meaning "anyone") proclaims no such evidence exists. You don't know, and neither do I, but the whole thing smells like bad fish, and I'm thrilled there is an investigation going on. You can't just go down to the Evidence Store and buy a large sack, there are many crimes that go unsolved because the Bad Guys hid their tracks well enough, and that may be the case here. But to say there is not enough cause to investigate? Please.
Last edited by Curly Q. Bobalink; 11-21-2020 at 06:12 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
