Politics Thread

[Xville]

If we have elections getting decided by less than a thousand votes (possible in Georgia), it doesn't take much fraud to swing an election, apparently.

Yep.

[bobbiemcgee]

If we have elections getting decided by less than a thousand votes (possible in Georgia), it doesn't take much fraud to swing an election, apparently.

Well, first you would have to recruit a 1000 people, then provide them with ssn#'s or some form of ID and get them thru the polls (with the proper signature) somehow without being detected, then, of course, you would have to pay them 'cause they aren't going to risk jail time for nothing, then you would have to keep the scouts pledge of never telling anyone anything for ALL TIME. Crooks always seem to have a hard time with this one.
Of course, the mastermind of this ploy would first have to figure out months in advance which race in which state and for which party he was going to make the 1000 vote difference in and raise thousands of dollars. Nothing to this fraud thing.

[boozehound]

If we have elections getting decided by less than a thousand votes (possible in Georgia), it doesn't take much fraud to swing an election, apparently.

Which I agree with, and we should take all reasonable measures to prevent fraud. I'm still not sure what ranting and raving about how our elections are fraudulent helps that though. Free and fair elections are literally the cornerstone of our Democracy.

[GoMuskies]

Well, first you would have to recruit a 1000 people, then provide them with ssn#'s or some form of ID and get them thru the polls (with the proper signature) somehow without being detected, then, of course, you would have to pay them 'cause they aren't going to risk jail time for nothing, then you would have to keep the scouts pledge of never telling anyone anything for ALL TIME. Crooks always seem to have a hard time with this one.
Of course, the mastermind of this ploy would first have to figure out months in advance which race in which state and for which party he was going to make the 1000 vote difference in and raise thousands of dollars. Nothing to this fraud thing.

That would be the dumbest way to do it given how many people are voting by mail. Hell, it would only take one Republican mailman working in a Democrat stronghold (or vice versa).

[jhelmes37]

If we have elections getting decided by less than a thousand votes (possible in Georgia), it doesn't take much fraud to swing an election, apparently.

This is why a recount must happen in every close state. When you're talking 2k people in a state with 7.6 million registered voters (Georgia), that's 0.02% of ballots that are determining the winner.

When dealing with numbers that big, discrepancies are nearly guaranteed. A full audit must take place.

[bobbiemcgee]

That would be the dumbest way to do it given how many people are voting by mail. Hell, it would only take one Republican mailman working in a Democrat stronghold (or vice versa).

Criminals don't have the brightest bulbs. How would the crooked mailman theory work? Does he sign all the ballots?

[GoMuskies]

Criminals don't have the brightest bulbs. How would the crooked mailman theory work? Does he sign all the ballots?

He would "lose" ballots from his route.

[bleedXblue]

To be fair: Trump went through a lot of lawyers before he found one as crazy as Giuliani. You almost think Trump has to have some dirt on him to get him to degrade himself like this.



This is, I think, one of the most damaging things that has come out of this election. The idea that many of latched on to that there is some kind of widespread, systemic, voter fraud perpetrated onlyby Democrats. Because it's difficult to prove a negative, there is really no way to conclusively show that there isn't fraud. People can point to the fact that the actual incidence of confirmed voter fraud is extremely low, but that won't placate people who have been convinced of the narrative that massive voter fraud exists (and, again, benefits only the Democrats). It's damaging to the very core of America because it undermines confidence in our institution. All because Trump said so.

This also falls under that 'what would you have to believe for this to be true' umbrella for me. Depending on the situation it seems that Democrats are either complete idiots, or absolute criminal masterminds capable of pulling off massive voter fraud without leaving evidence. Remember these are the same people that couldn't even leak a Democratic Primary Debate question to Hillary Clinton without getting caught.

Lets keep this in context. This is the first election that I am aware of, where there is a significant amount of mail in ballots. The opportunity for fraud is much higher when you don't show up in person, with an ID, confirming your address and having your signature verified. Pretty hard to cheat that system.

[GoMuskies]

with an ID

Woah, woah, woah. I think we've all been "educated" by now that requiring such a thing is super racist voter suppression.

[xubrew]

This is, I think, one of the most damaging things that has come out of this election. The idea that many of latched on to that there is some kind of widespread, systemic, voter fraud perpetrated onlyby Democrats. Because it's difficult to prove a negative, there is really no way to conclusively show that there isn't fraud. People can point to the fact that the actual incidence of confirmed voter fraud is extremely low, but that won't placate people who have been convinced of the narrative that massive voter fraud exists (and, again, benefits only the Democrats). It's damaging to the very core of America because it undermines confidence in our institution. All because Trump said so.

This also falls under that 'what would you have to believe for this to be true' umbrella for me. Depending on the situation it seems that Democrats are either complete idiots, or absolute criminal masterminds capable of pulling off massive voter fraud without leaving evidence. Remember these are the same people that couldn't even leak a Democratic Primary Debate question to Hillary Clinton without getting caught.

I'm going with the Democrats being complete idiots. Let's suppose for a second that they are cheating. Why the hell are they cutting it so close?? They were favored to win big. And why not also cheat on the under ballot? Many were expecting them to get control of the senate. Had they won big and had they gotten control of the senate and had we known it the night of the election, it would have actually not looked all that suspicious. So, to be fair, if the Democrats were to cheat, this is probably how they'd go about doing it because they are complete idiots. I think the real foul play is the attempt to suppress the vote and/or stop all the ballots from being counted.