The evidence strongly suggests it's the Republicans who are trying to rig the election!

[Elixir]

There is not a single allegation of voter fraud in any of those videos. Try again.

Yabut …
HILLARY!!! OMFG!!! EMERGENCY!!!
These morons think setting their own hair on fire gives credence to their lies.

 

[Shadowy Man]

First off, the allegations of voter fraud only seem to pop up when dems win; not when republicans win.

I’ll link to Hilary Clinton’s concession speech if you’ll link to Trump’s.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This is such a wickedly bad false equivalence, might need to rename it Clinton-Trump.

 

[Tigers!]

I think the bigger risk with voting machines is that they might be compromised in some way before they are deployed, maybe because the machine has software bugs or hardware faults, or because a bad actor was able to add malware while the machine was being made. Even then, it's not entirely clear how much damage a broken/compromised machine could actually do if there are scrutineers checking the machine's output.

Based upon my time as a polling official scrutineers can not do much about the integrity of the voting. They can look at the counting. They can only see what comes out, not what when in. This applies to paper or electronic.

Whether an election uses pen-and-paper ballots or machine-printed ballots, the system can only be trusted as long as it is subject to constant scrutiny.

We are all aware aware of recent supply chain attempts to have a particular result went off with a resounding bang. Such manoeuvres are no longer just the scribblings in a book.
Exploding pagers one day, compromised voting machines the next.
Eternal vigilance is required ever more.

 

[Elixir]

I don’t think they’re going to need to “rig” it. It looks like lying and lying and lying might be their ticket.

 

[ZiprHead]

What legal maneuvers are preventing this?

Yes @RVonse

WHAT “LEGAL MANEUVERS”?

It will be a travesty if we are doomed to chase figments of trumpogenic paranoia for the duration of this Country’s existence.

Here are three links covering the court cases of the claimed voter fraud.

Fact check: Donald Trump received dozens of hearings on his 2020 election claims

Donald Trump falsely claimed in Tuesday night's presidential debate that all 64 of his election lawsuits failed in 2020 only on "a technicality."

www.usatoday.com

Loading…

www.americanbar.org

This one out lines the cases that made it to the Supreme Court.

Results of Lawsuits Regarding the 2020 Elections

The various claims of evidence alleging a stolen 2020 election have been exhaustively investigated and litigated. Judges heard claims of illegal voting and found they were without merit. (Learn more about how the changes that have happened since 2020 will affect the 2024 election and...

campaignlegal.org

I suggest @RVonse read these carefully.

 

[Elixir]

What legal maneuvers are preventing this?

Yes @RVonse

WHAT “LEGAL MANEUVERS”?

It will be a travesty if we are doomed to chase figments of trumpogenic paranoia for the duration of this Country’s existence.

Here are three links covering the court cases of the claimed voter fraud.

Fact check: Donald Trump received dozens of hearings on his 2020 election claims

Donald Trump falsely claimed in Tuesday night's presidential debate that all 64 of his election lawsuits failed in 2020 only on "a technicality."

www.usatoday.com

Loading…

www.americanbar.org

This one out lines the cases that made it to the Supreme Court.

Results of Lawsuits Regarding the 2020 Elections

The various claims of evidence alleging a stolen 2020 election have been exhaustively investigated and litigated. Judges heard claims of illegal voting and found they were without merit. (Learn more about how the changes that have happened since 2020 will affect the 2024 election and...

campaignlegal.org

I suggest @RVonse read these carefully.

Are there examples of
LEGAL MANEUVERS
buried in there?
And how do LEGAL MANEUVERS keep actual evidence from public view? I mean, for all Trump’s legal maneuvers, everybody outside of core MAGAts knows he’s a fucking career criminal and traitor, because of EVIDENCE.
Bring on the EVIDENCE of voter fraud.

 

[bilby]

They can only see what comes out, not what when in

That's customary, but only because the scrutineers typically prefer to promote their party, (eg by handing out HTVs or just by wearing a supporter shirt, cap, etc.), rather than actively scrutinise the voting as well as the counting.

They have the right to inspect the ballot box to ensure that it is empty when sealed; To watch the voters placing their ballots in the box, and to be present when the seals are removed at the start of the count.

Usually, nobody bothers with the "watch the voters placing their ballots in the box" bit, because the integrity of the Electoral Officers and officials is assumed; And because to do so requires compliance with the rules probiting canvassing in the polling place - which means getting rid of those shirts, caps, badges, etc.

They cannot look at what votes are cast, but they can look at who is putting ballot papers into the box, and how many papers they put in.

They just usually see no need to bother, when they can instead simply confirm that the number of ballots issued matches the number counted. But if there were any expectation of foul play, the scrutineers have sufficient rights as to be able to watch for any extra ballots being stuffed into the boxes.

And of course, it would require a lot of dodgy votes to be added, in order to have a reasonable prospect of influencing the final result. Given that nobody knows in advance which seats will be decided by razor thin margins.

The chances of stuffing the ballot without being noticed is small, the consequences if caught are severe, and the likelihood of achieving your objective, even if you don't get caught, are small. So nobody really cares, or needs to care.

There are more opportunities for malfeasence in the counting - it would be fairly easy to "accidentally" count a bundle of 50 or 100 votes against candidate A, when they actually were cast for candidate B. That's why the scrutineers concentrate on watching the count.

 

[Elixir]

What a fucking waste of time and money, basically to satisfy one wannabe dictator’s desire to sow distrust so he doesn’t have to win an election to stay out of jail.

 

[bigfield]

We are all aware aware of recent supply chain attempts to have a particular result went off with a resounding bang. Such manoeuvres are no longer just the scribblings in a book.
Exploding pagers one day, compromised voting machines the next.
Eternal vigilance is required ever more.

I think there's very little even a supply chain attack could do to a voting machine, besides change the machine's own data. This would cause some problems when the machine's records don't match the printed ballots, and election officials recount the printed ballots to confirm the result. The GOP and their media allies would probably be able to use something like that to sow fears of election interference among their supporters. If I were Putin I'd certainly be interested in giving it a try.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

What legal maneuvers are preventing this?

Yes @RVonse

WHAT “LEGAL MANEUVERS”?

It will be a travesty if we are doomed to chase figments of trumpogenic paranoia for the duration of this Country’s existence.

Here are three links covering the court cases of the claimed voter fraud.

Fact check: Donald Trump received dozens of hearings on his 2020 election claims

Donald Trump falsely claimed in Tuesday night's presidential debate that all 64 of his election lawsuits failed in 2020 only on "a technicality."

www.usatoday.com

Loading…

www.americanbar.org

This one out lines the cases that made it to the Supreme Court.

Results of Lawsuits Regarding the 2020 Elections

The various claims of evidence alleging a stolen 2020 election have been exhaustively investigated and litigated. Judges heard claims of illegal voting and found they were without merit. (Learn more about how the changes that have happened since 2020 will affect the 2024 election and...

campaignlegal.org

I suggest @RVonse read these carefully.

Often, a technicality of "standing". Because they weren't HIS fucking lawsuits!

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Shadowy Man]

Donald knows that the details don’t matter. He knows his followers won’t read all these opinions. They’ll just believe him when he says the cases were thrown out without merit because the system is corrupt.

If only he could appoint some judges then we could be sure the judicial system could be cured.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Predictable right wing projection. If anyone wants to know what right wingers want to do, are doing or are accusing liberals of doing just listen to their claims.

 

[unapologetic]

Are you suggesting, dear sir, that our friends may not be discussing these political issues in good faith??

RV sure is spreading a lot of FUD.

Given that nobody knows in advance which seats will be decided by razor thin margins.

The Republicans knew in the states they gerrymandered in 2020.
OK, you are in Oz, you may not know. In the US, by law, each state is required to update/redraw voting districts every 10 years. This is usually done by the party in power in that state. See = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

In 2020, in Republican run states, the Republicans used Computer models and AI to help them identify close voting districts, and break-up Democrat districts.
In one state, (Nebraska or Wyoming I think) voters petitioned to have a referendum to have a 'citizens committee' do the re-districting.
I don't know how that turned out. (I saw a doc, but can't find it now)

https://iidb.org/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fmedia%2FGZODp1DXcAAd0nA%3Fformat%3Djpg%26name%3D900x900&hash=edcce0ed69b5aa0db0597e26e9d1c606

That math is faulty. Each name can only be registered at one poll. And only get one ballot at the box.

 

[unapologetic]

In one state, (Nebraska or Wyoming I think) voters petitioned to have a referendum to have a 'citizens committee' do the re-districting.
I don't know how that turned out. (I saw a doc, but can't find it now)

Update: It was Michigan. I found a more recent news report

But the doc. I saw went deeper into how Republicans used Computer models and AI.

 

[southernhybrid]

They are still at in Georgia. The quote is from an article I just read in the AJC.

Fulton has already appointed a team to monitor its performance in the November election as part of an agreement with the board and the secretary of state’s office. But Republican members of the state board now want to appoint their own monitors to oversee Fulton’s operations.
The county board of elections filed a lawsuit Monday claiming the state board has no legal authority to appoint its own monitors.

At a meeting Tuesday, a divided state board responded with a subpoena for a slew of county records from the 2020 election. The board members also subpoenaed the Fulton County board to appear at an upcoming meeting to address their concerns.

The escalating legal battle comes as the state board’s new Republican majority continues to assert its power. In recent months the majority has approved a series of new rules governing the conduct of this year’s election that have prompted several lawsuits that say the board has exceeded its legal authority.



This week’s actions stem from long-running scrutiny of Fulton County’s performance in the 2020 election.

This is just one of many things the MAGAs in Georgia are trying to do to undermine our election in Georgia.

 

[bilby]

Given that nobody knows in advance which seats will be decided by razor thin margins.

The Republicans knew in the states they gerrymandered in 2020.
OK, you are in Oz, you may not know

I know about gerrymandering - I am from Queensland FFS.

But my point was about razor thin margins, not merely small ones.

You might get away with adding fifty or even a hundred votes to the system; But even in seats with 'tiny' majorities, this is rarely sufficient to overturn the result, and determining in advance which seats will be that close is basically impossible.

Adding more than a double-digit number of votes is almost certainly going to lead to an investigation and to your cheating coming to light.

So it's pointless to try.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Are you suggesting, dear sir, that our friends may not be discussing these political issues in good faith??

RV sure is spreading a lot of FUD.

Given that nobody knows in advance which seats will be decided by razor thin margins.

The Republicans knew in the states they gerrymandered in 2020.
OK, you are in Oz, you may not know. In the US, by law, each state is required to update/redraw voting districts every 10 years. This is usually done by the party in power in that state. See = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

In 2020, in Republican run states, the Republicans used Computer models and AI to help them identify close voting districts, and break-up Democrat districts.
In one state, (Nebraska or Wyoming I think) voters petitioned to have a referendum to have a 'citizens committee' do the re-districting.
I don't know how that turned out. (I saw a doc, but can't find it now)

https://iidb.org/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fmedia%2FGZODp1DXcAAd0nA%3Fformat%3Djpg%26name%3D900x900&hash=edcce0ed69b5aa0db0597e26e9d1c606

That math is faulty. Each name can only be registered at one poll. And only get one ballot at the box.

Is this a derivative of the As I was going to St Ives riddle? 10 fake names, 10 polling booths, vote 10 times. How many times did the person vote. 10... they said ten times!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Given that nobody knows in advance which seats will be decided by razor thin margins.

The Republicans knew in the states they gerrymandered in 2020.
OK, you are in Oz, you may not know

I know about gerrymandering - I am from Queensland FFS.

But my point was about razor thin margins, not merely small ones.

You might get away with adding fifty or even a hundred votes to the system; But even in seats with 'tiny' majorities, this is rarely sufficient to overturn the result, and determining in advance which seats will be that close is basically impossible.

Adding more than a double-digit number of votes is almost certainly going to lead to an investigation and to your cheating coming to light.

So it's pointless to try.

Certainly it is a red herring as there is even remote evidence for even acute voter fraud because no one is even making the accusation in a court of law.