Election fraud

(Nov 10, 2020 03:35 PM)Leigha Wrote: My concern when it comes to properly investigating if there was election fraud is without recounting ALL of the mail in ballots from the battleground states, how can fraud be proven? Unless evidence was caught on camera or something, how can they obtain evidence? I keep reading ''Trump continues with probe into election fraud, despite no evidence.'' If Trump's team isn't allowed a complete recount, how would we ever know if there was fraud? Read an article earlier that Biden only won by like 276,000 votes in these states under investigation.

Things that make you go hmm.

Fraud might not be proven, but ballots without required information, postmarks, or with errors can still be eliminated.
There is evidence of fraud, but evidence isn't proof or convictions without due process of law. Gore had 37 days to litigate and recount, so still a long way to go. Regardless of old media claiming "nothing to see here".

(Nov 10, 2020 03:36 PM)C C Wrote: https://twitter.com/APhilosophae/status/...2428163072

Nice find, CC.

(Nov 10, 2020 03:58 PM)Leigha Wrote: Using automation to improve different parts of the process is the only way, in my opinion. Less reliance on direct human contact with the ballots, the better. The fact that some states are still counting “new” ballots shows that we need greater efficiency in this process. And sticking to a hard deadline for when ballots need to be postmarked. These should’ve been postmarked back in mid-October to assure they’d be counted on Election Day.

Absolutely. I was reading that one state had machines to open the envelopes of mail-in ballots, and these machine damaged many of the ballots, requiring them to be transcribed by poll workers. My first question was, why not have the workers open envelopes instead of "fixing" ballots. Lots of opportunities for fraud in these Democrat-run states.

Exactly ^

No one other than the voter who mailed in their ballot, should be allowed to edit or tamper with it. And how do we know that all of the ballots that came in after Nov 3rd were postmarked Nov 3rd? I think an entire recount of these questionable states should take place.

And why is Biden rushing to transition? He hasn’t even been sworn in yet. If you are confident that you legitimately won, why not agree to a recount of all mail in ballots? Of course we wouldn’t be able to count ballots that are “missing” for Trump (if that actually happened)

I’m grateful for our democracy but if we muck this up, the future of it will be even worse.

(Nov 10, 2020 04:23 AM)Syne Wrote: “Somebody will fill in an oval and go ‘Oh my gosh! That’s not who I wanted to vote for.’ So they’ll cross it out, they’ll fill in another oval, they’ll put an arrow to the one that says this is the one I want, and they’ll actually initial it sometimes. But the machine is reading that as an overvote, so it won’t go through. So we have to duplicate that ballot with the voter’s intent, so it can be counted then properly,”

Your video implied that they were fabricating ballots. Do you see a pen in the woman’s hand that’s reading off the ballots? No, you don’t. You presented false evidence, which damages your credibility. Like I said, do your damn homework!

Syne Wrote:If it won't go through the machine, on the spot, you destroy the bad ballot and give them a new one to fill out. You don't sit on it until others can guess their intent later.

But maybe the voter placing it in the tabulator is another thing Dem states don't do, so they have the chance to "fix" them later. In my state, my ballot goes directly from my hands into the tabulator, and the screen tells me if it was accepted or had errors.

Why do states have different election rules?

(Nov 10, 2020 05:14 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 10, 2020 04:23 AM)Syne Wrote: “Somebody will fill in an oval and go ‘Oh my gosh! That’s not who I wanted to vote for.’ So they’ll cross it out, they’ll fill in another oval, they’ll put an arrow to the one that says this is the one I want, and they’ll actually initial it sometimes. But the machine is reading that as an overvote, so it won’t go through. So we have to duplicate that ballot with the voter’s intent, so it can be counted then properly,”

Your video implied that they were fabricating ballots. Do you see a pen in the woman’s hand that’s reading off the ballots? No, you don’t. You presented false evidence, which damages your credibility. Like I said, do your damn homework!

Without election observers from BOTH PARTIES witnessing the transcription, we have no idea whether they are fabricating ballots or not. It could be just the one reading the ballot doing the fraud. We have no idea and no way to know. All we do know is that there are two people in the process and only one witness (far enough back he perhaps can't even read the original and transcribed ballots).

If you can't muster this basic level of skepticism, it's your credibility that's suspect.

Quote:

Syne Wrote:If it won't go through the machine, on the spot, you destroy the bad ballot and give them a new one to fill out. You don't sit on it until others can guess their intent later.

But maybe the voter placing it in the tabulator is another thing Dem states don't do, so they have the chance to "fix" them later. In my state, my ballot goes directly from my hands into the tabulator, and the screen tells me if it was accepted or had errors.

Why do states have different election rules?

And? No one doubted that states have their own election procedures. In fact, I presume that Democrat-run states have different ones, expressly to allow this kind of manipulation.

(Nov 10, 2020 05:25 PM)Syne Wrote: Without election observers from BOTH PARTIES witnessing the transcription, we have no idea whether they are fabricating ballots or not. It could be just the one reading the ballot doing the fraud. We have no idea and no way to know. All we do know is that there are two people in the process and only one witness (far enough back he perhaps can't even read the original and transcribed ballots).

If you can't muster this basic level of skepticism, it's your credibility that's suspect.

What? That's your justification for promoting fake news?

Wow! Ben was right. Your credibility is declining.

(Nov 1, 2020 05:17 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: Oh, man. You get less credible every time I notice one of your posts.

Syne Wrote:And?

And it's part of the constitution.

(Nov 10, 2020 06:32 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 10, 2020 05:25 PM)Syne Wrote: Without election observers from BOTH PARTIES witnessing the transcription, we have no idea whether they are fabricating ballots or not. It could be just the one reading the ballot doing the fraud. We have no idea and no way to know. All we do know is that there are two people in the process and only one witness (far enough back he perhaps can't even read the original and transcribed ballots).

If you can't muster this basic level of skepticism, it's your credibility that's suspect.

What? That's your justification for promoting fake news?

Wow! Ben was right. Your credibility is declining.

Not fake news, moron. You can literally see, with your own eyes, that both parties are not there to observe. That's directly contrary to the excuse article you cited. Use your brain for once.

Quote:

Syne Wrote:And?

And it's part of the constitution.

Again, the part you avoided quoting: "No one doubted that states have their own election procedures. In fact, I presume that Democrat-run states have different ones, expressly to allow this kind of manipulation."

State constitutions require election observers from both parties have access.

(Nov 10, 2020 06:45 PM)Syne Wrote: Not fake news, moron. You can literally see, with your own eyes, that both parties are not there to observe. That's directly contrary to the excuse article you cited. Use your brain for once.

No. Originally, you posted it as evidence of voter fraud and it is not evidence of voter fraud.  What they were doing was perfectly legal.

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI.../0320..PDF

The damaged ballots are recorded.

Use your brain for once.

(Nov 10, 2020 07:06 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 10, 2020 06:45 PM)Syne Wrote: Not fake news, moron. You can literally see, with your own eyes, that both parties are not there to observe. That's directly contrary to the excuse article you cited. Use your brain for once.

No. Originally, you posted it as evidence of voter fraud and it is not evidence of voter fraud.  What they were doing was perfectly legal.

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI.../0320..PDF

The damaged ballots are recorded.

Use your brain for once.

Read your own damn citation, moron.

In addition,each political party or political body shall be entitled to have observers at the central tabulation center, in a number, as determined by the county board of elections, sufficient to permit accurate observation of the receipt, handling, duplication, and processing of all ballots and district totals cards.
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI.../0320..PDF

It's literally right there in their law, dipshit. That video is clearly a violation of their law for observers from both parties, and that is sufficient to question whether further illegal activity is going on.

(Nov 10, 2020 07:26 PM)Syne Wrote:

(Nov 10, 2020 07:06 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 10, 2020 06:45 PM)Syne Wrote: Not fake news, moron. You can literally see, with your own eyes, that both parties are not there to observe. That's directly contrary to the excuse article you cited. Use your brain for once.

No. Originally, you posted it as evidence of voter fraud and it is not evidence of voter fraud.  What they were doing was perfectly legal.

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI.../0320..PDF

The damaged ballots are recorded.

Use your brain for once.

Read your own damn citation, moron.

In addition,each political party or political body shall be entitled to have observers at the central tabulation center, in a number, as determined by the county board of elections, sufficient to permit accurate observation of the receipt, handling, duplication, and processing of all ballots and district totals cards.
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI.../0320..PDF

It's literally right there in their law, dipshit. That video is clearly a violation of their law for observers from both parties, and that is sufficient to question whether further illegal activity is going on.

Entitled to, dipshit. Is the guy in the chair a demorcat? Are both of those women demorcats?

Besides, that's not even the way the video was used. You weren't even aware of that when you posted, dumbutt.

(Nov 10, 2020 04:23 AM)Syne Wrote: So you're telling me that one woman is reading off a damaged ballot (presuming it's plenty legible for no doubt) and the other is filling in what the first is reading off? Okay, I accept that.

(Nov 10, 2020 07:56 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 10, 2020 07:26 PM)Syne Wrote: Read your own damn citation, moron.

In addition,each political party or political body shall be entitled to have observers at the central tabulation center, in a number, as determined by the county board of elections, sufficient to permit accurate observation of the receipt, handling, duplication, and processing of all ballots and district totals cards.
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI.../0320..PDF

It's literally right there in their law, dipshit. That video is clearly a violation of their law for observers from both parties, and that is sufficient to question whether further illegal activity is going on.

Entitled to, dipshit. Is the guy in the chair a demorcat? Are both of those women demorcats?

Election workers, the two doing the duplication, are not also election observers. That would defeat the purpose of the latter.
In PA, the odds of the one observer being a Republican strains credibility.

Quote:Besides, that's not even the way the video was used. You weren't even aware of that when you posted, dumbutt.

(Nov 10, 2020 04:23 AM)Syne Wrote: So you're telling me that one woman is reading off a damaged ballot (presuming it's plenty legible for no doubt) and the other is filling in what the first is reading off? Okay, I accept that.

Rhetorical question, deary. I didn't post it with any commentary at all.